Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Bond 23 Delayed "Indefinitely"


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
102 replies to this topic

#1 of 103 OFFLINE   Worth

Worth

    Screenwriter



  • 1,159 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 17 2009

Posted April 19 2010 - 09:27 AM

 It looks like MGM's financial woes have officially put the Bond series in development hell. Is Craig going to become the new Dalton?

http://prnewswirefil...definitely.html

Sealed with a curse as sharp as a knife. Doomed is your soul and damned is your life.

#2 of 103 OFFLINE   Colin Jacobson

Colin Jacobson

    Producer



  • 5,249 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 2000

Posted April 19 2010 - 11:19 AM

Don't see how you can compare Dalton to Craig.  Fairly or not, many viewed Dalton as part of the reason the franchise slipped in the late 80s, while Craig has been widely liked as 007.  If the franchise stalls, it's not Craig's fault...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Worth 

 It looks like MGM's financial woes have officially put the Bond series in development hell. Is Craig going to become the new Dalton?

http://prnewswirefil...definitely.html


Colin Jacobson
http://www.dvdmg.com

#3 of 103 OFFLINE   Steve_Pannell

Steve_Pannell

    Supporting Actor



  • 591 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 04 2003
  • Real Name:Steve
  • LocationNew Albany, MS

Posted April 19 2010 - 11:38 AM

Now that I've jumped through hoops to get this reply box, I'll offer my $.02:

Maybe he means that Craig is just going to get 2 shots at playing Bond? Even if it's not his fault.

Too bad though. I was really liking Craig as Bond.


#4 of 103 OFFLINE   Worth

Worth

    Screenwriter



  • 1,159 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 17 2009

Posted April 20 2010 - 02:32 AM

Yes, I meant that Craig may only end up with two films under his belt because of problems with MGM.

My hope is that this press release is EON's way of telling MGM that their not willing to make any more Bond films with MGM as a partner and that the studio might as well sell their stake to another interested party.

Sealed with a curse as sharp as a knife. Doomed is your soul and damned is your life.

#5 of 103 OFFLINE   Jason Roer

Jason Roer

    Supporting Actor



  • 977 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 05 2004

Posted April 20 2010 - 10:51 AM

 Very annoying news. I love what Craig has done with the character and was very much looking forward to any further installments that he would be a part of. I will hold out hopes everything gets resolved and either MGM finds some cash, or some really, really rich dude (or company, though it would be so much cooler if it was just a single guy, right?) buys MGM and greenlights a new Bond right away.

Cheers,

Jason


#6 of 103 OFFLINE   Brent M

Brent M

    Producer



  • 4,486 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 15 2001

Posted April 21 2010 - 05:57 PM

I loved Casino Royale, liked Quantum of Solace and was really looking forward to the next installment. I hope this delay doesn't last too terribly long.

"If you're good at something, never do it for free."

#7 of 103 OFFLINE   Brisby

Brisby

    Second Unit



  • 288 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 11 2010

Posted April 25 2010 - 03:03 PM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin Jacobson View Post

Don't see how you can compare Dalton to Craig.  Fairly or not, many viewed Dalton as part of the reason the franchise slipped in the late 80s, while Craig has been widely liked as 007.  If the franchise stalls, it's not Craig's fault...




 

You know...the Dalton films were horribly underrated. The Living Daylights is one of my favorite post-Connery Bond films, and Licence To Kill is tasty just for really running with it's gritty, Fleming-esque violence. Dalton deserved a third movie, and it's a shame it never happened. :( Dalton didn't "kill" the franchise so much as the SIX-YEAR GAP between movies coupled with the end of the Cold War did. I hope that MGM can iron out their problems so we can get a third Craig movie out for the fiftieth anniversary(!) of the Bond franchise in 2012.


#8 of 103 OFFLINE   Zack Gibbs

Zack Gibbs

    Screenwriter



  • 1,687 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 15 2005

Posted April 25 2010 - 03:27 PM

I'm sorry but didn't Sony buy something-or- other a few years ago specifically so they would have the rights to Bond? Were not the last 2 films from Sony? I demand explanations!

"Because he's the hero that Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now... and so we'll hunt him... because he can take it... because he's not a hero... he's a silent guardian, a watchful protector... a DARK KNIGHT."

