5 Bond films for Craig

emtiem

This is quite surprising; Daniel Craig has a contract up until Bond 25:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i11356e5762144f434339ff37e128990b

Good news!

Dan Same

emtiem wrote:

This is quite surprising; Daniel Craig has a contract up until Bond 25:

I can't say that this makes me happy. I had hoped that Craig would do no more than three films in total. (Plus, Craig doing five films means that there is no chance of Clive Owen replacing him. )

emtiem

I suppose it doesn't mean that he will definitely make those as anything could happen, I think (didn't Dalton sign for three?), but it does show that he's committed to Bond, which is great.

And it'll mean he'll be Bond for the 50th anniversary

Tee Hee

emtiem wrote:

This is quite surprising; Daniel Craig has a contract up until Bond 25

emtiem wrote:

And it'll mean he'll be Bond for the 50th anniversary

Napoleon Plural

Ha Ha, Tee Hee, that made me chuckle... )

John Drake

Interesting and welcome news. I noticed also that MGM are pushing forward with a Thomas Crown sequel.

jetsetwilly

IIRC the standard Bond contract is 3 films plus an option for a fourth; this is certainly the contract Moore and Brosnan were both on. Could the "four" Daniel Craig films actually include CR, and the journalist has misinterpreted?

darenhat

For some reason this sounds like misinformation. Sloan wasn't actually quoted as saying he signed Craig for four more films. That's big news...I doubt we'd be hearing about it like this if it were the case. I have a suspicion that the journalist made a typo (if he were a math major, do you think he'd be writing for the Hollywood Reporter?)

emtiem

jetsetwilly wrote:

IIRC the standard Bond contract is 3 films plus an option for a fourth; this is certainly the contract Moore and Brosnan were both on. Could the "four" Daniel Craig films actually include CR, and the journalist has misinterpreted?

It's very possible; I'd like to see a more direct quote.

highhopes

My feeling about this news hinges on one overriding question: Are we talking about five Casino Royales, or five The Man With the Golden Guns?

Dan Same

Tee Hee wrote:

emtiem wrote:

This is quite surprising; Daniel Craig has a contract up until Bond 25

emtiem wrote:

And it'll mean he'll be Bond for the 50th anniversary

) That's great.

John Drake wrote:

I noticed also that MGM are pushing forward with a Thomas Crown sequel.

But it's been known for a while that Brosnan will be remaking The Topkapi Affair as a sequel to The Thomas Crown Affair. ?:)

Hardyboy

Good grief. . .rehashes of Fame and Death Wish? Just goes to show that in Hollywood everything old is indeed new again!

John Drake

Dan Same wrote:

John Drake wrote:

I noticed also that MGM are pushing forward with a Thomas Crown sequel.

But it's been known for a while that Brosnan will be remaking The Topkapi Affair as a sequel to The Thomas Crown Affair. ?:)

I knew Brozzer was trying to get a sequel off the ground, but I didn't realise MGM were backing him. I thought maybe it was wishful thinking on his part.

John Drake

Hardyboy wrote:

Good grief. . .rehashes of Fame and Death Wish? Just goes to show that in Hollywood everything old is indeed new again!

I can do without any more of those franchises either. Unless they combine the two, and make a film in which the kids from Fame turn vigilante and start gunning down criminals. I'd watch that movie.

Dan Same

John Drake wrote:

I can do without any more of those franchises either. Unless they combine the two, and make a film in which the kids from Fame turn vigilante and start gunning down criminals. I'd watch that movie.

The only thing I liked about Fame was the sequence in which they sang the title song (IMO it's an extremely boring film), and so if they were to remake it, I think that adding some vigilante justice would be a great idea.

Loeffelholz

emtiem wrote:

This is quite surprising; Daniel Craig has a contract up until Bond 25:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i11356e5762144f434339ff37e128990b

Good news!

