I read that article and the thread on the Bond forum. Lots of confusing stuff! But I guess it comes down to MGM needing the creditors to give them time, a grace period for what they owe and some more money on loan to make the Hobbit and Bond 23. If they can make those films, then they can generate some income to start paying everyone back. But the creditors want them to pay up now or force them into bankruptcy. If they go bankrupt, that would mean the properties that MGM has would go to the creditors possibly and Sony has wanted Bond in the past.
It would be a shame for MGM to go down. But it is confusing since Sony has a deal with MGM right? One guy asked why Sony doesn't save them? Maybe MGM wants to hold onto Bond as it's their only leverage. I can't seeing Sony owning the Bond franchise that bad a think, EON is always going to be running the show, so the only difference is the lack of MG logo at the start of the film.
But what is a mystery is why Columbia and Sony are not moving forward with the BD releases? I guess since MGM is part of the partnership, and they're in the midst of this heavy financial crisis, they can't move forward with the discs. Cutting off more revenue. I'd really like to see the rest of the Bonds out on BD. If there are no more Bond films, then it would be a shame, but it's not that innovative anymore. The classic Bond films are where the money is, isn't it? They don't make any more Elvis or Beatle records, but they sure generate a lot of income with the past recordings.
Perhaps that was stupid comments to make, new films generate income and interest that then generates interest in the older films.
I didn't realize MGM was in so much trouble. I guess it makes me glad to know Paramount had kept such a tight rein on budgets on the Star Trek franchise. I keep buying their DVD and blu rays of TOS and films, over and over again...
