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
Thanks for that. Doesn't really explain why it would be impossible for Craig, specifically, to return. But I do know that there were at least two uncredited writers working on the screenplay right into production, so I'd be surprised if any available draft is completely accurate.
(Oh - one stupid anecdote from one of those writers (not the source of my information) - there was a description of two "giant balls" smashing down on something in the screenplay (?) and during the first table-read, Craig was helpless with laughter at this.)
Yeah exactly, it's not impossible for Craig to return but not impossible for him to leave. The footage released matches fully, although they def ended up changing and reshooting some scenes - but in terms of locations etc probably. IMO stuff past the first 100 pages has potential to change, that's the part of the script that needed work previously while everyone was super happy with the first 100 pages.
And the anecdote - don't think that description appears in either of the drafts I read although may that have referred to Q's "M wants my balls for Christmas decorations" quip?
But, we all know this is just a business.
Yes, I don't know if that proves anything either way.
But look: I am sincerely and honestly reporting what was told to me. I can't tell you for a fact that it's true or that something won't change. It wasn't Craig that told me this but it was someone on that level and this was only a few weeks ago. It doesn't make sense to me either but I don't see why they would have lied. It wasn't appropriate for me to push any further. I'll see if I can find out any more.
- Originally they wanted to do a two-movie arc, I don't think Craig leaving after his 5th movie would have surprised anyone. This two-movie arc is now condensed into one film.
- Skyfall was about Bond being too old for the job. It wouldn't make much sense for Craig's Bond to continue working for MI6 in two or more films after Skyfall.
- Spectre's ending is the perfect ending for Craig's Bond.
As for Bond 25, my guess is that Spectre won't return. The new Bond WON'T be Damian Lewis (he is 44 already!), and the reboot will be a "soft reboot". They won't show the beginnings of Bond again. Anyway, thank you for the insider informations @dmwalker !
Some people might say that it would be disappointing if Spectre reappeared only for this one film, but the thing is that the organisation was present in all 3 previous Bond films, we just didn't know about it earlier.
Spectre ends with Blofeld captured, Bond leaving MI6 and finally having a normal relationship with a woman. It is THE perfect ending for Craig's Bond. The Blofeld story is pretty much finished at the end of Spectre. Sure they could continue it if they really wanted to (Blofeld escapes! the bad guy kills Bond's girlfriend yet again!), but it wouldn't make much sense. And nothing indicates that they decided to return to the two-movie story arc.
Some people might say that it would be disappointing if Spectre reappeared only for this one film, but the thing is that the organisation was present in all 3 previous Bond films, we just didn't know about it earlier.
And why keep ESB alive if he is not coming back in the next film?
You could be right. I'm just reading it differently.
I was wrong to respond the way I did. Thanks for sharing.. I don't necessarily agree but I should have presented my opinion differently.
No need to worry :) Rumours about problems with Logan's script ? Almost no one believed them. Rumours about the movie being titled "SPECTRE" (before it was in the press) ? Almost no one believed them. Some experts here even proved it was *not* SPECTRE the days before the press conference :)
I don't know if you're right or wrong. I was also told the very same thing about this one being Craig's last quite some time ago but by someone who was definitely explaining it was just rumours, or rather, that the rumours were that the creative team itself did not know what to do on this very topic.
What I know for sure is that all that's being said about "contracts" can be forgotten. Only them know what they will do. And I'm not sure they're 100% sure. The open ending we have in the script may be a choice to be handle both possibilities (Craig's last or not ?) after seeing the audience's reaction etc etc. There have been quite radical changes on it, furthermore. The change of the studio is a major factor. This is an industry, after all. Years may be spent agreeing on another contract, and Craig won't be younger. I think no one knows what will happen (except the few who always know everything).
JW, I've been aware of huge scoops like dozens of other nobodies in the industry. The 'you'll never work for movies if you talk' threat is *very* efficient. But it was just that : talk and talk about such and such scoop. Any piece of evidence that would turn a rumour into a proven fact is on the other hand very hard to get (unless you're a Sony executive who put the secrets on the Internet :) ). For instance, a colleague of mine saw the images of Avatar far before anyone else (to make it brief, to prepare some goodies), but he had to enter a closed computer room with someone from the production always there, and the computer on which he could see the first images was a no WIFI, no USB, etc.. computer.
So he could tell anyone after that what the images looked like, but he could not prove it to anyone. Obviously, when you prepare goodies with him, you trust him because well, that's part of his job to design the goodies. But he would not have been able to leak anything.. And if we had leaked the goodies, big troubles...