If true, this is great news, although they referenced it rather fleetingly. It will be interesting to see if Eon is asked for a comment to confirm or deny...if confirmed, it would certainly merit a story of its own, and not just a mention.

I'd actually be surprised if they could get (Formerly) Poor Danny^TM to commit to four more Bond films at this point in time...but if they drove an armoured car to his house and unloaded a pallet of cash, he'd possibly come round to their point of view :v

Sweepy the Cat

I was just about to post this. I'm glad he's staying and hope he make's five. After that it'll be a guy doing three bond films then guess what.

Lazenby - OHMSS
Dalton - TLD and LTK
New Actor - Bond 26, 27 and 28
Brosnan - GE, TND, TWINE and DAD
Craig - CR, Bond 22, 23, 24 and 25
Connery- DN, FRWL, GF, TB, YOLT, and DAF
Moore - LALD, TMWTGG, TSWLM, MR, FYEO, OP and AVTAK

Loeffelholz

Looks as if the story is taking on more gravitas---and added detail---as MI6 is now running with it:

http://www.mi6.co.uk/sections/articles/craig_extends_contract.php3?t=&s=

MI6 goes on to say "If the new contract is completed," which I interpret to mean that, although a tacit agreement to extend the contract might be in place, it hasn't actually been inked yet.

At 5 million pounds for #22 and 8 million pounds for #23, Craigger ought to be Formerly Poor, indeed, by the time he wraps his 007 career with #25 :007)

I hope it works out, as this will give Henry Cavill time to push his way past puberty, and purchase his first razor B-)

darenhat

It would take a hefty chunk a dough. I have a hard time seeing a studio contract someone that far out into the future. The more money that's paid out, the greater the pressure to bring in a blockbuster. With MGM placing seventh among seven, as Sloan stated, and audience tastes being as fickle as they are, expecting Craig to bring in a stellar Bond film in 2012 or 2013 to save the studio seems a bit much.

I wouldn't mind seeing Craig in Bond 22, but if it's too much like CR, my interest is going to fade. If it's a more traditional take on Bond, audiences may find that Craig doesn't quite fit the bill in that case. I'd want to wait and see what the next two films bring before jumping into a long term contract.

Loeffelholz

That's what I mean when I say I hope it works out...because naturally it would be contingent upon a string of solid successes. I wouldn't be surprised if such a long-term contract included an 'escape clause' for the studio at the back end of the contract, to include some sort of severance package for Craig, in the event they find it advantageous to dump him after three or four films.

Given the numbers put up by his debut, though, and with Haggis still on board to 'polish' the follow-up ( ), they've every reason to be optimistic -{

Dan Same

I'm not entirely sure whether to believe this news. Firstly I'm surprised that MGM would sign such a massive contract with Craig so early in the piece. CR was a huge hit, and Bond 22 is currently being filmed, so I don't see why they wouldn't wait until after Bond 22 to sign a new contract with him. I agree that based on CR's success, they have every reason to be optimistic, but surely there's no rush to do it now.

Secondly, I question whether Craig would want to commit to four more Bond films. He was in one of the biggest films of 2006, and with The Golden Compass due for release later this year, Craig is a bona fide star. He has publicly stated that he would like to explore other projects beyond Bond, so I don't know why he would commit to four more Bond films so early in the piece. Yes, some people will mention the money. But Craig wasn't exactly poor before CR and he is certainly not poor now.

Loeffelholz

Dan Same wrote:

I'm not entirely sure whether to believe this news. Firstly I'm surprised that MGM would sign such a massive contract with Craig so early in the piece. CR was a huge hit, and Bond 22 is currently being filmed, so I don't see why they wouldn't wait until after Bond 22 to sign a new contract with him. I agree that based on CR's success, they have every reason to be optimistic, but surely there's no rush to do it now.

