Nov 2021 is so close to 2022 60th films anniversary they should just shunt it to spring 2022 and go bells and whistles on a big blow out for DC and announcement of new era.
If this is correct I think this is the right move. Vaccinations will start for the general populations in around April (just a guestimation) and old people and high-risk groups are not the core audience for Bond. Perhaps for "Death on the Nile" :v
But most of the people who want to get vaccinated will be by November, at least in the developed world that's bought up 80% of this year's vaccines. If EON confirms November soon they can keep their powder dry for the fall.
They’re doing what they think is going to make them the most money. Most of us don’t know their exact situation, so I don’t think it’s fair to pass judgement on them waiting. Us seriously fans who don’t want to wait are a small minority of people. Most of the audience isn’t thinking about the film right now.
VOD, streaming etc has worked out well for many lesser releases but the two experiments with big tentpole films has been a bit of a bumpy ride. Mulan suffered as many people balked at the idea of paying a premium fee (around $30.00) on top of the monthly fee they pay for Disney+. Wonder Woman 1984, while initial numbers were high, at least people could see it without paying a premium in addition to the monthly HBO Max fee but the film is not very good and there were technical problems with streaming the film because of bandwidth limitations and the large number of people trying to stream the film especially during the holiday season. When I watched WW 1984 on New Years Eve the film froze on 3 occassions and I had to wait 15 minutes plus for it to buffer each time....not a fun experience, especially for such a meh film. If that was NTTD to having those kind of technical issues, I would have been livid.
...old people and high-risk groups are not the core audience for Bond ...
this is an interesting point, worthy of debate.
I think "old" people are the target audience for a film series going back to 1962. A new James Bond film in the theaters is like a classic rock band touring yet again, of interest mostly to who grew up with the series. The young folk have other film franchises they regard as their own.
and maybe like the classic rock audience, the potential market for a new Bond film is more valuable to the theatre owners because the older nostalgia driven market has more money to spend (middle aged boomers with grownup salaries, retired folk with pensions) and is more likely to go to an actual theatre rather than be content streaming.
I‘ve said it before so I‘ll say it again: if this movie will indeed be pushed back once again (we all know it will), EoN should NOT attach a specific release date to it anymore.
I‘ve said it before so I‘ll say it again: if this movie will indeed be pushed back once again (we all know it will), EoN should NOT attach a specific release date to it anymore.
I think they need a date secured far in advance in case they do want to release it then. And I like having a date to look forward to, even if it does change again. It would feel less hopeful to me if there were no release date.
I‘ve said it before so I‘ll say it again: if this movie will indeed be pushed back once again (we all know it will), EoN should NOT attach a specific release date to it anymore.
I think they need a date secured far in advance in case they do want to release it then. And I like having a date to look forward to, even if it does change again. It would feel less hopeful to me if there were no release date.
Exactly. If it's playing in theaters, they need to plant a flag and "claim" a weekend. An interesting wrinkle in that model is that now no one knows exactly when all the WB films will be hitting HBO Max, as the release date strategy no longer applies.
...old people and high-risk groups are not the core audience for Bond ...
this is an interesting point, worthy of debate.
I think "old" people are the target audience for a film series going back to 1962. A new James Bond film in the theaters is like a classic rock band touring yet again, of interest mostly to who grew up with the series. The young folk have other film franchises they regard as their own.
and maybe like the classic rock audience, the potential market for a new Bond film is more valuable to the theatre owners because the older nostalgia driven market has more money to spend (middle aged boomers with grownup salaries, retired folk with pensions) and is more likely to go to an actual theatre rather than be content streaming.
I've never seen the cinema audience at James Bond movies broken down by age, so I can't say anything for sure. I'm guessing the average age is higer than for superhero movies, but I can't remember noticing many gray-haired people at the cinema when a Bond movie is shown. My impression is that old people mainly show up for epics about WWII, the royal family or ideally both.
I'm not even sure we define "old" the same way. Here people above the age 70, especially those living at homes for the elderly and often aged 90+ get vaccinated now. You may have thought about a slightly younger age group.
I'm not even sure we define "old" the same way. Here people above the age 70, especially those living at homes for the elderly and often aged 90+ get vaccinated now. You may have thought about a slightly younger age group.
yes I see, you mean folks in retirement homes who are already getting the vaccine. Actually, I would hope they wouldn't rush out to the movie theatre anyway, I don't believe these vaccines are going to make vulnerable people bulletproof, they're only ~90% effective at best and the virus is rapidly mutating.
I was thinking about me, and folks on this forum who have a year or two on me. I'm feeling pretty ancient and obsolete these days. But I'm definitely nowhere near the front of the vaccine line, not should I be.
But real point I was trying to make was the Classic Rock audience analogy, I do think the Bond fan demographic may skew similarly and be more inclined to see a film in a theatre, whenever possible again, even if it is already available to stream online.
I think they could release this film online now, make some of their money back, and we'd all still go see the exact same film in the theatre whenever it is possible even if it is a year later.
Maybe make the eventual theatrical release an extended version or Directors Cut, just as an added attraction.
I'm not even sure we define "old" the same way. Here people above the age 70, especially those living at homes for the elderly and often aged 90+ get vaccinated now. You may have thought about a slightly younger age group.
yes I see, you mean folks in retirement homes who are already getting the vaccine. Actually, I would hope they wouldn't rush out to the movie theatre anyway, I don't believe these vaccines are going to make vulnerable people bulletproof, they're only ~90% effective at best and the virus is rapidly mutating.
