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
And if Cubby had given final cut away to the latest fashionable director rather than trust his experienced instinct..?
Why? Because we agree with some of Eon’s decisions? You think we have no criticism to give?
No you're wrong, Pierce himself said he was kicked to the curb. (You mean like that?) :>
but in all seriousness, I've heard reports saying he was asking for too much money, but I think Pierce probably felt a little strung along and didn't like being kept out of the loop as to what all their plans were.
Despite all that, the series came back to the pop culture forefront in the 90s, and Brosnan's charm and popularity were a big part of that, even if the movies themselves were only seen as okay. But Brosnan was Cubby's choice and Craig was Barbara's, and she did the movies she wanted to with him, for better or worse. It's natural that she would praise Craig more than Brosnan, but given that Brosnan inherited a fading series and left it profitable while Craig inherited a series that was riding a box office high and left it in ruins, maybe she should've been a bit more professional with Brosnan, not to mention grateful.
1. Contracts are made to be broken.
2. Filming schedules are made to be flexible (They did this with Rami Malek)
It seemed to me that Pierce gave up just a little too easily.
It's not about final cut. People need to think critically about reports like this one. Amazon has incentives to put stories in the papers that make the Broccolis look out-of-touch or incompetent.
It's about the money. Nolan made about $100 million from "Oppenheimer". He is the biggest name-brand director in Hollywood. He got 15% first dollar gross (first dollar gross!) off of "Oppenheimer", in addition to everything else. Why on Earth if you were the Broccolis would you take that big of a chunk out of your own earnings when you could have another quality filmmaker make a hit movie for a significantly smaller amount? Similarly: if you are Nolan who could get any idea funded, why on Earth would you take gun-for-hire work?
Now Amazon may make a different decision given that they need a HIT above all else, and they may decide whatever the cost is to them is worth it since they have no established track record. But then we get back into the micromanaging point — will Amazon have the necessary discipline to work with him? I would assume not.
“For Your Hoover Only”: May vacuums Bond’s bedroom. Then she vacuums the hallway and breakfast nook. Then she vacuums Bond’s bedroom again because she missed a spot.
“Bedspreads Are Forever”: May spends the morning making Bond’s bed. But has she chosen the right duvet cover?
“Live and Let Dry”: May does Bond’s laundry but accidentally shrinks his favorite dress shirt! Can she get a replacement from Bond’s tailor before he notices?
“You Only Buy Twice”: May goes shopping for Bond’s breakfast at Fortnum & Mason, but in a shocking twist, the store has run out of Norwegian Heather Honey! A crisis is averted when May orders it from Amazon instead (Jeff Bezos has a cameo as the friendly delivery man).
“The Yank Who Irritated Me”: Tiffany Case has moved into Bond’s flat and is driving May crazy with her untidiness, crying jags, and spilled drinks. Can May find a way to get rid of Tiffany without hurting Bond’s feelings? And will she succeed in removing that whiskey stain from the sofa?
“Chunderball”: A group of disguised Spectre agents arrives at Bond’s flat to kill him. May answers the door and says Bond is at the office but will be home soon if they care to wait. May serves everyone tea but the assassination plot is called off after the agents get food poisoning from the crumpet.
“A View to a Stove”: May faces the greatest crisis of her career when she gets amnesia after a fall in the kitchen and no longer remembers how to make scrambled eggs! Will Bond be forced to replace her?
“Dr Says No”: After a stay at Shrublands Bond wants to eat healthy food only. Will May be forced to junk her fried haggis dinner plans?
“The Man with the Golden Offer”: Bond has gone missing in Japan and everyone believes he’s dead. May is keeping Bond’s flat going on her savings but she’s running out of money. Will she accept Sir James Molony’s offer to become his housekeeper instead?
“From Scotland with Love”: May is contacted by man in Glen Orchy who claims to be her long-lost nephew’s brother’s son-in-law. Is he for real or an agent of Smersh, or--even worse--an imposter hoping to learn her secret recipe for Cock-a-Leekie Soup?
