Bond 23 Delayed "Indefinitely" (1 Viewer)

[Sam Favate]

Originally Posted by Mike Frezon /forum/thread/299911/bond-23-delayed-indefinitely#post_3685941

According to Moore,

His trailer was near Jones' and she'd play music quite loud. He asked her to turn it down, and she didn't. When it came time to shoot their bedroom scene, he said he got under the covers, where she already was, and was greeted by a gigantic dildo. From the tone of his writing, he was not amused, by the incident or by her.

 

[Mike Frezon]

 

[Brisby]

Originally Posted by Richard--W
So Eon finally dropped Glen after encouraging him to mis-direct a decade of Bond films.

Eh? Glen's Bond films were all fine (A View To A Kill aside, but no director could have made the sad spectacle of a nearly 60-year-old Roger Moore limping around work). For Your Eyes Only, The Living Daylights and Licence To Kill are all extremely well-directed films with great action/suspense sequences and a nicely ruthless tone to the violence. Had Dalton played 007 in FYEO, it would have been a near-classic (and even with the aging Moore, it's still one of the best post-Connery films). Octopussy is an odd duck, to be certain, but that's the problem with a move that tried to fuse together the more "serious" tone of FYEO with the dumb gags of something like Moonraker (Moore's stunt double swinging on a vine while emiting s Tarzan yell[!] might be one of the low points of the series). But even there, you can find a number of fine sequences (the opening scene with agent 009 being stalked through a foggy forest by the two knife-weilding twins was genuinely eerie, and the only scene I really remembered from the film when I saw it in theaters at the age of nine). John Glen did fine work for the series all around, and I'd rather see him do another one than handing the next film over to another "art-house" director with no idea how to coherently shoot or edit an action sequence.

 

[Steve Christou]

The new Bond film has been scrapped, damn it all! That's all we need, another reboot in 10 years time.

The new James Bond film, due for release by 2012, has been canned due to a cash crisis. Production crew were told in April the £132million blockbuster, starring Daniel Craig, had been postponed amid “financial problems” at debt-ridden movie studio Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, which co-funded the film. But now it has confirmed the movie has been axed – and it could be years before the secret agent with a licence to kill is back on the big screen. A glum insider said: “Members of the production crew have been told the Bond film has been canned. “There is a lot of bad feeling as a lot of time, money and hard work has already gone into this.” American Beauty director Sam Mendes had been lined up to direct the 23rd flick in the franchise, which started with Dr No in 1962. But production company EON confirmed in a statement yesterday: “We do not know when development will resume and cannot comment further at this stage.” MGM is drowning under a reported £2.4billion of debt as it desperately searches for a buyer. A string of box office flops have meant big losses.American TV company Spyglass Entertainment is the front-runner to take over but Summit Entertainment – which makes the smash-hit Twilight vampire films starring Robert Pattinson – is also understood to be in talks with creditors. Craig, 42, won an army of fans for his debut as Bond in Casino Royale – famously walking out of the sea in a tiny pair of white trunks. That 2006 blockbuster took £385million at the global box office, while sequel Quantum of Solace raked in £392million – the largest takings for a 007 film ever. Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2010/07/02/new-james-bond-film-canned-due-to-cash-crisis-115875-22375892/#ixzz0sZ0bz7oN

They're eyeing Rupert Grint as a possible replacement for Daniel Craig if things don't work out.

 

[Edwin-S]

That Rupert Grint thing.......that's a joke, right?

 

[Steve Christou]

Come on Edwin, you know me.


Grint came to mind when I read recently that Scorsese liked his performance in the Harry Potter movies and thought he would make an effective gangster in a future film of his. I'm not kidding I read that somewhere...


oh here I found the link -


http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5i9VK7DMkqRw6GHRynxarGFlmQ9zg

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

I think Grint would make a decent Doctor for "Doctor Who" in a decade or two.

 

[Paul_Scott]

If Eon were smart, they would do a massive re-write and make this next one on the cheap- emphasizing plot and suspense over elaborate (and expensive) action set-pieces.

Do something with a twisting, turning plot more akin to Spy Who Came In From The Cold than Goldfinger. This would keep the franchise generating income, keep Craig in the fold, and have a side benefit of grounding the series even more so that a further, back to more typical action standard, installment would seem even more 'spectacular' by simple comparison.


A GREAT Bond film could be made on the cheap, but the problem is that it's always easier to conjure up Michael Bay-like explosive antics than it is to craft an intelligent and arresting narrative without resorting to shit blowing up every ten minutes.


MGMs woes should be seen by EON as a huge opportunity rather than an impediment. Think outside the box, Barb.