#9 of 103 OFFLINE   Adam Gregorich

Adam Gregorich

    Executive Producer



  • 14,886 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 20 1999
  • LocationThe Other Washington

Posted April 25 2010 - 04:16 PM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Brisby 

You know...the Dalton films were horribly underrated. The Living Daylights is one of my favorite post-Connery Bond films, and Licence To Kill is tasty just for really running with it's gritty, Fleming-esque violence. Dalton deserved a third movie, and it's a shame it never happened. :( Dalton didn't "kill" the franchise so much as the SIX-YEAR GAP between movies coupled with the end of the Cold War did. I hope that MGM can iron out their problems so we can get a third Craig movie out for the fiftieth anniversary(!) of the Bond franchise in 2012.
 
While I liked it at the time it was released, I don't think License to Kill has held up as well for me.  That is because of the story and not because of Dalton.  I think the Living Daylights was a great bond film. 


#10 of 103 OFFLINE   Sam Favate

Sam Favate

    Producer



  • 4,897 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 03 2004
  • Real Name:Sam Favate

Posted April 25 2010 - 11:29 PM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Gregorich 

While I liked it at the time it was released, I don't think License to Kill has held up as well for me.  That is because of the story and not because of Dalton.  I think the Living Daylights was a great bond film. 
I agree that Daylights is a great one, but Licence (which I watched recently on BD) plays like a typical 80s revenge flick, the likes of which could have starred Jean-Claude Van Damme or Steven Seagal. It's really a weak entry in the series. It also didn't help that it came out mid-summer 1989, after Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Star Trek V, Ghostbusters II, Batman, Lethal Weapon 2, etc. It was a big year for summer movies, most of which were sequels. There was no room in that summer for a weak movie (See: Star Trek V's box office), and the juggernaut that was Batman made it even harder to get noticed.


#11 of 103 OFFLINE   Steve Christou

Steve Christou

    Executive Producer



  • 14,392 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 25 2000
  • Real Name:Steve Christou
  • LocationLondon, England

Posted April 26 2010 - 10:21 AM

Well that's a damn shame, I liked Daniel Craig. I hope he gets to do one more before the fickle producers dump him for someone else and reboot the series again.

First UA now MGM if they had only gone to any other studio.

Dave hören... auf, wille stoppen sie Dave... stoppen sie Dave... Mein gehirn geht... Ich bin gefühl es... Ich bin gefühl es... Ich bin ängstlich Dave... Guter Nachmittag. Ich bin ein HAL 9000 computer. Ich wurde funktionsfähig am HAL-Betrieb in Urbana, Illinois auf January 12 1992.


Lord of the Hubs


#12 of 103 OFFLINE   Edwin-S

Edwin-S

    Producer



  • 5,630 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 20 2000

Posted April 26 2010 - 11:43 AM

I thought LtK was bad the very day I saw it in the theatre. I don't know what it was, but it wasn't a Bond film, even though it had a character named Bond in it. Dalton wasn't to blame. He had nothing to work with because the story had no mooring. The Cold war sensibilities that made up a large part of the Bond mythos were no longer viable with the "end" of that war and the talents of a Super Spy were just wasted on something as mundane and petty as a Cocaine dealer.
"You bring a horse for me?" "Looks like......looks like we're shy of one horse." "No.......You brought two too many."

#13 of 103 OFFLINE   Richard--W

Richard--W

    Producer



  • 3,527 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2004

Posted April 28 2010 - 02:15 AM

I don't buy into the re-definition of James Bond as a character, which is patronizing and condescending, but Daniel Craig has earned his spurs, so to speak, and deserves another crack at the character. There is a world of difference between his two performances. Of the two, I prefer his more reserved, poised, and monochromatic interpretation in Quantum of Solace. He is not responsible for the writing and directing and editing decisions that provoked so much controversy. If the film had nothing else going for it, it had Craig.  I was not looking forward to the new film that was shaping up, however. Let's hope this delay will give the powers-that-be time to reflect and get a grip on the character again.

Craig was born to play action-heroes. I hope he eases himself into another action-hero franchise when Eon dumps him.

With regard to the discussion of Licence to Kill, I think it reads better on the page than it plays as a film. The film is mis-handled. I agree with Brisby that Dalton is horribly under-rated.


