Speculation has been going on for some time about this fallout. The problem is, here there’s no obvious way to resolve the matter. Amazon isn’t dependent on this franchise - and once Eon decides to play ball again Amazon can make it a very nasty business. If these two don’t get to terms we won’t see any more films until they do. Or one of them folds, which isn’t likely happening anytime soon.
6 Likes
When I woke up, saw this thread revived, and thought “Uh-oh.”
For those lacking a subscription:
6 Likes
Thanks for that link. This does indeed explain a lot of things, and hopefully takes a bit of the heat off Babs and Michael as the “villains” in the situation, or at least spreads the blame around. It’s so much easier to hate on Bezos without feeling guilty.
I did chuckle a bit at this line, though:
In doing so, she quotes a refrain attributed to her father, a film agent who’d sold hair driers before he secured the rights to adapt Ian Fleming’s novels.
“Don’t have temporary people make permanent decisions.”
[cough!]DanielCraig[cough!]
8 Likes
It probably also doesn’t help if Barbara actually tries to watch a Bond film on Prime as I have done recently. Constant commercial interruptions at odd intervals, and that’s with a paid subscription. It’s actually better watching them on Pluto TV.
6 Likes
So this explains the impasse and clarifies: no more Bond movies in the foreseeable future.
It is bitterly ironic: finally there is enough money for the budget… but only under insane conditions.
So, let‘s watch the films we have ad infinitem.
1 Like
So, as I’ve said a few times now, the Bond franchise is dead.
Maybe the literary arm of the franchise could actually pick up the slack and, oh, I don’t know, release a novel featuring a man named James Bond? Or is that too much to ask?
1 Like
This article should be taking seriously as it comes from a reputable newspaper and states that it was based on interviews with people that are business associates, friends and family. That being said, I’m at least questioning the article’s credibility based on the following very obvious reporting error:
“ Broccoli has taken her time before. There was a six-year stretch between 1989’s “Licence to Kill” and “GoldenEye” as the family figured out who should play Bond after Timothy Dalton and what his adventures would entail in the post-Cold War era.”
The story of the 6 year gap is very well known. If the two reporters can’t get that right, I’m left to wonder if the rest of his characterizations are true too.
10 Likes
Indeed, the first thing I thought when I started reading this article was “It’s just like the LTK-GE hiatus all over again, with everything on hold while the Broccolis lock horns with another stakeholder.” Considering how much journalists usually love connecting dots and pointing to precedents, it’s pretty amazing they’d let that angle get past them. And in a publication devoted to business and finance, no less.
5 Likes
Yes, that’s a major failure omitting the MGM-Pathé lawsuit and depicting it as if that gap had been Broccoli just taking her time.
And still…
Wilson, her stepbrother, has complained to friends that he couldn’t land a meeting with anyone at Amazon above an “L6,” the internal designation for a senior role that is nonetheless six rungs below Chief Executive Andy Jassy, an L12. A person close to the company said Wilson has met with several senior leaders.
This part would not just ring entirely true but dovetail with other observable details like hacking the Bonds into 80s commercial tv instant fodder. This is what happens when a big player decides to throw around their weight and establish the hierarchy.
Fact is, with old MGM Danjaq/Eon was the one effectively paying all the bills. Amazon now could easily get the idea it’s Eon’s turn to pay rent on its servers. And if they’re really miffed they might finance BOND 26 on a LICENCE TO KILL budget - not adjusted to inflation. See how that goes down…
Main takeaway for me: Road to a Million apparently was already okayed before Amazon came on board. So the blame for that doesn’t go to Bezos.
3 Likes
I guess the six year-hiatus was not researched properly because the journalist was rather interested in the EON-Amazon tug of war.
Lazy, for sure. But the WSJ does not care about Bond accuracy like we do.
In any event… bad news.
But at least enlightening.
1 Like
This passage gave me a bit of a chuckle:
“Broccoli has complained that Amazon isn’t a good home for Bond, since the company’s core business is selling everything from toilet paper to vacuums - a perspective Amazon executives find unfair… In doing so, she quotes a refrain attributed to her father, a film agent who’d sold hair driers before he secured the rights to adapt Ian Fleming’s novels.”
Touché…
2 Likes
they forgot “After which he went on and hired a former bodybuilder and coffin polisher as the lead.” 
