Either way, MGM seem so inept that they can’t even correctly choose a financial partner. In the days of online credit scoring, is it really any more difficult than that?
On to other longer term solutions, along the lines of securing their rights to Casino Royale, Blofeld, Thunderball, SPECTRE etc, I would love to know what dialogue has been held internally at Eon, and / or with MGM, to buy themselves Out of this constricting no-hoper deal with MGM.
Oh I am sure you are absolutely right. But on that understanding, MGM will Never Absolutely have to consider it.
I am thinking the only way out of this mess for Eon, is MGM’s eventual bankruptcy whereby Eon are afforded the possibility to buy their share from the administrators. The irony there being, so long as Bond remains attached to this bloody distributor, there will likely always be someone tempted to bail them out, thereby prolonging the agony and the association.
In the current climate Annapurna is surely happier to take risks than many contenders. Necessarily a risk means there are cases, frequent cases, when the risk doesn’t pay off. We’ll see if and how the company’s policy changes in the next few years.
I really cannot imagine Annapurna - or most other studios - would not be interested in Bond. But Annapurna’s catalogue, the kind of projects they tend to invest and eventually launch, suggests they will always be a hit-and-miss operation. With the hits having to feed the entire family. That’s not so different from other industry ventures; the trick is not to let the family live as if they all were huge hits - or getting more of just these earners. Like Bond.
For the industry companies like Annapurna are absolutely necessary if cinema as we know it shall survive. They need, urgently need, studios doing something else outside superhero blockbuster fare. They need the talent and the creativity and the passion, filmmakers who really live for their projects and want to present something else, stories told in their own time and rhythm, actors doing their thing in ‘real life’, not in a blue box.
Once companies like Annapurna disappear from the roster there’s not a lot left that would justify keeping the dinosaur ‘cinema’ alive.
All other things being equal , if you look at the trajectory of blockbuster movies and the various markets etc. They have to be hoping that if it’s well received , Bond 25 will hit between 1.3 and 1.5 B , which is indeed, a financial prop and prestigious marketing offshoot.
Reading about another film being delayed, including planned reshoots, it occurred to me that I don’t remember EVER reading about a Bond film requiring reshoots/additional footage. Is this correct?
Perhaps not, but wishing QoS had been the exception. Re-do the handful of mishandled and half cocked sequences and beats and it could’ve been a real gem in the collection.
