EoN sells up - Amazon MGM to produce 007 going forwards (Heyman and Pascal confirmed as producers)

14446484950

Comments

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,536
    Christopher McQuarrie for Bond 26, Edgar Wright for Bond 27, Mel Gibson for Bond 28. Kosinski for Bond 29. Who says no? I would suggest Peter Weir but he's getting on a bit.

    Weir’s last film was 15 years ago.

    And he’s officially retired.

    I’d imagine that from your list, the most legit shot is Kosinski.

    I think when McQuarrie is finished post on M:I, he’s going to be doing smaller projects and ones he writes as well (he started as a playwright, then a screenwriter).

    I’m sure Wright would love a shot at Bond. Let’s see how his Running Man film turns out. But I just don’t think he’s seasoned as a serious filmmaker. There’s something fun in most of his films, yet all of them have an infantile/fanboy energy to them. And that energy would be insufferable in a Bond adventure.
  • NoTimeToLiveNoTimeToLive Jamaica
    Posts: 132
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I don't understand why a director who makes gay romance movies should make an action movie, regardless of how good they may be.

    What next, are we suggesting Jack Black to play the villain and Kim Kardashian as Moneypenny?

    Why did the director of sex comedies make two of the better received Bond films? Because talent matters.

    Because he was attached to strong scripts, unlike the directors for the other Brosnan movies. I don't think Campbell is that good of a director, he hasn't made anything worthy of recognition outside of Bond.
    Hence why Mendes made one of the best Bond movies as well as one of the worst.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,552
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I don't understand why a director who makes gay romance movies should make an action movie, regardless of how good they may be.

    What next, are we suggesting Jack Black to play the villain and Kim Kardashian as Moneypenny?

    Why did the director of sex comedies make two of the better received Bond films? Because talent matters.

    Because he was attached to strong scripts, unlike the directors for the other Brosnan movies. I don't think Campbell is that good of a director, he hasn't made anything worthy of recognition outside of Bond.
    Hence why Mendes made one of the best Bond movies as well as one of the worst.

    SF wasn't that bad.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited March 20 Posts: 3,247
    If someone with Martin Campbell's pre-GE track record was suggested to direct the next Bond, he'd probably be shot down as the wrong guy or for not being up to handling such a big project. Yet look what he did with Bond, given the chance. We often say that we can't tell how an actor would play Bond by looking at his earlier roles - does a similar thing apply to directors and their earlier films? Dunno.
  • edited March 20 Posts: 1,755
    Venutius wrote: »
    If someone with Martin Campbell's pre-GE track record was suggested to direct the next Bond, he'd probably be shot down as the wrong guy or for not being up to handling such a big project. Yet look what he did with Bond, given the chance. We often say that we can't tell how an actor would play Bond by looking at his earlier roles - does a similar thing apply to directors and their earlier films? Dunno.

    Well, I still doubt him.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,588
    Presuming the deal closes in May, which it will, I wonder how quickly we will see some sort of announcement, like a projected release date.

    I'm guessing quick.
  • Posts: 4,432
    echo wrote: »
    Presuming the deal closes in May, which it will, I wonder how quickly we will see some sort of announcement, like a projected release date.

    I'm guessing quick.

    I hope so! I still think there is an outside chance at Cinema Con in April. It's a bit of a longshot, but not impossible.

    With Amazon MGM Studios now holding full creative control over the James Bond franchise, one of the key questions for me is how the iconic opening title card will evolve—especially in relation to how 'Albert R. Broccoli’s EON Productions' who are credited at the top of the Bond films, whose continued involvement remains uncertain. Additionally, I wonder whether Amazon will alter the traditional Bond title format by introducing a "007" prefix or a structured naming convention.

    The Fate of the Classic Opening Title Card

    For decades, every Bond film has opened with the Albert R. Broccoli’s EON Productions credit, reinforcing the lineage and custodianship of the franchise. Even after the passing of Cubby Broccoli, Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson continued this legacy, ensuring that the title card remained a hallmark of continuity. But with Amazon now taking full control, will this long-standing tribute to EON remain, or will it be replaced by an Amazon MGM Studios-branded intro?

    If Amazon is shifting away from EON’s involvement, even symbolically, will the films now simply begin with an Amazon MGM Studios logo, followed by the iconic gun barrel sequence? Or will there be a compromise—perhaps a “Produced in association with EON Productions” credit, assuming Barbara and Michael remain involved at any level? The title card has always represented a sense of lineage, quality, and tradition, so any change to it would be a significant moment in Bond’s cinematic identity.

    Will Future Bond Films Use “007” in Their Titles?

    Another topic worth discussing is whether Amazon will maintain the franchise’s tradition of standalone film titles (GoldenEye, Skyfall, No Time to Die), or whether they will introduce a more structured naming convention, such as “007: Eclipse” or “James Bond: Shatterpoint.”

