Let’s see if we can spot a line in the credits then…
2 Likes
If only life was that fair.
2 Likes
Probably comes down to EON’s reputation for playing things fairly safe. Sure, they’ve broken out of it a bit in the Craig era, but that’s been largely down to the selection of Craig himself.
The rumors surrounding BOND 25 was that there was some kind of grand, perhaps even risky, idea that they were going to try. Who knows exactly how much of that to believe, but just taking that at face value for the sake of argument, who is the more likely entity to be delivering something risky and new to the franchise? A new face like Danny Boyle or Neal Purvis and Robert Wade? That’s where, I think, the pro-Boyle attitude of many comes from here. Many, myself included, desperately want them to do something new with these films. Seemed as though Boyle was at least going to attempt to deliver that.
2 Likes
Errr… Give me a minute to think about that one… …
That’s the pub quiz question that everyone, including the guy passed out in the toilets covered in 
know the answer to…
1 Like
The “palace intrigue” aspect of the Boyle departure will make for interesting reading and is already the cause of interesting writing on these very boards. I do believe that if we take “creative differences” at face value, I’m not entirely sure it’s down to the big hook and the “duelling Hodsgon or P & W” script debate. The big hook was part of the conversation when Boyle came aboard; if anything did the Hodgson script just not work? And I don’t mean to Boyle’s liking or even EON’s.
One thing we learnt from the Sony leaks was the amount of back and forth that a number parties had on influencing the script process. To be fair on on both EON and Boyle, we shouldn’t forget that MGM/whoever else it is, has a stake in all this, and executives being executives, will flex their stakes when necessary.
I think it’s too simplistic to argue that “Boyle’s a diva” (sorry SAF 
) or EON being too safe (sorry Dalton ). All of this reeks suspiciously of SP and (and I will now be guilty of speculation!!!) what Mendes probably went through last time out.
For me, I’ve been for what some call the “auteur” route, if for no other reason I’d prefer one man’s vision than the homegenous result of too many faceliess executives!!
No apologies needed. We are all friends here, debating passionately but always respectfully!
3 Likes
Well, the P&W script for CR was even fresher than the final result. Their draft for QOS was full of brilliant ideas.
But they continue to be the scapegoat…
They all do have faces.
And they should return them to their original owners
I both like this and at the same time wish they would hold the next one-word title for the next Bond actor. Two consecutive is fine IMO but once you get to three in a row, that’s a trend.
I can’t help feeling that the hubbub over “Quantum of Solace” made them gun-shy about any title that was the least bit obscure or that didn’t sound “cool” enough, i.e. “The Property of a Lady”.
Rubbish.
They could get away with The Grand Noggins, so long as the 007 logo was liberally sprinkled all over the posters.
(Maybe not, but you get my drift)
Can I clarify something?
Latest rumour I read cited casting as the reason for this fiasco; Boyle’s choice of an obscure actor to play the villain.
Chat here is citing possible script issues as the reason.
Have I missed something 
Can’t wait for it !
I think this is already a Wes Anderson film.
To be fair, let’s give him a go… 
3 Likes
Nobody knows for sure, but there are more arguments here for requested script changes than casting issues. Again, I yield to the industry guys, but producers usually give director’s leeway in casting, but not script changes when dealing with a series as long as Bond.
That’s what’s confusing me, since the last news story i recall on this cited casting:
Sure it’s still rumour, but since the script has been ‘agreed’ upon and they are now in casting, the latter seems the likelier catalyst for Boyle’s departure.
Whether it was this alone, or simply the final straw we’ll probably find out in the distant future.
I’m not quite as down on P&W as many, and have at times defended them, but at this point, after some six films that they’ve now worked on, I still think it could reasonably said that someone coming from the outside (i.e. Boyle) could be expected to have more fresh ideas for Bond than the guys who have done it six times already. Not necessarily a knock on P&W, just more of an observation.
