Absolutely. I have finished the Lazenby chapter, and up to this point there have been so many names mentioned I have never read about in the myriad of other behind the scenes books.
Makes one think that Connery and even Lazenby were really there at the right time.
After having read the Lazenby and the Connery again chapter I am surprised that EON really tested people who had no acting experiences at all, going for particular characters. Granted, they nixed them when they saw the results, but reallyā¦
Also interesting that Cubby insisted on Bond being tall.
I had a decision about Bondās future today. Here are some of my predictions, and what changes could (or even should happen.
The writing needs to change. How many times can Bond resign or get suspended or get fired from MI6? Or an M who is not what they seem? Or poor decisions come back to haunt them, and Bond has to go through a sometimes too personal of a story. Like Richard Maibaum, Iām thankful for Purvis and Wade writing. They are great ideas men. Truly, not much was probably their fault.They arguably made SP better. But too many of story ideas that seem to have started with them need to go.
As for Michael G Wilson, he looks and sounds so frail now. I think if heās still alive for the next movie, heāll probably do what Cubby did on GE. Oversee, but let Barbara and probably one of his sons call the shots. Next to Cubby and Harry, he is one of the most important people in the Bond media world. But I think itās time that he retired and watched a Bond movie for enjoyment. Just so he could be surprised. Barbara definitely will stay on. She honors her fatherās legacy. Sheās a better long time producer for one franchise than many others are for several (cough, Kathleen Kennedy and her great connections with directors, cough). She will be around for Bond, and I support that. She may show favoritism, but she does have the best interest for Bond at heart.
Maybe Gregg and David Wilson are going to be promoted sooner than we think. Overall, I know cinematic Bond isnāt dead. James Bond will return. For now, itās just fun to speculate.
This is not about changes in the writing. This is about ideas given the writers by EON and DC (the only Bond actor who actually was given the power to influence the stories). But I agree: these ideas have to go, they were overused.
Wilson has been involved in Bond films longer than Barbara Broccoli, and losing his influence will be detrimental. Wilson started to work for EON in 1972, and was directly involved in production since TSWLM, co-writing the scripts since FYEO. He is the most important element of these extremely entertaining movies since then, and he does not need any education on Bond.
BB is also involved since her early years and a major force in producing the franchise. Right now itās impossible for us to say whether her heart is still in it. Kathleen Kennedy, however, has been navigating Spielbergās films and then taken on the Herculean task of reviving Star Wars in a most hostile climate dominated by internet hatred and Disney infighting, not to mention streaming demands. She had a lot more on the plate in these last two decades than BB. And she succeeded more than anyone in her position could have.
Is anyone demanding Kevin Feige to leave Marvel after many disappointments?
What I think is needed now isā¦perspective. For decades that was an issue with the financial side of Bond. And now thatās no longer an issue we have no real grasp how and with whom the franchise moves onward on the creative side.
BOND 25 would have been an obvious chance for many important decisions with the production side. But when Craig returned and it became NO TIME TO DIE my impression is that all the energy went into finishing that tenure with a big BANG - and naturally not with a mind to upend the whole process with a change-of-guard.
Now, apart from needing some distance to NO TIME TO DIE, thereās the added pressure to find a working relationship with the Amazon people, find a fitting director to restart the series, find a new actor to fill enormous shoes - and find some interesting twist to a decades-old recipe that addresses all those needs and ideally helps installing a creative team fit for the 2030s and beyond.
The new Sellers book on the casting of Bond reveals interestingly how much influence came from the studiosĀ“ executives - makes one wonder whether the current impasse is also reflective of a tug of war between Amazon and EON.
I strongly suspect it is. How often do you get the chance to cast this role - and would you entirely resist the opportunity to put your own stamp on it if you could? After all, Craig only happened because Broccoli and Pascal supposedly were on the same page about him.
I doubt thatās already the case with the Bezos clan, especially since they already had their early āmisunderstandingsā. It wouldnāt come as a surprise if they had wildly different ideas about who/what/when.
BB is someone who has made it clear, as has everyone who works for her, no ground will be given on Bond or as Sam Mendes put it āThis isnāt the X-Factor. If Barbara says jump, you say how highā
He said it fondly.
I donāt see Amazon, the worldās richest company, liking someone being protective over her family legacy.
Question is who gets to say what will be done? How long can EON veto? Is there some time constraint in the contract? Could Amazon at some point say: we now own BondĀ“s future?
There are two angles - at least, possibly/certainly more that Iām not aware of - to this situation. From the outside the trademark: that doesnāt run out in itself. And evidently Eon/Danjaq are busy making money with preposterously overpriced flimflam; no complaints there.
But an interested party might argue, as far as films are going the trademark isnāt used any more after eight or ten consecutive years of zilch new productions. Not sure how that would fare - but keep in mind an interested party might also be Amazon itself.
From the inside thereās the question how much cooperation you can expect from a studio youāve kept from moving forward with BOND 26 for some time already. If Eon insists on positions that donāt sit well with Amazon they can always get their own back by pulling another LICENCE TO KILL budget. As the ones picking up the tab Amazon can make it a very uncomfortable working relationship for their partners.
A few hundred million dollars write-off for a tanked production isnāt a worry; welcome in fact for the tax returns. Nor would it really hurt the Bond brand in the long run. Been there, done that, got a t-shirt for it.
And we all now that Amazon will go very low to get what they want.
The John Calley situation already proved how horrible it could become for EON when they disagreed with their financier and/or distributor.
Dalton had to be let go because the studio insisted on it, not EON. And while in earlier times EON could outmaneuver studios we are living in very different times now.
I donāt like being doom and gloom but Iāve also got to be real.
Iām sure it will limp on, but for the first real time I feel the film industry is trending downwards. The magic is missing and things are going through the motions. I look at whatās playing in cinemas and none of it interests me, nor do I connect with the current actors in the same way.
I donāt think the future of anything is guaranteed in the current climate. It feels like something is more likely to underwhelm and underperform than truly succeed. When Bond comes back it will have to go against that grain and stand out as something exciting and worthwhile. The worst thing something can do is simply come and go, which a lot of stuff does these days.
The longer you leave it the stronger that pressure will be, too.