    So far, the mainline Bond films have resisted subtitle conventions, even as other franchises—Star Wars, John Wick, Knives Out, and Fast & Furious—have embraced them. However, we have seen Bond marketing increasingly lean on the 007 logo, even if it has never appeared in an official title. Could this be a precursor to Amazon eventually branding films more explicitly as "007: [Title]", to better establish the franchise identity in a market where audiences now expect shared universes and multiple interconnected projects?

    If Amazon does introduce a new subtitle format, would it be for spin-offs only (Moneypenny: From the World of 007) while keeping the mainline films traditional, or could we see a shift across the entire franchise? Would fans accept this, or is the standalone title format too ingrained in Bond’s DNA to change?

    Keen to hear thoughts on both these points—should the EON Productions title card remain, and what do you think about the possibility of future Bond films using a "007" or "James Bond" prefix?
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited March 20 Posts: 17,477

    The Fate of the Classic Opening Title Card

    For decades, every Bond film has opened with the Albert R. Broccoli’s EON Productions credit, reinforcing the lineage and custodianship of the franchise. Even after the passing of Cubby Broccoli, Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson continued this legacy, ensuring that the title card remained a hallmark of continuity. But with Amazon now taking full control, will this long-standing tribute to EON remain, or will it be replaced by an Amazon MGM Studios-branded intro?

    To be fair, Broccoli and Wilson didn't just continue that, they started it; when he was alive Cubby Broccoli (and Saltzman when he was there) just had his name before the 'presents' bit, I don't think Eon was ever mentioned in the titles before 1995.
    If there is a 'presents' then it'll probably be MGM Amazon Studios, I think that's fine. It's what it is.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,318
    what do you think about the possibility of future Bond films using a "007" or "James Bond" prefix?
    Wow, I hadn't even thought about this until now. It's a great point to bring up and I think it would be absolutely dreadful, but I wouldn't put it past Amazon to do it. There have been plenty of Bond movies that made boatloads of money without having 007 in the title. It would really feel like they were dumbing it down.
  • Posts: 2,164
    James Bond, 007 before the title would not be a bad thing. In print it would identify it as a Bond film whereby a title alone doesn't. MI does it that way. Dead Reckoning Part II will be preceded by Mission Impossible. I don't see that as dumbing down, just breaking with tradition.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,318
    CrabKey wrote: »
    James Bond, 007 before the title would not be a bad thing. In print it would identify it as a Bond film whereby a title alone doesn't. MI does it that way. Dead Reckoning Part II will be preceded by Mission Impossible. I don't see that as dumbing down, just breaking with tradition.

    Is that really necessary though? Is that what it will take to draw in that elusive younger demographic? I understand that many franchises do this, but I loved that Bond didn't. That alone wouldn't be a deal breaker for me, but I just hope we never end up with something as generic as James Bond, 007 Part 1.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,426
    I always loved that the titles of each film were standalone for Bond. There was no need for “James Bond: Dr. No” and so on. Hollywood never seems to trust audiences into understanding that sequels can be completely different titles. Indiana Jones started off with “Raiders of the Lost Ark”, but instead of getting the follow up film titled “The Temple of Doom” we get “Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. The sequel to Hunger Games couldn’t just be the title “Catching Fire”, it had to be “The Hunger Games: Catching Fire”. Even Rian Johnson couldn’t have it his way by just calling his second Benoit Blanc film “Glass Onion”, it had to be branded “Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery”. These film companies are all about branding, branding, branding.

    For Bond, all you needed was a new title with the 007 logo slapped on the poster.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 17,477
    With Indiana Jones that wasn’t dumbing down, it was pulpy fun evoking titles of old.
  • Posts: 7,998
    I would love to see 'Bond is back!' on the posters, and suppose it's too much to ask to return to the old style posters that were illustrated rather than photos!?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,426
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    I would love to see 'Bond is back!' on the posters, and suppose it's too much to ask to return to the old style posters that were illustrated rather than photos!?

    Designs of posters these days are primarily made for thumbnails for streaming, rather than the old one sheets you could marvel at framed on a wall. That’s why modern posters are more about minimalism. It’s not easy to appreciate the FRWL poster when it’s reduced to the size of a postage stamp.

    This…
    10.1177_13548565211064520-fig1.jpg

    Is why Bond on streaming looks like this

    04r25sxso5u91.jpg
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 17,477
    I don't know if that entirely adds up as none of those are film posters. I love the detailed stuff as much as the next guy, but with my marketing hat on I'd say that if you're promoting a new Bond film you don't need much more than a big striking picture of Daniel Craig in a dinner suit on the side of a bus. That gets your message across with much more punch and impact, and is easier to read visually, than a big melange of explosions and cars. The human eye is naturally drawn to faces, you have a face staring out, a big impactful picture of someone we know is James Bond in a James Bondy pose, add in the 007 logo, and everyone knows what they're getting and you've communicated that in less than a second.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,372
    Amazon picks its Bond producers: Good luck to David Heyman and Amy Pascal, who are in talks to shepherd the next iteration of James Bond. The veteran producers have been among the names rumored in the British press in the weeks since Amazon shocked the town by acquiring full control of the Bond franchise from Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson, but now I’m told reps for Heyman and Pascal are negotiating their deals. Amazon declined to comment, and nothing can be official until the Broccoli transaction closes, which is still a ways off. But they’re the choice of Amazon execs Mike Hopkins, Jen Salke, and Courtenay Valenti, and barring some impasse, the announcement will happen.