 

[Zack Gibbs]

Originally Posted by Paul_Scott

If Eon were smart, they would do a massive re-write and make this next one on the cheap- emphasizing plot and suspense over elaborate (and expensive) action set-pieces.

Do something with a twisting, turning plot more akin to Spy Who Came In From The Cold than Goldfinger. This would keep the franchise generating income, keep Craig in the fold, and have a side benefit of grounding the series even more so that a further, back to more typical action standard, installment would seem even more 'spectacular' by simple comparison.


A GREAT Bond film could be made on the cheap, but the problem is that it's always easier to conjure up Michael Bay-like explosive antics than it is to craft an intelligent and arresting narrative without resorting to shit blowing up every ten minutes.


MGMs woes should be seen by EON as a huge opportunity rather than an impediment. Think outside the box, Barb.

They've got films in the can they can't even afford to release. Even that wouldn't be financially viable.

 

[Paul_Scott]

I would have thought EON would have had a clause in their contract with MGM that allows them to get someone else to distribute the films if MGM is financially incapable of doing so.

 

[Zack Gibbs]

I've no idea, someone could write a fascinating article on it all, and I'm still not sure how Sony plays into all. I know they spent a lot of money a few years back to get their hands on Bond, and now where are they in all this?

 

[Mike Frezon]

Originally Posted by Steve Christou /forum/thread/299911/bond-23-delayed-indefinitely#post_3706812

 

[Richard--W]

What's Daniel Craig waiting for? I know he's busy making films, but why isn't he making action films? The physicality he brings to action is very compelling. He was born to play the action hero. The way he hurls himself into danger is like nothing I've seen. His fans want to see him in action movies. Why make them wait until the next James Bond is sorted out from MGM?


In the 1960s and early 1970s, spy movies were a popular genre. Every year saw a number of spin-offs, imitators, and alternatives to James Bond. Sometimes there'd be a dozen spy films in a summer. Bourne and Bond and MI have demonstrated that the genre is still popular. Then there's The Constant Gardener, Syrianna, The Good Shepard, Breach, and Mr and Mrs Smith, countless cable and direct-to-DVD films, among others. In publishing as well, spies are still numerous, and several serial spies from the sixties are still going. So why don't independents, especially European independents, start exploiting the genre again? There's no reason to wait for the next James Bond movie. All it takes is the will and some coin to start making action-adventure-spy films. An audience is waiting.

 

[nolesrule]

Might have something to do with his contract.

 

[Richard--W]

It might.


In any case, I wish Bond 23 could be written by TOM STOPPARD, directed by JOHN BOORMAN, scored by JOHN BARRY or at least supervised by him, and produced by the team responsible for the Horatio Hornblower mini-series. Owners Broccoli and Wilson should stay out of the development, writing, casting, and directing process. Just because they inherited the rights doesn't make them filmmakers. They are simply not competent. Let them stay home and sit this one out.

 

[Sam Favate]

Craig is now filming Cowboys & Aliens, which is an action film with Harrison Ford, and by all reports, a popcorn flick.


The Bond thing is complicated, and it seems no one learned any lessons from the mess in the early 90s that delayed the series for six years. However, I don't see MGM's problems lasting that long. If they keep stalling as they are, pretty soon they'll end up in Chapter 7 (unvoluntary liquidation) and the Bond rights will be the first thing that gets sold. I also think the producers will be ready to go very quickly when they get an OK.

 

[nolesrule]

I know with Brosnan, it was in his contract that he couldn't appear dressed in a complete tux, which is why the tie is untied in The Thomas Crowne Affair... at least according to the audio commentary.

 

[WinstonCely]

More news to be bummed by....


The latest Bond film is now canceled. It was in indefinite holding pattern, but now is actually canceled. Link: http://www.imdb.com/news/ni3181017/


I know the franchise will go on, but it's a shame if they can't get it going again with Craig in the seat. He was only getting better, and his two films (especially when watched as one) give Craig an amazing background to work with and expand on in future films.

 

[Sam Favate]

I'm not counting Craig out just yet. He does have a contract, after all.

 

[Worth]

The "cancelled" rumours all stem from a single posting on the Ain't It Cool News website. There's been no official statement of cancellation from either EON or MGM - besides the difference between "cancelled" and "delayed" is a matter of semantics. Does anyone really think there won't be another Bond film down down the road?


I think the worst case scenario is a repeat of the Dalton era - a delay of five or six years followed by the introduction of a new actor in the role. Given that Hollywood is averse to anything remotely original of late, and the fact that a new Bond film consistently brings in hundreds of millions, there's no way they'll allow the property to just sit there collecting dust.