"The Droperty of a Marmalady": May falls over in the kitchen again, breaking a jar of Frank Cooper's Fine Cut. Will she have time to make a new batch before Bond gets home?
***SPOILERS AHEAD***
Luckily, Bond kept a spare jar of Oxford in the cupboard, which concealed the housekeeper's clumsiness until she could buy a new pack of 2 online from Amazon.
No David Arnold.
He did five movies already, there’s other talent out there.
Brosnan was caught between two powerhouses, NBC and Eon. Not an enviable place to be.
It was a different time, when TV actors did not usually cross over to film and back. That was why Bond didn't happen for him in 1986. Cubby wanted Brosnan exclusively.
In retrospect, 1995 was better for Brosnan anyway. Who's to say Brosnan wouldn't run into the same ultraviolent juggernaut of Lethal Weapon et al in 1989 and be done after two films, too?
Bond 16 probably wouldn’t have been like LTK, depending on whether Brosnan pushed for a harder Fleming inspired edge the way Dalton did, and who knows how that would have turned out?
But if both movies did turn out to be bigger hits than Dalton’s, I don’t think we would have seen much conflict between Eon and MGM, or at the very least it would have been a much shorter hiatus. Dalton would have gotten his third film in 93 or 94 if John Calley were not so adamant to get rid of Dalton.
I do like TLD as we have it with Dalton, but I tend to agree that Brosnan would have been a better choice for a successful film; yes he was a bit thin and massively-bouffanted at the time, but he was a charismatic lead and a bit more of the movie star type audiences would have clicked with. In terms of an LTK, they probably wouldn't have gone in that direction, but he did prove that he could do cold-blooded killer pretty effectively in 1987 with The Fourth Protocol. He could have easily had a 15 year run as Bond.
that would have cause WAY to many legal headaches with EON and NBC. That wouldn't have been worth it.
Going into DAD and the months after DAD, EON probably thought they make one more with Brosnan. Thus getting Brosnan's hope up for a 5th movie. What EON should have done to be more professional to Pierce was to say maybe we will do a 5th one, no promises. This way they didn't get Pierce and the fans hopes up.
It is that simple. I sometimes think EON over thought things way too much when it came to the series.
I agree and disagree. Yes I would love to hear other composers score a Bond film, but if your Amazon you would want to play it safe and bring on a composer who knows and is a pro at the Bond sound.
That is very possible. The thought of more Arnold doesn't really excite me, but I must admit he can create a Bondy sounding score in a way that something like LTK's score (which I've been listening to the new CD of) doesn't quite achieve.
I do think that him accepting the job is less than certain though, he hasn't scored a film in years and it seems that's by choice.
I think Arnold would say yes in a heartbeat if asked. I don't think he was expecting to be done after QoS. Don't matter if he hasn't scored in years. Bond is a different animal which he probably love to comeback for.
None of us can know. He does clearly still have love for Bond as he's always still doing Bond projects here and there, but a new Bond movie may be exactly the thing he'd hate to do for all we know: not because it's Bond but because maybe he's been turned off the idea of doing big movies with all the committee decisions and being squeezed by big companies. Maybe he will, maybe he won't, we can't know.
Yeah, my feeling is they'll go reasonably safe with the next one and give us a Force Awakens/GoldenEye; but who knows.
I think the difference is that with TFA it was coming a decade after the prequels which still had a reputation of being major let downs all across the board, and Disney wanted to evoke what worked before those. That’s not really the case with Craig because aside from maybe QOS and SP, his run was generally well received and made a lot of money.
Maybe from the perspective of fandom that trying to evoke the Brosnan films would be playing it safe, but from Amazon’s point of view the highest grossing Bond films are all Craig’s, and it wouldn’t surprise me if they think it’s safer to just do a movie more in tone with CR than with GE.