    This duo checks a lot of boxes. Heyman is British, for one, and he’s handled big film franchises like Harry Potter, Barbie, and Wonka. Pascal also produced Barbie, but more importantly, she worked on Casino Royale, Skyfall, and Quantum of Solace when she ran Sony Pictures, which distributed several Bond pics. The plan is to make a new movie for theatrical release before any spinoffs or TV extensions, so their first task will be to settle on writers and/or a filmmaker before picking a new Bond. And just because Heyman and Pascal are lead producers, that wouldn’t prevent them from bringing on, say, Chris Nolan and his wife/partner Emma Thomas to produce, too… if Nolan was interested in directing.

    https://puck.news/newsletter_content/what-im-hearing-apple-fears-bonds-producers-zaz-bomb-threat/?_gl=1*axfunq*_up*MQ..*_ga*MTQxMTI1MjI1My4xNzQyNTQ4MzM0*_ga_SEFD191RFM*MTc0MjU0ODMzMy4xLjEuMTc0MjU0ODMzNi4wLjAuMTY1MDg4NjQ4OQ
  • If this news is true, I feel slightly more at ease with Pascal’s involvement. I suppose it’s a breath of fresh air seeing they’ll be focusing on a feature film first before spin-offs (let’s be honest to not do so would be a misfire right out the gate) but we’ll just have to wait and see how things are going. I’m still on the fence on Amazon Bond.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 17,477
    Samuel001 wrote: »
    Amazon picks its Bond producers: Good luck to David Heyman and Amy Pascal, who are in talks to shepherd the next iteration of James Bond. The veteran producers have been among the names rumored in the British press in the weeks since Amazon shocked the town by acquiring full control of the Bond franchise from Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson, but now I’m told reps for Heyman and Pascal are negotiating their deals. Amazon declined to comment, and nothing can be official until the Broccoli transaction closes, which is still a ways off. But they’re the choice of Amazon execs Mike Hopkins, Jen Salke, and Courtenay Valenti, and barring some impasse, the announcement will happen.

    Really, you've heard this yourself? That's encouraging, I must say I've liked the sound of Heyman ever since his name came up, and Pascal is a positive name thanks to being somewhat Broccoli-adjacent. If the news turned out to be true I'd be reasonably happy with it.
  • edited March 23 Posts: 4,851
    Yes, to be fair those are encouraging picks, although neither are guaranteed to give us worthwhile or even financially successful Bond films. I suppose we’ll have to wait until May or after for anything definitive.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 17,477
    Meanwhile, and don't necessarily take this seriously but it'll get repeated around the place, The Sun have said Amazon want B26 by the end of 2027 and with a $250m budget.

    But it is The Sun, and they're very unreliable.
  • Posts: 61
    I was thinking stunts galore.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 17,477
    I guess in a way it would be quite funny if Amazon MGM of all things gave us the first British-born producer of the Bond films.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,756
    Fingers crossed on Cuaron, this is big news.
  • zebrafishzebrafish <°)))< in Octopussy's garden in the shade
    edited March 21 Posts: 4,396
    Excellent, two producers that got the Spiderman and Harry Potter movies rolling! I feel instantly relieved. And a Bond veteran, of course.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited March 21 Posts: 17,477
    Variety are also reporting the rumours, and although they only give the same source as being Puck as well, I do wonder if they know something as they were hinting about Heyman a month ago when an article they put out said Amazon "will look first to attach a producer in the vein of David Heyman", which at the time I thought seemed very oddly specific.
    https://variety.com/2025/film/news/james-bond-amazon-christopher-nolan-shut-out-1236321078/

    Meanwhile Deadline say "We’re hearing that there’s truth to" them being in talks.
    Fingers crossed on Cuaron, this is big news.

    Good point actually, they get on well and have made a couple of (very successful) films together. Cuaron is a Bond fan, it wouldn't seem to be unlikely.
  • Posts: 615
    Heyman/Pascal rumors have some teeth now? That's a good first step Amazon wants to do this the right way. Hopefully they close the deal. Cuarón doing Bond would be awesome.
  • edited March 21 Posts: 2,439


    This video is about 20 minutes long so quite the ask for anyone to view; I just felt it appropriate to share here because everything this YouTuber says is sort of in line with how I’m feeling over the Amazon crap. He makes some great points about the lack of creativity in Billionaires these days towards the end. I recommend giving this a watch.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,588
    Cautiously, I see this as good news. Pascal worked on CR and QoS, so there will be some creative continuity--a handing of the baton from Eon to Amazon--rather than just some random person taking over.
Sign In or Register to comment.