It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I know they cop some hate from time to time, but passionate fans will always have strong emotions about their favourite character and MGW and BB serve as a target for those emotions. I don't think it's anything personal and I for one have nothing against them, if Skyfall is as good as they say it will be I for one will be thanking them.
His son could take over. Perhaps this will happen in the next decade.
"Whether right or wrong I do think her decision making seems like it has been in the best interest of the franchise. She doesn't strike me as the type of woman who would destroy her father's legacy. "
I think her father would have disapproved of setting Daniel Craig's first gun barrel scene in a mens toilet. I think that was wrong but the rest of what she's done, well, I guess he would have approved. Whether or not he would have wanted Craig as Bond, who knows....
I think her father would have disapproved of setting Daniel Craig's first gun barrel scene in a mens toilet. I think that was wrong but the rest of what she's done, well, I guess he would have approved. Whether or not he would have wanted Craig as Bond, who knows....
I don't know if you meant this to be funny, but it made me laugh.
I think that what you say is true - for the most part. When people care about Bond enough to come here every day and post and discuss then obviously they are huge fans. Also, with fifty years, six actors, and 22 (well, 23) films there is now a very wide range of what "Bond" is so there will always be people who are unhappy with the current style and direction of the series or lead actor, and also people who are overjoyed at a "return" to a previous style.
However, it is very discouraging to read some of the comments here posted by a thankfully very small number of people. The open misogyny that is directed at Babs (or even Judi Dench!) is quite shocking. What's funny is that it's so transparent that the authors have a problem with strong women (or "lefties" or feminists!) that the posts actually make me feel embarrassed for the authors when I read them. However, of all the "genre" communities on the internet I have to say that these forums seem to have the most intelligent, reasonable discussion of any that I've seen. Perhaps it's because a lot of people here aspire to be like Bond - classy, intelligent, and confident enough to not be bothered by other people's opinions which may be different than their own. I long ago left forums discussing other film series and TV shows but still enjoy coming here. :-)
I agree with these points.
I am a fan of Babs. She gave us Craig, full stop. And she still seems energetic and youthful.
MGW has contributed a lot to the franchise. He had some hand in writing FYEO-LTK, one of the better runs of the series; otherwise, he would not have gotten co-writing credit.
But I too am tired of his longer and longer cameos. I liked it better when he was in the background in TLD or had his line or two in TND, but by time we got to CR, it had become too much.
Yes, I agree with you @thelordflasheart, some people here really have outrageous opinions. I try not to get in the discussions because that would just give them an attention they do not deserve. Thankfully the majority doesn't share their opinions, otherwise I would have left a long time ago.
He did start to make a swift exit when i started pitching a set piece idea to him though - but no hard feelings!
In my book MGWs contribution to the cinematic Bond is not far behind Cubby and Harry – probably on a par with Ken Adam and John Barry.
He has been producer in some capacity since 1979 – 33 years which is the same as Cubby (and to be honest Cubbys contribution to LTK and GE was pretty negligible) and he was working on the films way before then.
He co-wrote (or in the case of LTK was sole writer) all of the 80s Bonds which featured some much better scripts than most of the Brozza films – it’s actually a shame he doesn’t go back to writing and spare us P & Ws laboured efforts.
In addition he has successfully steered the ship through the passing of most of the people who were instrumental in the success of the series (Cubby, Barry, Maibaum, Adam (ok not dead but you get the idea), Binder).
I get the impression that these days hes happy to take a back seat and hes somewhat tired of Bond – not tired as in bored I hasten to add, but tired in the sense of having given as much as he can to the series.
Babs is the one who certainly wears the trousers in the relationship and it is she who calls the big shots these days with rather unpredictable results – Craig a hit, Tamahori a miss, the reboot a hit (although that was one of MGWs pet ideas for years I don’t think it would have gone ahead without Babs greenlighting itas well), Forster something of a miss.
It seems to me that she somewhat has ideas above her station and instead of delivering solid on budget films that always made money like her father was content to do (particularly in his last decade) she craves critical acclaim and wants to raise Bond into something closer approaching art. For this she is certainly to be commended it is just that her choices have been somewhat erratic thus far. Apted, to a certain degree Tamahori and Forster all had awards and critical acclaim behind them but that is not necessary the requirement of a Bond director. Apted and Forster seemed out of their comfort zone with the action scenes and Tamahori just thought he could do it better his way without understanding the reasons that the series had lasted so long in the first place.
I appreciate what she is trying to do and I do think Mendes is a step in the right direction. I certainly believe that a Bond director should be like the lead actor British or at least Commonwealth to ensure that they ‘get’ Bond properly so I have high hopes.
It seems bizarre though that (even though I’m assuming Babs takes the lead here MGW could be just as culpable) despite paying the money to surround themselves with an A list cast and director they are content to leave the script in the hands of blokes who have never come near an awards ceremony, unless we’re talking the Razzies (just had a look at the Razzies for 2002 and disgusted to see that DAD only won for worst supporting actress for Madonna. Where was the worst SFX award and Halle Berry is not even nominated FFS!).
