›

Will we ever see the Bond Continuation novels as films?

MrDJWestMrDJWest
edited July 2013 in Literary 007 Posts: 76
I remember reading a quote from the producers that they where not interested in adapting non Fleming material at the moment, but this was many years ago. Now most of Fleming has been used, not quite exhausted as a source but do you think we will ever see the continuation novels adapted? I feel that some of them are just as good as Fleming and would make really good films.

What do you guys think?

Comments

  • JWESTBROOKJWESTBROOK
    Posts: 5,745
    I'm still thinking "Will we ever see Fleming's original novels (properly) as films?"
  • Dr_YesDr_Yes
    Posts: 169
    While I haven't read any of the continuation novels (yet), they'd have to be a better source material than some of the screenplays that used only a Fleming title & one or two character names. Of course there are still missed opportunities in some of the neglected material from Fleming's own works but I'd be open to adaptations of continuation stories as well. I remember being confused by the title of "Licence to Kill", thinking at first that it had been the film version of Gardner's "Licence Renewed". I had assumed that EON had made the logical decision to follow the new literary source for Bond adventures. Silly me.
  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    As Cubby explained years ago, the problem with using the continuation novels, is that he would have to pay for rights to the books.
    Cheaper to concoct original stories.
  • MrDJWestMrDJWest
    Posts: 76
    Oh that's interesting, they don't have the rights? I just assumed that they automatically had them because it was James Bond.

    Was their not a court before 2006`s casino royale when the courts said everything bond was eons preventing Kevin Mclory to develop more stories? Or are the book rights something else?
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited July 2013 Posts: 13,978
    Though it hasn't stopped EON from borrowing from the books. The fight between Bond & Caber in Licence Renewed and the fight between Bond & Necros in The Living Daylights. They're not exactly the same, but surely it's not a coincidence.

    Or how about the Goodyear Airship climax of Role Of Honour and the Zorin Industries Airship/Golden Golden Gate Bridge climax of A View To A Kill. Again, not 100% the same, but given how Role Of Honour was published in 1984 and A View To A Kill was released in 1985...
  • timmertimmer
    edited July 2013 Posts: 4,622
    MrDJWest wrote:
    Oh that's interesting, they don't have the rights? I just assumed that they automatically had them because it was James Bond.

    Was their not a court before 2006`s casino royale when the courts said everything bond was eons preventing Kevin Mclory to develop more stories? Or are the book rights something else?
    Eon did have formal rights to the Fleming novels, but I think to actually do a screenplay based on one of the continuation novels, there would have to be a kick-back to the original author. At least that's what Cubby seemed to be saying. Makes sense. Gardner, Benson etc did create their own original stories.
    This stance does make Eon look kinda cheap though. Then again, I have no idea what rights-payoffs to the continuation authors would cost.
    From EON's perspective, I guess the continuation titles are kinda niche, and thus not worth paying for, when they can just as easily dream up their own stories, and cherry-pick , as @MajorDSmythe points out, bits that they like from the post-Fleming novels, without crossing into rights territory.

  • MrDJWestMrDJWest
    Posts: 76
    Yeah, I defenatly think the titles of the continuation novels are a bit naf and cliche, such as `never dream of dying`, `no deals, mr bond`, `doubleshot`, `nobody lives forever` i dont think they would work well as titles, where as `devil may care` and `Colonal Sun` are pretty good titles for movies.

    Also I would love to see Colonal Sun made into a film. Perhaps it would make a good first film for the next Bond actor?
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    Regardless of the rights, there is still a good deal of Fleming material that has not been used. Even in the faithful adaptations, they were taking away as much as they were keeping things in.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    They've used bits and pieces of the continuation novels in the films, though.
  • PerdoggPerdogg
    Posts: 686
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    I'm still thinking "Will we ever see Fleming's original novels (properly) as films?"

    To be honest, I doubt Barbara Broccoli has ever read a Bond novel.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    Agent007391 wrote:
    They've used bits and pieces of the continuation novels in the films, though.