@Suivez_ce_parachute
What Blofeld's scar will look like in the movie, and your $40 Million dollar, Billion dollar grossing actor walking out on you are two VERY different topics. One I see as casual, the other one gut wrenching to the point of going mute. I never said anything about threats, I'm just not convinced somebody *brags* about Daniel Craig leaving the role of James Bond, especially before the release of the big follow up to Skyfall. I just do not think that just "comes up".
Especially considering there is a looming contract - meaningful or not - binding Craig at least until SPECTRE is released, upon which there is a lot of time to convince / bribe / lure Craig to stay for one more.
If this was happening say this upcoming January, I would be more able to believe it. Craigs done now that SPECTRE is out. Cool. But now? Five months until one of the biggest movies of the year drops? You really willing to risk news of your actor leaving you just before the publicity begins to kick off? Do you want every article about your upcoming film to finish with "Rumors claim this is Craig's last?" and people trying to guess what made him quit?
I can't say I would be any more convincing in @dmwalker 's shoes trying to tell us what is and what isn't. I'm just discussing what he provided, and backing my thinking. I would be very excited at the prospect of a new Bond actor, but I just don't think the timing is right for anything - not for somebody KEY to the franchise to let slip that Craig is out before your film's marketing has even geared up - and the timing is not right in the franchise for a new guy. I think you invest everything you can into at least one more picture with Craig.
I doubt Craig has given notice when he isn't even done shooting yet. It doesn't seem like the thing to do.
Or, let's say you really did get the skinny from say, good old Naomi (who I think believes she is above Craig's level), she has to know she'd be in deep s... having already floated the phony Elba is in negotiation with EON crap last year (which she is now trying to walk back in the press). If true, EON could not possibly want this info out before the film opens. It undermines potential SP BO, as clearly noted in that LA Times piece I linked to a few days ago about all the new buzz over a Bond replacement.
Something doesn't pass the smell test on your noting your source is "someone on Craig's level." My .02 is that if you are legit, and really did hear this rumor from someone "on Craig's level," you - or they - are being played. But who knows. The count down to SP in Oct. is going to be crazy.
I just don't see any finachel or creative reason to drop Craig especially if Shatterhand (bond 25) is as juicy artistically as we assume it will be
The best summary of my reasoning I couldn't produce. Eloquent @smitty
According to this rumor, either Craig is giving up a $20million + salary, with some back end points likely at this point which means a really, huge salary, or he is being fired. He made no film for 3 yrs between Bonds, so he sure ain't desperate to do other films, and if he were indeed fired, EON would look nuts as he has been pouring gold into their pockets. I don't know which scenario is crazier. A 3rd scenario which is the only rational one, is that SP could bomb, and Craig would then walk, but that scenario is unknown to everyone, including leakers, till SP opens. Maybe Mr. Integrity head the rumor alright, but missed three words - "if SP bombs."
What if Chris Nolan is ready to direct Bond 25, but wants to cast a new actor in the leading role and do his own thing, instead of continuing the Craig era? What if the producers are eager to work with him? What if Craig wants to leave anyway? Ok, this is just speculation, but you can think up many different scenarios where there are creative and/or financial reasons to drop Craig.
Eon would be crazy to boot Craig in favour of Nolan directing. I'm not even that thrilled about Nolan directing but the marketing admittedly would be insane in terms of hype. Nolan directing Craig, however, that would alleviate my concerns of Nolan directing somewhat.
(Start at 14:55 mark)
He speaks about how exhausting producing a Bond film is, in almost every interview.
Yes, he has done that since at least 1997 and Tomorrow Never Dies.
Even if this is true, it seems obvious to me all this will be denied until the official announcement well after SPECTRE. But yes, I find it very likely that such a decision could be discussed freely and informally : when you have no proof, no ones believe you in the first place, and the press will hesitate to run the story, so no need for a Mafia kind of secrecy. Even with a leaked script, notice that the press is not running stories spoiling everything.
I don't know if dmwalker says the truth or not, but IMO forget "logic" in the debunking of this. One thing that could happen for instance is that his source is actually involved indeed in the moviemaking process, and is actually believing it, and is in fact wrong because there have been yet another change of mood, etc.
Anyhow, if one consider all the rumours that were reported here about Logan's script problems, SPECTRE title, Lea Seydoux casting, the script being leaked, etc... one should remember they were all "debunked". This forum is not very good at judging rumours I'm afraid :)
Troube is : no one knows who "they" will be. Sony's deal is over with SPECTRE. And the leaks tell us Sony didn't want to pay millions to Craig for SPECTRE related advertising. We'll see if indeed we have ads with Q as they proposed to do...