#14 of 103 OFFLINE   Richard--W

Richard--W

    Producer



  • 3,527 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2004

Posted April 29 2010 - 01:15 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin Jacobson 

Don't see how you can compare Dalton to Craig.  Fairly or not, many viewed Dalton as part of the reason the franchise slipped in the late 80s, while Craig has been widely liked as 007.  If the franchise stalls, it's not Craig's fault...

That wasn't true in the 1980s. People who have that impression today are under a misunderstanding. Many fans and critics credited Dalton with restoring credibility to the series. In interviews, he impressed everyone with his knowledge of Fleming and his insights into the character. After his first film The Living Daylights (1987) came out, Dalton was praised for doing his own action scenes and for restoring a dramatic edge to James Bond. Praise for Dalton was unanimous, and audience response to him was overwhelmingly positive. Behind the scenes, that was not the case with director John Glen. After the problematic A View to a Kill (1985), MGM did not want John Glen to direct the next installment and first Dalton film, but they acquiesced to Eon. Later Glen was roundly criticized for the general sloppiness and inattentiveness of Licence to Kill. When the Bond series was rebooted in 1995, MGM told Eon that they would not entertain any association that included Glen as a director. So Eon finally dropped Glen after encouraging him to mis-direct a decade of Bond films.



#15 of 103 OFFLINE   Sam Favate

Sam Favate

    Producer



  • 4,897 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 03 2004
  • Real Name:Sam Favate

Posted April 29 2010 - 01:22 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard--W After his first film The Living Daylights (1987) came out, Dalton was praised for doing his own action scenes and for restoring a dramatic edge to James Bond. Praise for Dalton was unanimous. Behind the scenes, that was not the case with director John Glen. After the problematic A View to a Kill (1985), MGM did not want John Glen to direct the next installment and first Dalton film, but they acquiesced to Eon.
Also, A View To A Kill was widely (and correctly IMO) criticized for new lows in the series, and for making it into something of a parody of its former self. Daylights reversed that trend and then some. Dalton was considered the critical and dramatic savior of the series, although he did lack some of the name recognition and appeal of Roger Moore.

Just finished Moore's autobiography (My Word Is My Bond) which has some interesting behind the scenes info. Speaking of View, I had no idea, but Moore apparently loathed Grace Jones, who pulled quite the practical joke on Moore in their bedroom scene. Moore's led an interesting life, and even beyond his insights to the Bond films, it's worth reading. He comes across as more raunchy than I suspected (in chapters about his early years) and more prissy than I suspected in his later, UNICEF years.




#16 of 103 OFFLINE   Richard--W

Richard--W

    Producer



  • 3,527 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2004

Posted April 29 2010 - 02:05 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Favate 

Also, A View To A Kill was widely (and correctly IMO) criticized for new lows in the series, and for making it into something of a parody of its former self. Daylight reversed that trend and then some.
True, and then Glen steered Licence to Kill toward the same lows all over again. The buddy-buddy team of Michael G. Wilson and John Glen was catastrophic to the Bond series. Wilson would rewrite Richard Maibaum's spirited and carefully crafted scripts instead of just leaving them alone, and then Glen would pound them to death. Still, there was enough action and drama to keep the series afloat even though people were losing respect for it.

Quote:
Dalton was considered the critical and dramatic savior of the series, although he did lack some of the name recognition and appeal of Roger Moore.

Just finished Moore's autobiography (My Word Is My Bond) which has some interesting behind the scenes info. Speaking of View, I had no idea, but Moore apparently loathed Grace Jones, who pulled quite the practical joke on Moore in their bedroom scene. Moore's led an interesting life, and even beyond his insights to the Bond films, it's worth reading. He comes across as more raunchy than I suspected (in chapters about his early years) and more prissy than I suspected in his later, UNICEF years.
I bought My Word Is My Bond but I know I'll never get around to reading it. Celebrity bios are heavy sledding. I'm quite a fan of Roger Moore, however. Not many actors are as good-natured and charismatic as Moore. He is a fine consummate actor in The Man Who Haunted Himself (1970), Gold (1974), ffolkes (1976), Shout at the Devil (1976) and in odd moments of his Bond films when he is given something to work with. I read his first book, Roger Moore's James Bond Diary, written on the set of his first outing Live and Let Die (1973). He realizes early on that all his expectations for playing Bond were not realistic under the circumstances. Off the screen, by all reports his leadership of Unicef has been dedicated, sincere, selfless, admirable, and enormously beneficial to the organization. Roger Moore feeds the poor. That's a James Bond in real life.