The script is the most important part of a film and yet they continue to let these journeymen hacks who would struggle to get a job at the Sunday Sport loose on a job that has to be one of the top gigs in the world of film.
Its as if they are Roman Abramovitch and they’ve shelled out for world class stars up top and in midfield but theyre content to let Titus Bramble and Jean Alain Boumsoung be the backbone of the defence.
This is EONs biggest failing over the last decade for me - consistency and quality of scripts and compared to the solid output that MGW turned out in the 80s its baffling why they don’t just sack P&W who, lets be fair here, have had more than enough cracks of the whip to deliver if they had it in them and let MGW take the job leaving Babs to produce. Or if he doesn’t fancy it any more at least spend some money on some more talented writers. I’ve heard Gatiss and Moffats names bandied about and whilst I’m not wholly convinced of their suitability they would certainly represent a serious step up in class over P&W.
And that's the difference between Bond and Bourne, that those guys would say 'mehh' to Borune, but be all over a Bond film.
Michale Apted?
Really?
They needed to control the franchise at the expense of the franchise.
In my opinion, the last three Brosnan Bonds were made by older people. Scene after scene of people standing around talking.
Directing a BOND film?
C'mon.
I agree with this. There are some talented, big directors that could make a great Bond film and would love the chance to make one, but EON don't like letting directors have lots of control, which means we don't get many big, talented names. And that backfires when we get small film directors who are out of their depth and then we end up with weaker Bond films (DAD and QOS anyone?). I really hope this doesn't stop us from getting a Nolan Bond in the future.
EG- (And I know I'll get stupid comments stereotyping his films, "Bond would have an afro and would say f*ck alot and kill Vesper", but I'm going to say this anyway). I think if they got Tarantino (though it'll never happen now), gave him more control than usual with the script and everything while still keeping an eye on him, they could get a really good film.
He has helped in some very good bond films.
I take your points but I think giving up control would only be a success if they get the right man - and thats someone who understands Bond and not just a 'name'.
I think they gave Tamahori the leeway to bring in the big CGI sequence which was all his idea and look how that turned out. Also they gave up quite a lot to Forster resulting in unfathomable editing and piss poor opening titles.
I am amongst the crowd who would like to see Nolan get a crack at Bond but it will never happen because he would demand to write it as well and for some reason P&W are unsackable.
I did think Tarantino would do an interesting job but I even without the stuff that came out recently they would never have let him near it. He would want to mess about with the formula way too much. He would want to do something like give Bond the scar which sounds great to us Fleming fans but from EONs point of view wouldnt be a goer when trying to sell the film. I think QT would require way too much supervision by EON that it was never worth the hassle to them. However I would be intrigued to see the results.
My pick for the next director would be Nolan or Matthew Vaughn and further down the line Duncan Jones (it would be worth it if only for the fact he could maybe get his old man to do the song and maybe play the villain).
Everyone would have their own lists good bond v. bad bond movies, but I think we all could agree that those two have supervised more bad bonds than good ones.
They're never gonna hire an A-list director because the guy would also want to drop-kick the two... I'll call them writers off the show straightaway, and there's too much old blood on the pictures as it is.
The MINUTE Die Hard came out and punched License to Kill in the neck in the 80's, I would have hired John McTiernan and said, "We're not going to NOT make a Bond film for almost a decade. We're going to evolve and get better."
At least it happened with Craig's type of Bond, I'll give them that.
One watches Nolan's films and the guy's begging to do a Bond film, but they want mostly older, over the hill directors or talent-challenged younger guys who they can control. Oh, and they've gotta be cheaper than Tarantino, Cameron and some of these other, REAL directors.
How old was Michael Apted when he did his Bond film? I saw him last year. He looked like he was in his 70's.
You think James Cameron is gonna sit through a writer's pitch when one of them says, "Yeah, and then Bond parasails on a tsunami! Isn't that coool?""
Or Ridley Scott putting up with, "We figure we'd dry the destructive satilite angle again for the end of the picture while everyone fights inside a giant plane."
That's why I blame those two.
Stuff like that.
They may be nice, I dunno, but man they've made or supported some BAD decisions, and won't let anyone else make them either.
He has two sons working at Eon. Gregg Wilson had an "assistant producer" credit in Quantum of Solace. It was in the main titles.
I find this somewhat worrying.
Imagine your mother re-married when you were in your 20s and with no career to speak of. The bloke she married was a millionaire who ran a large multinational.
Now the bloke turns to you and says 'Are you looking for a job? Come and work for me and when I go you can take over the family business. Oh and did I say you will make millions?'
You could go out on your own and forge a career but this seems like too good an offer to refuse so you take him up on it.
40 years later and you are getting ready to retire having made your millions but your son is in the same position you were all those years ago so you say to him 'Are you looking for a job....'
