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 honestly don't think they felt any pressure to act, Eon have a strong poker face. It's just they all knew Craig would be doing publicity for Logan Lucky and he would be asked about Bond, which he was by every interviewer, and, with a deal locked in place with him, it was a natural time to allow the actor himself to say, "I'm coming back!" That generated positive publicity and tons of media coverage which is always a good thing.
I'm still curious as to why they made their release date announcement 3 weeks earlier and didn't announce him at the same time, given he was apparently signed in advance of that announcement. For it to be all so that he could go on Colbert and spill the beans rings hollow to me.
The extra complexity with doing a distribution deal with Eon is that, generally speaking, the distribution company normally holds the stronger hand (because, as u say, a good chunk of the budget comes from that deal - although it's not quite right to think most of that money comes straight out of the distributor's pockets because the money stems from many deals, including international pre-sales) - but Eon have the ace card which is Bond - and now they also Craig again (and all distributors etc. base their initial sales estimates on the lead actor/s or lead cast and/or established franchise success and commercial worth - so Eon have a strong hand and will make big demands and probably won't budge too much. So there will be plenty of battles before a deal is finalised.
If you announce two or more things at the same time, one or more will be overshadowed by another. If Craig was already signed up (which is very possible) when they announced the release date, Craig's return would have been the story, not the release date. Spilt the news apart and you spread out the publicity. And I honestly think it was also quite a logical decision; Craig was going to be asked and they decided to give it to the man himself to announce his return (perhaps he requested that as well). The next day nearly every newspaper and media site I saw was running the story. What's hollow about that?
Look, I'm not saying the man isn't back. I just don't buy that the way they went about this was the best way to do it.
Your point about him being back helping with negotiations (from an MGM/EON point of view) makes sense, and I'm quite sure a part of this is him publicly and openly signalling to the distributors that he 'wants' to do this film, rather than just being contracted for it. Especially after his negative comments in the past have had such a run in the press over the last two years.
I think you've hit the nail on the head. By Craig announcing his return himself, with such enthusiasm and a live audience to cheer and applaud him, it really smothered all that negativity created by his "rather slit my wrists" comment. That makes sense in terms of how they chose to release the information. As for it only making news for a day or so, well that is the world we live in now - the flow of news is rapid and stories (especially "light" entertainment world stuff) don't last long.
That was a fun trailer, but remember? Seeing as Bond 25 is in 2019? It may be For King and Country?
I thought the Queen was like 130 years old?
You know distributors only really care about the commercial value of a film they want to sell, and they frequently determine that value by who the star is (although I can tell u some crazy stories about how wrong they can be). So all they really care about is Craig is back. The talk, Craig's personal announcement and his enthusiasm to be Bond again, is for the media and the public, but it would certainly make any potential distributor feel secure that the deal is solid and Craig will be selling Bond hard.
With absolute respect to you, that's just not the way it plays in the film game. Honestly, whoever Eon have been (or were) negotiating with, knew where Eon stood with getting Craig back because it is (or was) a major factor in any sales and finance deals. The first thing any distributor or sales company asks is "who do you have as your lead?" I know this from professional and personal experience over many, many years, and also from having friends who work as distributors and sales execs. Eon gave the announcement to Craig, on a popular live US tv talk-show, because it was very public. Eon, despite what some may think here, are not fools - they follow Cubby's doctrine - be showmen and give the audience something to get excited about. When Craig said he was back as Bond, the audience erupted into applause.
What I am disputing is your analysis of the benefits of the announcement being made when it was, and why it was made when it was made. Of course the distributor wants to know who the lead is. That goes without saying. They probably have their thoughts on who it should be as well. The issue is whether such lead is in fact committed to the job & how he is viewed. Particularly when nearly the only things discussed about James Bond in the past two years globally have been how pissed off he is with the role, how he wants more money, and all the other actor hopefuls. If all they needed was for Craig to be back then they could have just had the contract signed and have been done with it.
So, I would imagine that some distributor hopefuls may prefer some public assurance/commitment that he is back, and would also want to see how it plays with the public (not a small audience in Colbert's studio) and in the broader global media. Moreover, it's more difficult for a distributor to propose a change after so public an announcement.
So the announcement was made in the manner that it was. The impact has been assessed. I believe this will affect the details, terms and small print of the final deal for B25 with the eventual distributor which, contrary to your reasonable assumption some time back, appears not to have been finalized as of yet.
Is Eon really negotiating with distributors? Or is it MGM? In that November 2015 video, Michael G. Wilson said it was primarily MGM's decision, although Eon would be consulted.
I've seen that before...total bullshit.
When he working with Gary as his teacher, for Bond 25 (almoost 10 years later) he wil be the teacher.
Definitely. Villeneuve's work with a big budget with Blade Runner 2049 was also impressive, as was the film. The man can do no wrong right now, he would likely deliver an excellent Bond film. I hope Hollywood continues to give him budgets despite 2049's box office struggles.
In short, the industry loves Villeneuve. He didn’t deliver a clunker; he delivered a tremendous film with supreme execution. This was a risky project. He delivered on his end.
Right now Villeneuve can do no wrong and I guarantee there are plenty of suitors vying for his attention.
But a slow paces, 160+ Minutes film which is also a sequel to a classic from 35 years ago did not click with the YouTube generation as it seems. Too bad ... for them since they missed something really good. But I am absolutely sure the movie will make money through home video, tv, streaming ... Excellent choice this project was greenlit.
I am 100% sure Villeneuve would deliver a tremendous Bond film IF the script is any good.
The marketing was poor imho. The trailers basically only sold Ford, and he's not the draw he once was.
Ultimately the studio heads should have anticipated this, and if they didn't then that's more of a reflection on them than anything else.
Still, it was good they made the film they made. It's a rarity to be given that sort of budget and creative freedom to create a financial dud. The beancounters don't normally allow it.
I was never that much interested in the Bond directors to be honest - was curious when Mendes was announced (and happy with Skyfall since it was something really new in the series). I sincerely hope they can get Villeneuve but we‘ll see
Bond would be lucky to get him at this point. He may be the perfect director, in this moment, to send off DC.
I do believe the concept behind the latest script is something that brought Craig back to the table; it's something he can go out on top with (after all, he got banged up on the last film; it was a ridiculously long shoot for a final product that was mediocre, at best; he's richer than Dog; he's got other projects percolating in the background; he knows he doesn't have to carry another franchise again and can go back to working on smaller films and theater). Something brought this guy back, and I suspect it's the concept in the script-- how they want to end off his tenure. It was obviously was too tantalizing to turn down (since I think we all agreed, it did often feel that he had one foot out the door during and post-SP).