#17 of 103 OFFLINE   Mike Frezon

Mike Frezon

    Studio Mogul



  • 29,766 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 09 2001
  • LocationRensselaer, NY

Posted April 29 2010 - 02:35 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Favate 




...I had no idea, but Moore apparently loathed Grace Jones, who pulled quite the practical joke on Moore in their bedroom scene. .
My mind is racing...    /img/vbsmilies/htf/laugh.gif

There's Jessie the yodeling cowgirl. Bullseye, he's Woody's horse. Pete the old prospector. And, Woody, the man himself.Of course, it's time for Woody's RoundUp. He's the very best! He's the rootinest, tootinest cowboy in the wild, wild west!


HTF Rules | HTF Mission Statement | Father of the Bride

Dieting with my Dog & Heart to Heart/Hand in Paw by Peggy Frezon


#18 of 103 OFFLINE   Richard--W

Richard--W

    Producer



  • 3,527 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2004

Posted April 29 2010 - 05:09 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brisby 

You know...the Dalton films were horribly underrated. The Living Daylights is one of my favorite post-Connery Bond films, and Licence To Kill is tasty just for really running with it's gritty, Fleming-esque violence. Dalton deserved a third movie, and it's a shame it never happened. :( Dalton didn't "kill" the franchise so much as the SIX-YEAR GAP between movies coupled with the end of the Cold War did. I hope that MGM can iron out their problems so we can get a third Craig movie out for the fiftieth anniversary(!) of the Bond franchise in 2012.
Dalton didn't kill the franchise, he rescued it. I wish Dalton would write a reminiscence of his ordeal on the set of Licence to Kill.  He had signed on to do three films, but he was never asked to come back for a third. Although he was popular with audiences, with the fans, with the cast and crew, and with MGM, the producers understood that James Bond is a star regardless of who plays him. I'd like to know how that contract was resolved. Did they have to pay Dalton anyway for the third film he didn't make? Maintaining professional silence is a clause in every Bond contract, and so far, it's worked. Moore seems to be keeping his professional silence over his disappointments, and Dalton is simply not talking. If and when an objective behind-the-scenes history is written, one that is not dependent on permission from the producers, it won't reflect on them favorably.

In any case, Bond 23 was shaping up to be another Casino / Quantum. I'm not eager to see that installment, with the worst writers of the entire series returning and the wrong writers being hired to polish it. Four writers altogether following the producers instructions and delivering on their agenda. How many writers does one film need? Let's hope the delay will facilitate a reconsideration of how to approach James Bond.



#19 of 103 OFFLINE   Zack Gibbs

Zack Gibbs

    Screenwriter



  • 1,687 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 15 2005

Posted April 29 2010 - 10:50 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard--W 

In any case, Bond 23 was shaping up to be another Casino / Quantum. I'm not eager to see that installment, with the worst writers of the entire series returning and the wrong writers being hired to polish it. Four writers altogether following the producers instructions and delivering on their agenda. How many writers does one film need? Let's hope the delay will facilitate a reconsideration of how to approach James Bond.
 
I've never really believed in the 'too many cooks in the kitchen' theory in these situations. I can even imagine what probably happens with the Bond scripts at this point. Wade and Purvis (I think those are their names, close enough) scribble together some basic action plot. Then they get someone to come in and give it some "drama" or "character," and punch up the dialogue. And then they might feel they need some more work but by this time the last writer could very well have moved on and is no longer available to continue working on it, so they've got to bring in someone else. (because they know damn well Wade and Purvis can't do it!!!!)

It's pretty much how every script is done these days. Often times you won't even know it because of crediting rules.

Anyways, I remember back when Goldeneye came out Sony was just starting to try and poach the Bond franchise again ala Never Say Never. And they were talking up having Dalton come back to the role even then.


"Because he's the hero that Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now... and so we'll hunt him... because he can take it... because he's not a hero... he's a silent guardian, a watchful protector... a DARK KNIGHT."

#20 of 103 OFFLINE   Malcolm R

Malcolm R

    Executive Producer



  • 11,629 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 2002
  • LocationVermont

Posted April 29 2010 - 02:53 PM

Dalton was my favorite Bond, and I haven't been at all happy with Craig's films. So I can't say I'm too crushed that future Bond films are in limbo.

The purpose of an education is to replace an empty mind with an open mind.