Fantastic idea. You could do a completely bonkers (fun) series of 3 one-offs. Elba, Cavill, and say Hiddleston. You can experiment with stories, actors, direction. Would be nothing if not fun.
2 Likes
With M:I probably (who knows if Dead Reckoning 2 will really be released next year, the looming actorsâ strike could delay the rest of the shoot or make Paramount rethink the release date in order to spread the grosses for a better tax relief) going on hiatus after 2024, the new Bond production should use the time in order to get ready for a release date in 2025 or 2026.
Plenty of time since 2021âs end of the Craig era.
6 Likes
I wish we went back to a 2 year window between releases . To see them approach these movies as event pieces is a bit troubling. Weâre not getting any younger .
3 Likes
Had they still been on 2 year releases, weâd be gearing up for Bond 26 in another couple months. That notion is wild (in a good way). I too wish we could get back to that.
3 Likes
I very seriously doubt that they ever go back to a two-year release schedule. It might happen with the next actorâs second film as a one-off due to trying to capitalize on his (hopefully) successful debut, like they did with Quantum of Solace, but as a general rule, I think the shortest we can expect on a regular basis is a three year gap. The current EON doesnât seem to have the appetite for continuously churning these films out on that kind of schedule, and instead seems to want to take their time between films in order to secure the best possible talent both in front of and behind the cameras.
4 Likes
Seriously, can I put MGMâs financial f*** ups as a signature? I am sick of pointing out why Bond films have a long gag EVERY TWO FILMS over and over and over and ovâŚ
Does google really only exist to me?
A joke I know Iâve made here before
3 Likes
I was trying to remind myself how finding out about DC came about in '05 so I did a little diggingâŚ
March '04 - Purvis and Wade break out the laptops and start writing (we obviously did not know this at the time)
12 April '04 - It was announced that the new Bond movie would begin shooting in '05 but Pierce Brosnan was quoted as being unsure if he would be a part of it (âif they want me they know where to find me.â)
1 Oct '04 - Reports are that filming would possibly be delayed because they have yet to find an actor (Pierce obviously let go in months before this)
04 Feb '05 - Casino Royale was announced as the next movie and Martin Campbell as the director
06 April '05 - An article from the BBC said Bond bosses had no comment on a report from The Sun that DC had been cast.
14 October '05 - DC officially announced
15 October '05 - I was on CBn so much to complain about DC that I almost rivaled Qwerty in post count 
A BBC article from April '05 had Vegas odds makers giving odds as:
DC 1/3
Julian McMahon 4/1
Clive Owen 6/1
Hugh Jackman 10/1
Colin Farrell 12/1
Ewan McGregor 12/1
2 Likes
Youâre right, the long pauses were caused by that.
It will be interesting to see whether the new Amazon deal will still bring Bond films only once in a while.
3 Likes
My opinion, and Iâm sure Iâve expressed it here before, is that EON wants to hit a bullseye with every film and now they have performance anxiety. The Bond Legacy looms large over every decision they make and they donât want to muck it up.
However youâre not always going to hit the bullseye so donât really worry about that. Just roll up your sleeves and get to work. Releasing a film every two to three years may not always result in a direct hit but more films means more opportunities to strike gold.
More often than not great films are lightning in a bottle where all the ingredients just happen to perfectly come together. You canât necessarily will that into reality. The only thing you can do it work hard and give it your best effort. The more you try the more likely you are to succeed.
11 Likes
Well stated. From you lips to EONâs ears.
1 Like
Reflecting on what you wrote, I wonder if EON is caught between âJonesing for Prestigeâ and âBeing the Spy Equivalent of Fast & Furiousâ
You logic is good:
But it is also true that prestige exists in inverse proportion to quantity. A designerâs haute couture is more expensive than their merchandise you find at Macyâsâbecause of both craftsmanship and exclusivity.
2 Likes
The problem might be the wildly changing marketplace and the always coveted target group of teenagers and young adults.
With only one Bond film every three to five years the marketing has to continually work wonders to make Bond attractive, fighting the âmy dadâs or grandpaâs franchiseâ-impression.
The box office of the last Indy proved that a franchise popular with older moviegoers will face problems, especially if it takes too long for the next film to follow.
I believe Brosnan created a new young fanbase with regularly releases, and Craig could build on that.
But the next film is years away, and for the next generation Craig will be old hat, just like Moore was for the Brosnan generation.
One additional problem: if the next actor does not connect, how often can EON try again? In the current climate two flops in a row might cause a long hiatus, especially if the films donât follow each other quickly.
A difficult situation, once again.
7 Likes
They are, unlike they were in Craigâs run, now on firmer ground in regards to financial backing and distribution. If anything this couldnât have been better timed - they can build Bond #7 from the ground up knowing they have a long term future.
Provided the actors agent doesnât give them bad advice of courseâŚ
5 Likes
All true - but what if the long term planning gets derailed if the new actor does not bring in the required numbers?
Or if the next Bond is successful but has irreconcilable differences with the producers?
And what will the expected box office for the next film be - at least Craig era high? More? Will DADâs half a billion be enough?
Also, should the next film stay true to the familiar Craig era-style or go back to the more adventurous and comedic elements of former films? Try too much or too little might be a problem. Also, the M:I films have set the stunt bar so outrageously highâŚ
Yep, Iâm playing devilâs advocate here, but the irony seems to be: now, with a really good financial backing situation and all the rights secured, the next step forward seems to be still tremendously risky?
2 Likes
You can see why theyâre taking their time on choosing the new guy.
3 Likes
Btw, the gifs are making me want to watch The Living Daylights and GoldeneyeâŚ
Perhaps I should do a first films marathonâŚ
4 Likes
I donât see where itâs a particularly difficult situation for them. Theyâre coming off the most successful run of films theyâve ever had, from a box office perspective, and theyâre situated now with a producing partner that has, quite literally, limitless funds at their disposal. Anything else is just assuming that theyâre going to mess up when thereâs no reason to believe that they will, because literally everything that the current regime has touched since theyâve taken over has literally turned into gold (financially speaking). The box office returns have gone up, and up, and up over the past 28 years, crossing over into the billion dollar territory. If they have a downturn at the box office, it will be their first, which is hardly reason for panic considering Barbara and Michael have been at the helm of this thing for basically three decades now. That is one hell of a track record.
2 Likes
Thatâs what gifs, as you showed me, can do.
Btw, howâs your M:I marathon going?
2 Likes
An interesting moment from Brosnanâs latest
1 Like
Finished the first two, intend on doing 3 and Ghost Protocol tomorrow and then McQuarries two (that I have) on Sunday.
2 Likes