    But not officially. I think there is enough material from the original novels for a few movies, if only as a starting point or to add Fleming flavour.
  • JamesPageJamesPage Administrator, Moderator, Director
    Posts: 1,380
    Nope. End of.
  • Sir_James_MoloneySir_James_Moloney
    edited July 2013 Posts: 388
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    I'm still thinking "Will we ever see Fleming's original novels (properly) as films?"
    No we won't.

    One can appreciate why the filmmakers took the decision to depart from the original novels to some extent even if one doesn't appreciate the final results.

    OHMSS is about as close as you're going to get, I think. And that was easily the most cinematic of all the novels.
    timmer wrote:
    As Cubby explained years ago, the problem with using the continuation novels, is that he would have to pay for rights to the books.
    Cheaper to concoct original stories.
    I don't really buy that as the explanation. Eon would be able to pick up the rights to the continuation novels for a song. Possibly for nothing at all. The film rights to those novels have zero market value as they are not, and will never be, available on the market.

    The fact is there's no real reason to adapt them. The stories have been neither critical nor commercial hits and aside from a few hardcore fans (who will pay to see the movies anyway) no-one knows they exist.
    Perdogg wrote:
    To be honest, I doubt Barbara Broccoli has ever read a Bond novel.
    "Ah, the legendary Perdogg wit. Or at least half of it."

  • timmertimmer
    edited July 2013 Posts: 4,622
    Sir_James_Moloney wrote:
    timmer wrote:
    As Cubby explained years ago, the problem with using the continuation novels, is that he would have to pay for rights to the books.
    Cheaper to concoct original stories.
    I don't really buy that as the explanation. Eon would be able to pick up the rights to the continuation novels for a song. Possibly for nothing at all. The film rights to those novels have zero market value as they are not, and will never be, available on the market.

    The fact is there's no real reason to adapt them. The stories have been neither critical nor commercial hits and aside from a few hardcore fans (who will pay to see the movies anyway) no-one knows they exist.
    But Cubby did say he didn't want to pay. He essentially said why the heck should I pay for new post-Fleming stories when I can commission my own.
    The rights to the continuation novels are yes, essentially worthless on the open market, because they would be in conflict with Eon's rights to "Bond," however if Eon as the Bond rights-holder did wish to base a movie on a continuation novel, the original author would have to be compensated, and the author or his estate would exercise their maximum financial leverage, whatever that might be, considering that Eon Bond-films do have proven track records as big money-makers. The author would want his cut.
    From Eon's pov, it's not worth the financial hassle unless the story was so compelling that they felt a need to film it and make a financial deal.
    This scenario is only going to happen though, if one of the continuation novels becomes such a smash best-seller, that the novel screams film me and make lots of money.
    Otherwise the Bond brand itself is enough to project big profits.

    ==Then again,never say never. Maybe someday, someone running Eon will get a hankering to do something with Gardner's work, for example, make the deal with his estate and off we go.
    I say this because I think Bond will outlive us all. Anything could happen way down the road.

  • Sir_James_MoloneySir_James_Moloney
    Posts: 388
    timmer wrote:
    Sir_James_Moloney wrote:
    timmer wrote:
    As Cubby explained years
  • Sir_James_MoloneySir_James_Moloney
    Posts: 388
    timmer wrote:
    Sir_James_Moloney wrote:
    timmer wrote:
    As Cubby explained years ago, the problem with using the continuation novels, is that he would have to pay for rights to the books.
    Cheaper to concoct original stories.
    I don't really buy that as the explanation. Eon would be able to pick up the rights to the continuation novels for a song. Possibly for nothing at all. The film rights to those novels have zero market value as they are not, and will never be, available on the market.

