SPECTRE Production Timeline

1711712714716717870

Comments

  • Posts: 832
    Yea sony is in a very tough spot on many fronts
  • Posts: 725
    Ottofuse8 wrote: »
    Yea sony is in a very tough spot on many fronts[/quote]

    And they deserve to be. They made a lot of really stupid decisions leading up to the Interview fiasco, they put SP at great risk with the endless destructive press reports related to leaked SP emails and script information much of it due to their incompetent IT practices. They deserve to lose Bond and it will be a body blow given how weak the studio already is. Just a lose lose proposition all around.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    Is there any word on when we’ll be getting a new video blog? Probably sometime soon.
  • edited August 2015 Posts: 161
    jake24 wrote: »
    Is there any word on when we’ll be getting a new video blog? Probably sometime soon.

    We should get either the Bond girls video blog (which should have been released last month but it didn't for obvious reasons) or the stunts video blog on August 15th
  • chamutakramchamutakram Dallas
    Posts: 40
    Would it be possible for someone to isolate the music from the trailer?
  • Posts: 4,619
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    I heard somewhere ..or read rather that Wilson had friends at WB. I kinda think they aren't leaving.

    Bond 25 distributed by Warner and directed by Chris Nolan? I wouldn't be surprised.
  • Posts: 725
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    I heard somewhere ..or read rather that Wilson had friends at WB. I kinda think they aren't leaving.

    Bond 25 distributed by Warner and directed by Chris Nolan? I wouldn't be surprised.

    I wouldn't be surprised either, and that would be the end of Craig as Bond, as Nolan will insist on his own Bond. Babs may gush over Craig, but she and Wilson will drop him in a nano second if the Warner agreement includes a Nolan trilogy for Bond 25-27. Somebody said if you want loyalty in the film business, get a dog.
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    Posts: 1,756
    smitty wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    I heard somewhere ..or read rather that Wilson had friends at WB. I kinda think they aren't leaving.

    Bond 25 distributed by Warner and directed by Chris Nolan? I wouldn't be surprised.

    I wouldn't be surprised either, and that would be the end of Craig as Bond, as Nolan will insist on his own Bond. Babs may gush over Craig, but she and Wilson will drop him in a nano second if the Warner agreement includes a Nolan trilogy for Bond 25-27. Somebody said if you want loyalty in the film business, get a dog.

    Who do you think Nolan would want for Bond?
  • Posts: 725
    He'd probably love to use his go to guy, Hardy, but Hardy is so big these days with so many good roles to pick and choose from. Bond is a grind that requires total scheduling priority. But who knows, if Nolan just does a 3 picture deal, maybe it will be Hardy. EON and MGM have probably already made their move toward secretly negotiating a new distribution deal. I'd be shocked if it's Sony again after what Sony put them through with the leaks.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Yes, Nolan's had talks with the profucers but i'm pretty certain we won't be getting any 3 picture deal with him at all. Him doing just one movie isn't even a sure thing.
  • edited August 2015 Posts: 229
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Yes, Nolan's had talks with the profucers but i'm pretty certain we won't be getting any 3 picture deal with him at all. Him doing just one movie isn't even a sure thing.
    I think Nolan would make a Bond film much darker and grittier than Skyfall and that is a good thing not because Skyfall wasn't superb because it was but because the ending of Skyfall almost demands a darker/grittier Bond and a darker plot in general.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    After SP, Bond should take a lighter tone.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Yea Wilson and Broccoli have released some creativity to their directors but I seriously doubt they would just give free reign over to Nolan. And I doubt Nolan would even give it up plus Craig is the most bankable Bond in years so I doubt the producers much less the studio even letting that go.

    Then on the other hand Nolan has name recognition in this and similar genres something Mendes didn't have going into Bond.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    jake24 wrote: »
    After SP, Bond should take a lighter tone.

    Well it's too early to determine somewhat as we havn't seen SP yet. The only thing that could tonally make things emotionally dark is the touching on Bond's past as a child but if post SP the movies could keep the tone of CR and take that little extra step of Bond being characteristically supercool (i.e. his emotional disposition) then we are definitely on to a good thing.

