Is EON lazy?

bigzilcho

I just read an item that said the next film will be delayed "indefinitely".

Whatever THAT means.

Am I the only one who is getting sick and tired of of EON's excuses. I mean, three years between Bond films is bad enough, but the news that Babs and Michael are not sure when the next film starts is unacceptable.

What happened to consistency and tradition?

Cubby and Harry delivered a Bond every two years...for 27 years!

Anyone who is going to use the argument that movie-making is that much tougher nowadays is talking through his hat.

Consider the logistical problems of YOLT or OHMSS or MR. Epic films done at a time that required their completion at a certain date. No excuses given. Was QOS REALLY that much harder to shoot than TSWLM?

This current climate of inaction in film-making is a direct result of bureaucrats running the asylum.

What we need is showmanship from Bond producers, not a lazy response to the studio's problems which, when you look at it long enough, looks like nothing more than laziness in attitude and commitment.

Next thing you know, a Bond film will be relaesed every five years and it will be accepted as the "norm" because we bought the propaganda thats been dished out.

Well, fellow Bond-fans, that is not good enough.

EON should study its own history much closer. Cubby and Harry understood audiences and what they want and when they want it.

Why is it that Babs and Michael look like they are doing us a favor when they make a Bond movie?

Put your noses to the grindstone, EON, and stop giving us excuses.

"Indefinitely" is not a word that is acceptable in the Bond universe.



"Q, have I ever let you down?"
"Frequently."

Loeffelholz

I'm with you, BZ. I used a Titanic analogy in another thread, and here's one more: Bond is Di Caprio, handcuffed in a lower deck room as the ship sinks. Eon is standing next to him, holding an axe. Will they swing it?...or not...?!?

Sir Hillary Bray

Easy guys -- you're venting at the wrong acronym. This is an MGM issue, not an EON issue.

Still, given MGM's obvious financial weakness, it is fair to argue that EON should have found a new distribution partner long ago.

Either way, the only real acronym that works here is...WTF. X-(

Sir Miles

I'm with Sir Hillary...I think this more to do with MGM than Eon...perhaps Eon can't get the right ammount of funding from MGM..?..perhaps MGM don't want to commit ANY capital to ANY film making whilst they try and find a buyer ? And don't MGM own 50% of the Bond rights ? Maybe they want to try and sell their 50%....and that could be harder to do if they have commited funding to make the film.

I agree...more MGM than Eon.

darenhat

I for one would not want to start on a business venture if it was uncertain as to who gets the profits. Unfortunately, to us it's a Bond movie...but to Eon, it's $$$. And to MGM, it's not about Bond #23, it's about 22 different Bond DVDs and Blu-ray royalties!

Loeffelholz

All comes down to incompetence and mismanagement...sure, I'll give MGM most of the blame for that---and maybe Eon is a complete victim of circumstance here, and blameless. Doesn't change the final line of the equation though: This Sucks

bigzilcho

Good points, everyone. Maybe MGM should be the fall guy in all of this.

But that does not account for 3 years for DAD (?!?) and 4 for CR. And an unsettling lack of urgency overall.

Lack of showmanship. Pure and simple.

Any talk of "creative exhaustion" by Michael Wilson makes me want to press the "gimme-a-break" button in my Aston Martin.

Do we know for sure that Quantum is not behind all this?



"If that's his original ball, I'm Arnold Palmer."

PDJamesBond

There is a lot of talk about this in the "Bond Suspended" thread under Bond 23, and the general consensus there is that this "suspended indefinitely" business is a power play by EON to force MGM's hand. So perhaps it isn't laziness, after all; perhaps it's a sly business move?

Time will tell. Hopefully we will find out sooner rather than later.