It strikes me as a strategic move, at an opportunistic time (just before #22 starts lensing) to cement long-term goodwill with the star. Granted, this all seems unlikely, at first blush, but the fact that this MGM exec apparently discussed it at a conference would seem to add a bit of credence. If it's actually going to happen, I would expect Eon to issue some sort of press release before too long---then again, perhaps they'll wait until #22 is actually in front of the cameras, and make it part of the new film's publicity parade...

Yes, Craig is already wealthy---but the prospect of a long-term influx of ever-increasing $$$$ has to hold some appeal. Perhaps during his consultation with Brozzer, Pierce told him about how his tenture with Eon enabled him to start up Irish Dreamtime Such possibilities would be very enticing to Craig, who strikes me as just the sort of fellow to aspire to something similiar---get into film production, or even directing---where he can pick and choose projects of a personal, or more 'socially important' nature.

Dan Same wrote:

...I question whether Craig would want to commit to four more Bond films. He was in one of the biggest films of 2006, and with The Golden Compass due for release later this year, Craig is a bona fide star. He has publicly stated that he would like to explore other projects beyond Bond, so I don't know why he would commit to four more Bond films so early in the piece.

Fair points; but he's got ample time in-between Bonds to pick and choose projects. If he can 'hang in there' for five Bonds in ten years or so, he'll be in prime shape to enter the next phase of his career, at around 50 years of age, as a true mover-and-shaker...an indie film mogul.

Jarvio

And DC's 5 films will be....
Casino Royale
Risico
The Property Of A Lady
The Hildebrand Rarity
Quantum Of Solace

How good would that be??

Dan Same

Jarvio wrote:

And DC's 5 films will be....
Casino Royale
Risico
The Property Of A Lady
The Hildebrand Rarity
Quantum Of Solace

How good would that be??

I think that the first four titles would be fantastic. Quantum Of Solace sounds too much like the title of a science film to me.

Loeffelholz

It would be nice to get a title at some point, wouldn't it? I could live with any title gleaned from Fleming, whether from a short story or a novel chapter...

Ah, well...one crisis at a time ) As long as we know who James Bond will be, for the next decade or so, everything else will take care of itself :007)

Dan Same

Loeffelholz wrote:

It would be nice to get a title at some point, wouldn't it?

It's so frustrating. We already know the title of the next Superman film, which might not even get made, and yet we don't know the title of the next Bond film. I'm desperate to find out what the next title will be as a title plays a key role in what I think of a film. A title can't save or kill a film, but it is still IMO a very important element.

Loeffelholz wrote:

I could live with any title gleaned from Fleming, whether from a short story or a novel chapter...

Me too. I've said this before, but the only two titles which I absolutely hated (TND and DAD) were the only two titles to have no Fleming connection. Even AVTAK and TLD, two titles that I don't particularly like, were better IMO than the above mentioned titles. When it comes down to it, I simply don't trust the producers to come up with an good title themselves.

emtiem

Loeffelholz wrote:

Looks as if the story is taking on more gravitas---and added detail---as MI6 is now running with it

It's the same source, so I don't think there's any reason to believe it more. I think that the Bond sites running it will mean the story will appear on quite a few more sites- I'd say don't put any more faith in it until you see a slightly stronger source.

Dan Same wrote:

I'm not entirely sure whether to believe this news. Firstly I'm surprised that MGM would sign such a massive contract with Craig so early in the piece. CR was a huge hit, and Bond 22 is currently being filmed, so I don't see why they wouldn't wait until after Bond 22 to sign a new contract with him. I agree that based on CR's success, they have every reason to be optimistic, but surely there's no rush to do it now.

Why on earth would you risk it? You've got a hugely successful movie with a celebrated star but you decide to wait until a few years later to secure him for more? That's a crazy risk. Snap him up immediately.

Dan Same wrote:

Secondly, I question whether Craig would want to commit to four more Bond films. He was in one of the biggest films of 2006, and with The Golden Compass due for release later this year, Craig is a bona fide star. He has publicly stated that he would like to explore other projects beyond Bond, so I don't know why he would commit to four more Bond films so early in the piece. Yes, some people will mention the money. But Craig wasn't exactly poor before CR and he is certainly not poor now.