    UNCLE is getting a lot of praise and one of the highlights is Cavill's ubercool characterisation so much so that people wanting him to be the next Bond is going to increase exponentially. I think one of the cons of the Craig era which is magnified so much more because of the UNCLE movie is, that Craig's Bond is super interesting but isn't being tge ubercool playboy type which so many I'm sure would love to see.

    Naturally, given that Craig's Bond at least from CR to SF and will no doubt continue in SP has been on a character arc and on a trajectory where certain berievements excuse the ubercool/playboy traits it would be nice for Craig to get a movie where he gets to display such qualities without compromising the integrity and tonal levels of a movie like CR.
  • Posts: 188
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    plus Craig is the most bankable Bond in years so I doubt the producers much less the studio even letting that go.
    Yep, and before him, Brosnan was the most bankable Bond in years. Never forget that the hot mess that was DAD still made megatons of money. So I don't think that's an argument at all.
    If they want Nolan and he makes it a condition that he can choose his own Bond, Craig will be dropped just as quickly as Brosnan.
    (And since I'm hoping for more Craig, I'm also hoping they won't decide to go with Nolan.)
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I'm not convinced that EoN would drop Craig in favour for Nolan but that's just my opinion.

    Anyway, I think EoN are waiting for UNCLE to be released and then after about a week or 2, they're going to really get the ball rolling SP marketing campaign.
  • Posts: 1,680
    Nolan is being heavily considered IMO. I think a lot of future decisions are going to be based on how SP does critically & financially.

    Dont rule Nolan out just yet, he has a good chance of doing B25 IMO.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Nolan won't be directing Bond 25 I'm sure of it. Its not logistically possible. It was only last month he finished writing a draft for his next movie. There's no way he's going to be working on his own movie where he hasn't even completed a final screenplay for and then be ready to direct and release Bond 25 in 2 or 3 years.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    roko wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    plus Craig is the most bankable Bond in years so I doubt the producers much less the studio even letting that go.
    Yep, and before him, Brosnan was the most bankable Bond in years. Never forget that the hot mess that was DAD still made megatons of money. So I don't think that's an argument at all.
    If they want Nolan and he makes it a condition that he can choose his own Bond, Craig will be dropped just as quickly as Brosnan.
    (And since I'm hoping for more Craig, I'm also hoping they won't decide to go with Nolan.)

    There are billion reasons why I disagree with you. Very much an argument if I'm putting up 300 millions dollars as a studio btw ..

    They want an artistic director they won't have to pay a mint anyway... Nolan unless he gives some to the Eon way probably won't do a Bond..

  • Posts: 709
    Ottofuse8 wrote: »
    How would Bond do under WB?

    Same as anywhere else?
    roko wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    plus Craig is the most bankable Bond in years so I doubt the producers much less the studio even letting that go.
    Yep, and before him, Brosnan was the most bankable Bond in years. Never forget that the hot mess that was DAD still made megatons of money. So I don't think that's an argument at all.

    DAD made less at the box office than any of the three Craig Bonds.
  • Posts: 11,119
    Tomorrow the theme song artist announcement?
  • Posts: 188
    dinovelvet wrote: »
    roko wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    plus Craig is the most bankable Bond in years so I doubt the producers much less the studio even letting that go.
    Yep, and before him, Brosnan was the most bankable Bond in years. Never forget that the hot mess that was DAD still made megatons of money. So I don't think that's an argument at all.

    DAD made less at the box office than any of the three Craig Bonds.

