› ›

Best and worst case scenario for the Amazon Bond

1235»

Comments

  • BMB007BMB007
    Posts: 593
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    “Producing a Bond film takes at least 2 years of their lives with little time for anything else. And with Michael retiring I think Barbara did not have the appetite to shoulder the burden alone. She has so many other interests, especially with her theatre projects.”

    “Looking at Amazon’s previous theatrical films does not fill me with any great enthusiasm,”

    “If they mess with the Essence of Bond they risk alienating a huge audience. Choosing the actor to fill the role is a huge task and not one I would hand over to subscribers of X.”

    “I have worked closely with Barbara and Michael for over 40 years and had the most amazing career, travelling all over the world in search of wonderful actors, and to be on hand on the various locations,” continued McWilliams.

    “I have now hung up my casting hat and have moved on to other film-related projects. But I wish everyone the best of luck and hope the transition can be relatively painless. But it won’t be the same.”

    Debbie McWilliams commenting on Amazon and her retirement from Bond casting

    She's always been candid in interviews but wow this is pretty open.
  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    Posts: 2,057
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Is it going to be a case of rats fleeing a sinking ship?

    Unless the check has enough 0s on it. Then they will change their minds
  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited 1:05am Posts: 4,657
    BMB007 wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    “Producing a Bond film takes at least 2 years of their lives with little time for anything else. And with Michael retiring I think Barbara did not have the appetite to shoulder the burden alone. She has so many other interests, especially with her theatre projects.”

    “Looking at Amazon’s previous theatrical films does not fill me with any great enthusiasm,”

    “If they mess with the Essence of Bond they risk alienating a huge audience. Choosing the actor to fill the role is a huge task and not one I would hand over to subscribers of X.”

    “I have worked closely with Barbara and Michael for over 40 years and had the most amazing career, travelling all over the world in search of wonderful actors, and to be on hand on the various locations,” continued McWilliams.

    “I have now hung up my casting hat and have moved on to other film-related projects. But I wish everyone the best of luck and hope the transition can be relatively painless. But it won’t be the same.”

    Debbie McWilliams commenting on Amazon and her retirement from Bond casting

    She's always been candid in interviews but wow this is pretty open.

    It's not a great sign, although she's not wrong in what she said and it reflects the general feeling across the board about this. I can imagine some other collaborators not wanting to return without EON.

    It's a shame. EON built up a good line up of talent over the decades and it showed in their films. It might well be a very fresh start then.
  • StirredNotShakenStirredNotShaken Toronto
    edited 7:37am Posts: 2,408
    007HallY wrote: »
    I always say Bond's never actually had an origin story on film. I really don't count CR. It's Bond on his earliest 00 mission/a very important one for him personally, but otherwise there's absolutely nothing about his origin.

    They could do that basic idea again in a different way - Bond in his earlier days as 007 on a mission which puts him on a certain track. Forever and A Day does that. It's not fundamentally needed, and they can certainly just give us an established Bond, but it's a neat way of reintroducing the new Bond/universe onscreen. I don't think it needs to have a long term impact on the next era/actor.

    This is what I'm talking about. This is the kind of introductory film, to me, not for one individual actor or for some overarching story, but for the entirety of what's to come with the cinematic Bond as a whole, that I think sets it on the right foot. Thank you for actually engaging with the idea and not foaming at the mouth at the mere suggestion of it.

    EDIT: And to go back to the supplement of my initial idea: why NOT have Bond films that are different? I'm not saying don't have a TSWLM, a Thunderball, a GoldenEye...but let's say the next Bond film explores his time in the SAS leading up to his two kills. Let's say the film after that is Live and Let Die. Let's say we finally DO get the proper Moonraker adaptation 99% of us seem to want. Let's say we get a Bond film where espionage is a bigger focus than action.

    Let's try stuff. What the hell do we have to lose? Maybe they take a big swing at something different and miss. Okay, fair enough, let's follow that up with something a bit more traditional as a palate cleanse, dust ourselves off, and carry forward. We've gotten 25 Bond films and I think it's fair to say at least half of them follow "the formula". I love those films and I can watch them any time. If whatever comes next is just gonna be "safe" and "established" each time out, I think that might actually be the most dull, uninspiring version of what could come next for Bond.
Sign In or Register to comment.