Yeah, I don't think it was about the money particularly; that's painting him as a greed-driven man, and I'm not sure why people would want to say that. For me, you've raised the most interesting part of this story- of course the studio want to secure him; it's a pretty obvious business choice to make. But the idea of Craig to be willing to be tied to Bond for that long is very interesting indeed.
Although many fans have been happy to say that he'll be gone as soon as he's used Bond for his own purposes (based on the behaviour of similar calibre actors I suppose), he's exhibited nothing but interest in the character and has shown that he thinks quite heavily about how to play it. Plus we've seen him turning up to the filming of a bit of Bond22 he isn't even in; sending messages to the England Rugby team who were delighted to hear from 007... I think he's actually rather proud to be Bond and might just be happy to stay. Yes, he wants to do other things; what actor wouldn't? But I don't think that being James Bond is something he's ashamed of or wants to leave behind at all.

taity

If it is true, Craig may very well be thinking "one for me, one for them" - meaning that as long as he's Bond alot of doors are open to him. He heas a full other year - 16 months to work on projects outside of Bond, he can pick some pretty different roles in that time.

Loeffelholz

emtiem wrote:

Loeffelholz wrote:

Looks as if the story is taking on more gravitas---and added detail---as MI6 is now running with it

It's the same source, so I don't think there's any reason to believe it more.

MI6 fleshed it out a bit, with the 'added detail' to which I referred---the editorial observations and extrapolations of Bond Savants (like us ) who watch these things closely, which puts things in perspective, and is helpful---particularly with regard to the remark about "If the new contract is completed," which adequately speaks to reasonable doubt, as far as I'm concerned

That's why I added: "I hope it works out" The two key questions in this area would seem to be 1) Was the head of MGM speaking through his arse when he made this announcement, or 2) Did the Hollywood Reporter get it wrong? I suspect we'll learn the truth at some point...

emtiem wrote:

I think that the Bond sites running it will mean the story will appear on quite a few more sites

Which is pretty much what I was saying, in terms of gravitas.

Personally, I don't view a desire for financial independence as 'greed' at all---particularly if it's money fairly agreed-upon, and lawfully earned, according to what the market will bear---but that's just me

Dan Same

emtiem wrote:

Why on earth would you risk it? You've got a hugely successful movie with a celebrated star but you decide to wait until a few years later to secure him for more? That's a crazy risk. Snap him up immediately.

I'm not talking about risking it. I'm talking about waiting until Bond 22. If Bond 22 isn't overly successful, they haven't wedged themselves into a corner. If it is successful, then they can make a new deal.

emtiem wrote:

Yeah, I don't think it was about the money particularly; that's painting him as a greed-driven man, and I'm not sure why people would want to say that.

I don't think that wanting more money makes you greedy. It's only greed if the money is at the expence of others (and the reality is that the money would otherwise have just gone back to the studio) and if you make the money using unfair means. If Craig is offered much more money, and if he enjoys playing Bond, my advice (if I was his manager) would be to sign the contract. I would insist to him, though, that he has an escape clause just in case either the producers decide to break the contract or he tires of the role.

emtiem wrote:

Yes, he wants to do other things; what actor wouldn't? But I don't think that being James Bond is something he's ashamed of or wants to leave behind at all.

I guess the question is whether he would feel the same way in 4 or 5 years time. Perhaps he will. However, regardless, I'm a little surprised that either the producers or Craig would agree to a new contract before Bond 22 has even gotten a title.

blueman

Great news! {[]

If they follow the two year cycle, that would put Craig's fifth Bond film in 2014, when he's 46--the same age Moore was when he took the role in LALD. With Craig's thing for working out for the part, that timeline should work, unlike Moore or Brosnan, Craig already looks old so he shouldn't "age" all that much.

Love for Fleming's YOLT plotline to be in a Craig Bond, also the DN squid.