Now the problem with all this is that 90% of us would accept the offer of a nice job with millions guaranteed even if the guys business was making, say, toilet paper.
I personally couldnt give a toss what business he was in - I would help him run it for such a cushy deal but the trouble is that you run the risk of ending up with someone who doesnt really have much interest in the toilet paper world and then my son who has had to hear about toilet paper all his life would be even less interested but he would still take the offer ending up with the quality of toilet paper going down or after I'm gone my son messing around with the toilet paper formula by making it out of sandpaper or encrusted with diamonds or something.
Before you know it people are wandering around with blood streaming down their legs and saying we're going to find another toilet paper manufacturer as this company has no idea how to make good toilet paper anymore.
I'm sure Gregg is a perfectly nice chap but I'm perturbed at the way he can just walk into a pretty big job without any notable experience or qualifications (his IMDB entry is pretty scant to say the least. Take away odd jobs on Bond films and theres nothing left).
Say what you like about Babs but at least she went away and did a course in motion picture production before being allowed near the series.
Obviously I'm not a naive ingenue and I know how the world works but I'm just perturbed that the bloke who say by 2020 will be co-producing the series as Babs winds down into retirement might see Bond as nothing more than the family toilet paper factory which is his to milk as much cash out of as he can.
I would like to think the series is in good hands with someone who cares about Bond and not someone whos only there because it was an easy option rather than having to find a job.
All it takes is one bad call by Babs, MGW or later down the line Gregg and we get someone who decides 'I dont need all this' and sells the rights to the studio. And that is the beginning of the end when we start seeing a female Bond, a black Bond, Bond Begins, Bond dies, Bond directed by Michael Bay etc, etc.
I'm sure I'm not alone in saying I dont want to use toilet paper made by Michael Bay.
You might be truthfull in your conception. BUT EON while it made mistakes it also kept the franchise a more British focused production, so NO Hollywood/Michael Bay excesses. Do you really think that SONY would have hired Daniel Craig as 007 without the influence of EON?? We would by now have a heartthrob firmly fixed in the youth culture like Robert Pattison as 007.
Sure they are making money there is nothing wrong with that, but EON is a counterbalance to the filmstudios which gives the production a different taste to what the studio system in Hollywood would give it. This is group of people whose concern besides the dosh is some artistic continuation of the Ian Fleming character. And while I might disagree with them like with QoB I prefer them that way every day of the week 52 weeks a year.
So in that aspect they are special, and the 12 years olds that have an opinion and feel that they need to be heard on the internet will continue to do so. And will be continuued to be ignored and rightly so.
They hire A- list directors such as forster and mendes.Forster stuffed it up....
Look at george lucas.He made the star wars films in the 70's and 80's then makes the awful prequels.
Spielberg made the 4th indiana jones film which wasn't well received.
All directors or producers make bad mistakes.
People critisize goldfinger as being overated,thunderball as having too many underwater scenes,yolt for the volcano stuff,ohmss for lazenbys casting. Harry and cubby being the producers must take the blame then.
No one is immune to making mistakes basically.
They already did that ;)
I think the word counterbalance is crucial here. Cubby told Barbara "don't let them fuck it up.." by that he meant the moneymen at the studios. Babs and Mickey know Bond. Babs still dips into Fleming once in a while. When they run out of inspiration they always go back to Fleming.
Can you imagine what a studio would do without the influence of Eon. Robert Pattinson for 007? Selena Gomez as a Bond girl? The whole thing set in a Californian high school?
Just have a look at some of the James Bond imitations to see how shit it could be. Cody Banks Jnr? Anyone?
And if the accountants, survey experts, and to be honest A list directors, listen to the studios or are let off the lead thats what would happen.
The Broccolis have been the bulwark against the studios since Diamonds. When the studios get their own way we get castiing like Denise Richards and Halle Berry. When Eon are allowed to do what they want....we get Casino Royale.
They are not perfect but they are a hell of a lot better then the alternative.
What "station" is that? She inherited (as far as we know) half of Eon, and Cubby was her father. She can do whatever she wants with her inheritance (including license it out for a PSA of Bond in drag). We can gripe as much as we want; it's her decision because it's her company, at least half of it. She seems to be the one who is carrying on Cubby's "family atmosphere" on the films.
I see so much sexism toward Babs--not in this post, WoI--and honestly, I feel it is largely unjustified. She's proven to be a very shrewd businessperson. And like it or not, she is the one who is likely going to keep Cubby's flame alive for decades.
http://www.deadline.com/2012/08/screen-to-stage-musical-transfer-once-recoups-in-record-time/
CR and QoS were huge hits despite critical barbs for the latter. Babs seems to get all of the blame and none of the credit. MGW isn't viewed with the same disdain despite also being a producer, and I think gender is the only reason.
The only thing that matters is that they make good movies, and the majority of their films are not.
They prefer to control the product regardless of the outcome.