I have heard them talk about some of their ideas, mainly for CASINO ROYALE, in which it sounds like their initial vision was better than the finished product. No doubt they’re taking some ideas from Barbara and Michael (the rogue element would probably be something he’s into, given he introduced it in LTK) and that has hampered their work to a degree. I would be interested to see a film without their involvement, just to find out how much of the problems that persist in their six films are due to them or due to outside influence. The rogue element is there in every single one of their films, as are the Bond/M trust issues, etc. I think the real question is how much of those things are tropes brought to the films by P&W and how much of them are brought in by people like Barbara Broccoli, Michael Wilson, or even Daniel Craig?
5 Likes
The listing of Shatterhand is the most recent thing in all this to raise my left eyebrow Sir Roger style.
Time do a little domain digging openly and also under Universal (US, UK and International).
4 Likes
I agree - EON wanted Boyle because they must have liked his films and thought that he would bring something interesting to BOND 25.
But those who blame EON asking Boyle in the first place (when they could have known it would be a tough ride with him) must take into account the realities of film financing and producing.
EON makes Bond films. To raise the money they are tied to MGM. MGM needs Bond films to keep their heads above the water. So they want Daniel Craig to star. Craig is mainly done with Bond after SPECTRE. He does not want to come back. But the idea of doing one last film that will be received better than SPECTRE lures him back. Of course, he has his conditions. The main one (beside the ton of money he asks for) is director approval.
What is EON to do? Of course, they need to make their star happy. So they jump through all the hoops, even if they secretly might think: it would be easier without DC. But MGM says: Are you crazy? We cannot risk trying out a new actor right now! We need stability!
So… after every big director says no because they are busy or have no interest, EON tries to go for hot new directors like Demange. They now also have a basic first draft by P&W, knowing it will be either tossed out or rewritten by whoever is brought on by the director. Craig says: Hey, why not ask Danny Boyle? I know him. He is a British indie darling. He would be fantastic!
EON agrees. They go after Boyle. They persuade him to do it. But… he also has his conditions, naturally. One of those is they use his idea and his screenwriter John Hodge. EON either loves that idea or they pretend to, in order to keep Boyle. Because now they have a happy star and the director which will bring great headlines to their project. Also, the idea of Boyle doing a Bond film is a thrilling one.
But there is, again, one major problem. Time. Boyle is doing another film when he should prepare full time for BOND 25. EON still says: we need this Craig-Boyle combination for BOND 25 to work. They have set a date because the MGM stockholders needed an assurance that 2019 would be a year of rising stock.
In an ideal world, EON would have pushed back that date and allowed Boyle enough time to do his musical first and then go to work on BOND 25. But MGM says: no, we need it earlier - make it work!
Boyle says: I can do it. Hodge writes his draft. I assume he delivered his first one around May/June. EON might have their reservations already - but it is a first draft, and it must show enough promise to proceed. Also, at this stage, no producer would alienate the director. That would be crazy.
Boyle now finishes his musical. Hodge delivers another draft, incorporating all the input he got from the first draft.
The whole preproduction machinery now is in motion. Plans are made. Departments are at work. Locations are secured. Casting starts.
The new draft is still not satisfactory, however. EON does not see the possibility that Hodge will deliver what is needed in time. So, the obvious and time-tested way is to call in more writers to rework that script. Names are thrown around, timeframes discussed.
Boyle is not happy. He fears that he will lose control. Then the casting sessions manifest this as well. Boyle goes to the mattresses with EON. I WANT THAT ACTOR. EON says: No, that is not how we do things here, let’s discuss the pros and cons. Boyle thinks: They try to steamroll me nicely but still they take away my control.
Maybe he already has regretted his decision. Maybe he already feels burnt out by the rush to finish his musical (which still might trouble him). Maybe the idea of being at work 24 hours for the next 12 months wears him down as well. Maybe he already feels sick and too tired.
So he quits.
EON is flabbergasted. The great Danny Boyle quits on them? And what are they going to do now? Everything seemed to go the way it always went. Production was on its way. What the f—?
Great. Now they have DC, at least on their side, but no director. MGM is already panicking. If the date has to be moved how will they explain that to their stockholders? GET A NEW DIRECTOR NOW! NOW! NOW!!!
So, EON goes back to Demange. He would still love to do it. But the timeframe is frightening. And the situation is not ideal. Will he still say yes?
6 Likes