    The fact is there's no real reason to adapt them. The stories have been neither critical nor commercial hits and aside from a few hardcore fans (who will pay to see the movies anyway) no-one knows they exist.
    But Cubby did say he didn't want to pay. He essentially said why the heck should I pay for new post-Fleming stories when I can commission my own.
    The rights to the continuation novels are yes, essentially worthless on the open market, because they would be in conflict with Eon's rights to "Bond," however if Eon as the Bond rights-holder did wish to base a movie on a continuation novel, the original author would have to be compensated, and the author or his estate would exercise their maximum financial leverage, whatever that might be, considering that Eon Bond-films do have proven track records as big money-makers. The author would want his cut.
    From Eon's pov, it's not worth the financial hassle unless the story was so compelling that they felt a need to film it and make a financial deal.
    This scenario is only going to happen though, if one of the continuation novels becomes such a smash best-seller, that the novel screams film me and make lots of money.
    Otherwise the Bond brand itself is enough to project big profits.

    ==Then again,never say never. Maybe someday, someone running Eon will get a hankering to do something with Gardner's work, for example, make the deal with his estate and off we go.
    I say this because I think Bond will outlive us all. Anything could happen way down the road.

    Agree with all that Timmer as it makes perfect sense, especially what Cubby said. I wonder what deal the continuation authors made with IFP regarding film rights? I imagine Faulks and Denver might have retained the film rights to their novels but what about Gardner? I'd imagine that IFP almost certainly hold the rights to Benson's.

    Author's usually receive 2-3% of the film's budget as a fee but it varies on a film by film basis.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    EON have actually said in the past they have the rights to both Faulks' and Denver's books, likely so someone else can't buy them, even though they have no intention of making them into films.
  • timmertimmer
    edited July 2013 Posts: 4,622
    Samuel001 wrote:
    EON have actually said in the past they have the rights to both Faulks' and Denver's books, likely so someone else can't buy them, even though they have no intention of making them into films.

    This is interesting but did Faulkes and Deaver actually negotiate the right's away ahead of time, or would they still be entitled to a cut, if the books were ever filmed?
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited July 2013 Posts: 13,355
    I have no idea on that but I'm sure both are aware their novels will never make it to the screen, athough both have been optimistic about wanting their novel made into a film - but then what else would you say in an interview?

    We may learn a bit about the process, as later this year, EON will purchase the rights to Solo too. Hopefully someone asks Boyd how it works.
  • PerdoggPerdogg
    edited July 2013 Posts: 686
    I would like to see the film be based on something from Sax Rohmer or Seabury Quinn. I am afraid the future Bond movies will be made based on cost rather than the creativity of the writer.
  • 007InVT007InVT Classified
    Posts: 893
    Perdogg wrote:
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    I'm still thinking "Will we ever see Fleming's original novels (properly) as films?"

    To be honest, I doubt Barbara Broccoli has ever read a Bond novel.

    Agreed. Ironically, the Gardner novels are almost more suited to Bond films.

  • Villiers53Villiers53
    Posts: 802
    Eon's grip on the Bond screen rights is clearly all encompassing and sadly for IFP, they will never pay royalties for a book adaptation when they can simply create original material. Defacto, this limits the development of 'literary' Bond.
    Personally, I'd love to see the 'Young Bond' and 'Moneypenny Diaries' books brought to the screen and I think it would be very much in Eon's interest to either pursue this themselves or allow another production company to do it. The knock on effect for the adult movies would be significant.
    'Young Bond' would pull new users into the franchise - the power of early adopters has been well demonstrated by 'Harry Potter' - and 'Moneypenny Diaries' would be a great vehicle for reaching women and men (everybody I've given those books to loves them).
    I think it's beholdent on EON to remember that the golden age of Bond came about when there was complete synergy between the film and literary offerings.
  • LicencedToKilt69007LicencedToKilt69007 Belgium, Wallonia
    Posts: 523
    What if it's fans wish, let's do it ! EoN or some production would then get the rights and adapt some of them. It'd be a huge satisfaction, for me at least. I'm also keen on the idea of a "Young Bond" thing never seen before ; preceding CR's plot.
  • DB5DB5
    Posts: 408
    The problem with the Young Bond novels is that they're all set in the 1930s. So moviegoers would get confused with the timeline. With regard to the continuation novels, they're simply not that good that they scream "MOVIE!"
Sign In or Register to comment.