3 Likes
Though to be fair, after he started producing Bond Cubby stuck entirely with it and made nothing else. Unlike Saltzman, he didn’t produce other films or try branching into other areas. Barbara apparently has learned from his example—yes, she’s had side projects, but they seem to have been secondary to Bond. I think she’s right to be concerned that Bond’s current home is a company whose primary interest isn’t in movies, and which considers Bond as just another property. This wasn’t the case with United Artists when the studio was in its prime.
Postscript: After reading the entire article (thanks MrKiddWint!) my sympathy is wholly with Barbara. Bond has always been a family business that has managed to find a way to work with the studios, but now it has to deal with the epitome of the 21st century corporate octopus.
7 Likes
The question is - which side leaked the story to WSJ?
4 Likes
It reads less like a leak - i.e. a spin op - but like a pieced-together research story. Where of course both sides had their chance to comment but chose to let that do their ‘unnamed execs/people close to/familiar with’ the matter.
People have been wondering for some time already what’s keeping the franchise from going ahead. All the other franchises and popular IPs face the same difficulties, yet only Bond seems entirely paralysed. It was just a matter of time until the media would run a story on it. WSJ may be better placed than other outlets to judge the management-business angle - but they likely didn’t have to dig deep to get the material for this piece. And the conclusion certainly confirms what has been speculated for some time already.
It’s possible this is part of a blame game that either side might have started to prime public opinion on the matter. But it was really just a question of time until the it would have become obvious there’s not going to be a new film in the foreseeable future.
4 Likes
Eon was my thought when I read it. Also explains the article’s dance around the gap between Dalton and Brosnan.
Eon needs Amazon to make a move, otherwise it has the ideas, but no money–like Kurosawa drawing his movies when he could not get funding late in his career.
Eon would have been better off if MGM/UA had landed with an owner who did not have a streaming platform, though only a company with a streaming platform would want/need the film library.
3 Likes
This is article is positive news (gift link):
1 Like
I don’t really think so. What Eon has to adapt to is its changing role in the greater scheme of things. That’s not impossible to do - but you have to accept your own leverage is now tantamount to suicide - yours, not that of your opposite number.
To get BOND 26 off the ground and retain full creative control Eon would have to humour Amazon’s execs. Of bloody course this is content, just as the glitzy trash peddled at the 007 Store is. If you’re snobbish about such things you can bet it’s going to come back and bite you in the behind - when you least need it.
Eon has to find a way to wield its powers softly, lest Amazon might decide it’s time to take away that power. Give them something, be open to arguments, plead your own case with confidence and in a way that’s aimed at finding common ground. Given Bond’s particular constellation and circumstances that’s the only way in my view to build a working - a workable - relationship.
4 Likes
We won’t be seeing movement on the next Bond for years, I suspect. There may be business issues behind the scenes, but I also get the feeling Barbara and Michael are older and have already introduced two Bonds with Brosnan and Craig. They’ve already done it and know the long term commitment required. Especially with Craig they went all in, and that story has a very definite sense of closure. I won’t torment myself in hoping for surprise announcements on a new film anymore. I’ll revert to tormenting myself with surprise Project 007 announcements instead.
5 Likes
That’s it precisely.
And after my initial siding with Eon I must say, from the little experience I have in dealing with streaming, the frustration is understandable, but the reaction - then we won’t produce any new Bond - is childish.
Yes, the streamers are conglomerates with intricate power structures… but so are studios.
Yes, the almighty power of the algorithm is terrible (and silly, because those algorithms like any AI can only decide on what’s fed them, and they fail again and again because nobody knows anything). But what is this algorithm craze other than the studios‘ fixation on market research and test screenings? It is all just another way to avoid responsability for a flop („the market research/algorithm said….“).
Is Amazon trying to milk Bond? Sure.
Do I like that? No.
Eon has supposedly veto power, so that’s wonderful - just don’t accept what you don’t like.
But will the guys who give you money have a say in all your endeavours with them? Of course.
Do they have different ideas for casting Bond? Everybody always had those.
You lucked out with Craig. That does not mean you alone have the ability to cast the right one.
And again: veto power.
In the end, the problems have always been the same.
Deal with them.
I get the feeling that with all those quotes from BB‘s „friends“ this article really was an idea BB had. If you were friends with BB would you tell the WSJ that she called Amazon people idiots?
Only if BB asked you to.
So, once again, a typical power struggle. Which also happened before algorithms.
8 Likes