    Yes, but that wasn't my point. I said Brosnan was the most bankable BEFORE Craig came along. They couldn't have known that the next Bond would be even more bankable.
    They already had an actor whose movies made good money and whose last movie had made more than any Bond movie since the Connery years. And yet they let him go and went in a completely new direction, not knowing whether the new guy would be equally (or more) bankable.
    So bankability won't save Craig if they decide to go into a new direction with a new director who has his own ideas about who Bond needs to be.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited August 2015 Posts: 11,139
    Casting Bond isn't about casting a "bankable" actor. Sure, it requires a good actor in the role but the script and directing needs to be on point. After the first movie, of it's a success and the actor delivers then it's off to the races unless they screw up big time creatively as was tge case with DAD but prior to an actor's second outing there's a reason why a relative unknown is cast.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited August 2015 Posts: 4,116
    roko wrote: »
    dinovelvet wrote: »
    roko wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    plus Craig is the most bankable Bond in years so I doubt the producers much less the studio even letting that go.
    Yep, and before him, Brosnan was the most bankable Bond in years. Never forget that the hot mess that was DAD still made megatons of money. So I don't think that's an argument at all.

    DAD made less at the box office than any of the three Craig Bonds.

    Yes, but that wasn't my point. I said Brosnan was the most bankable BEFORE Craig came along. They couldn't have known that the next Bond would be even more bankable.
    They already had an actor whose movies made good money and whose last movie had made more than any Bond movie since the Connery years. And yet they let him go and went in a completely new direction, not knowing whether the new guy would be equally (or more) bankable.
    So bankability won't save Craig if they decide to go into a new direction with a new director who has his own ideas about who Bond needs to be.

    Yea but I'm sure the casting of Bond is the producers' decision. I mean I know it is ..they own Bond or at least the part not owned by a chronically near death studio...

    I'm not saying the director doesn't have a significant say. I think Young, Hunt, Glen, and Campbell all had a say ..Campbell two times even.
  • Posts: 709
    roko wrote: »
    dinovelvet wrote: »
    roko wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    plus Craig is the most bankable Bond in years so I doubt the producers much less the studio even letting that go.
    Yep, and before him, Brosnan was the most bankable Bond in years. Never forget that the hot mess that was DAD still made megatons of money. So I don't think that's an argument at all.

    DAD made less at the box office than any of the three Craig Bonds.

    Yes, but that wasn't my point. I said Brosnan was the most bankable BEFORE Craig came along. They couldn't have known that the next Bond would be even more bankable.
    They already had an actor whose movies made good money and whose last movie had made more than any Bond movie since the Connery years. And yet they let him go and went in a completely new direction, not knowing whether the new guy would be equally (or more) bankable.
    So bankability won't save Craig if they decide to go into a new direction with a new director who has his own ideas about who Bond needs to be.

    I see your points, but I don't think anyone here can say what EON wants with any authority. Well, they want to make successful Bond movies, and they're doing it right now, so why mess with what's working?
    Its obvious reading between the lines that EON value Craig as an actor and a person more than they did Brosnan. And some people in here seem to be vastly overrating the appeal of getting Christopher Nolan. Skyfall made more at the box office than any of his Batman movies, so why would they throw out their biggest Bond since Connery just to court a director? Guaranteed that 90% of people showing up to a Bond movie don't know or care who's behind the camera. But all of them know, want to see, and like, who's in front of it.
  • Posts: 12,526
    In terms of a new Bond actor? I think it will be a younger actor again and perhaps someone relatively unknown. However I do strongly believe open ended contract or not that DC will be doing Bond 25!
  • TuxedoTuxedo Europe
    Posts: 262
    jake24 wrote: »
    After SP, Bond should take a lighter tone.
    I agree but I'm not sure if this will go along very well with Daniel Craig playing Bond.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    I agree ..he will. Doubt Mendes will or that they will even ask him.

    I can maybe see B26 if back on a 2 year schedule ...maybe.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    Tuxedo wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    After SP, Bond should take a lighter tone.
    I agree but I'm not sure if this will go along very well with Daniel Craig playing Bond.
    It worked for Casino Royale.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139

    RogueAgent wrote: »
    In terms of a new Bond actor? I think it will be a younger actor again and perhaps someone relatively unknown. However I do strongly believe open ended contract or not that DC will be doing Bond 25!

    Craig will be back for Bond 25.
Sign In or Register to comment.