I was thinking about me, and folks on this forum who have a year or two on me. I'm feeling pretty ancient and obsolete these days. But I'm definitely nowhere near the front of the vaccine line, not should I be.
But real point I was trying to make was the Classic Rock audience analogy, I do think the Bond fan demographic may skew similarly and be more inclined to see a film in a theatre, whenever possible again, even if it is already available to stream online.
I think they could release this film online now, make some of their money back, and we'd all still go see the exact same film in the theatre whenever it is possible even if it is a year later.
Maybe make the eventual theatrical release an extended version or Directors Cut, just as an added attraction.
Nice to get it cleared up. But I think it will be reasonably safe to go to the cinema by November. Enough people will be vaccines by then and we can't expect life to be 100% safe.
I'm not even sure we define "old" the same way. Here people above the age 70, especially those living at homes for the elderly and often aged 90+ get vaccinated now. You may have thought about a slightly younger age group.
yes I see, you mean folks in retirement homes who are already getting the vaccine. Actually, I would hope they wouldn't rush out to the movie theatre anyway, I don't believe these vaccines are going to make vulnerable people bulletproof, they're only ~90% effective at best and the virus is rapidly mutating.
I was thinking about me, and folks on this forum who have a year or two on me. I'm feeling pretty ancient and obsolete these days. But I'm definitely nowhere near the front of the vaccine line, not should I be.
But real point I was trying to make was the Classic Rock audience analogy, I do think the Bond fan demographic may skew similarly and be more inclined to see a film in a theatre, whenever possible again, even if it is already available to stream online.
I think they could release this film online now, make some of their money back, and we'd all still go see the exact same film in the theatre whenever it is possible even if it is a year later.
Maybe make the eventual theatrical release an extended version or Directors Cut, just as an added attraction.
I turned 53 recently, so I'm in that nether region between fading youth and hitting people with my cane. My observations are personal and unscientific, but I encounter hundreds of people a week in my professional life, not to mention my cadre of friends online and in real life. Take them for what they are or don't.
Among people closer to my own age or older, going to the movie theater is not so big a deal anymore. We've done it enough, the experience is hardly different than it was 30-40 years ago except more expensive, and in particular, there is shared agreement that there's not much to see worth the trip. Bond movies draw a few more of us, but watching a blu-ray on a 70-inch LCD is good enough. Now, most of my close friends would probably be defined as film snobs, whatever that means, but that doesn't mean we're not averse to taking a chance on something.
Among people much younger than me, I don't hear much buzz about Bond. Now, obviously, somebody is going to see the movies or else they wouldn't be making hundreds of millions. But when I've raised the issue of NTTD being delayed, I haven't heard much in the way of anticipation or disappointment. I noticed the last go around with SPECTRE, the audience was mixed between young people and middle agers. I may have seen some gray heads, but if so, they didn't stand out.
Still, somebody is going to go see it, and if the past holds true, a lot of somebodies. But probably not me in the theater. I can check the DVD out of the library and watch it on the big screen at home.
I do hear some talk about Bond among younger people, but naturally it's nowhere near the level it must have been in the 60's and 70's. And I too feel there is less content for me at the cinema than there was before. It looks like most of the movies are superhero movies or animation.
I turned 53 recently, so I'm in that nether region between fading youth and hitting people with my cane. My observations are personal and unscientific, but I encounter hundreds of people a week in my professional life, not to mention my cadre of friends online and in real life. Take them for what they are or don't.
Among people closer to my own age or older, going to the movie theater is not so big a deal anymore. We've done it enough, the experience is hardly different than it was 30-40 years ago except more expensive, and in particular, there is shared agreement that there's not much to see worth the trip. Bond movies draw a few more of us, but watching a blu-ray on a 70-inch LCD is good enough. Now, most of my close friends would probably be defined as film snobs, whatever that means, but that doesn't mean we're not averse to taking a chance on something.
Among people much younger than me, I don't hear much buzz about Bond. Now, obviously, somebody is going to see the movies or else they wouldn't be making hundreds of millions. But when I've raised the issue of NTTD being delayed, I haven't heard much in the way of anticipation or disappointment. I noticed the last go around with SPECTRE, the audience was mixed between young people and middle agers. I may have seen some gray heads, but if so, they didn't stand out.
Still, somebody is going to go see it, and if the past holds true, a lot of somebodies. But probably not me in the theater. I can check the DVD out of the library and watch it on the big screen at home.
good to see you Gassy, we haven't seen enough of you lately!
You're a year younger than me, so we're the same demographic. Was the Spy Who Loved Me also your first?
I saw a lot of films in the theatre over the last decade, but then I was living in smaller towns, smaller mom'n'pop theatres, cheaper ticket prices, different vibe.
Now I'm back in the city, actually all the theatres are the corporate run theme park style megaplexes where seats start at $15-, twice as much if you want your seat to vibrate or whatever the gimmick is. So I've been avoiding films I would have gone to see previously. Like you I wait for the dvd and borrow it from the library.
New James Bond would definitely be a special ocassion, but I was already not looking forward to the dehumanizing megaplex experience.
Still, I believe the big screen is the way these films are meant to be experienced, no matter how good our home theatres might be, noisy crowds and all.
As far as I can see (I'm guessing not very far, at least on this topic) NTTD's main competition in October is Dune. I like the source novel and the director Villeneuve and hopefully the market in October has room for both Bond and a tentpole sci-fi movie.
Mr MartiniThat nice house in the sky.Posts: 2,709MI6 Agent
As far as I can see (I'm guessing not very far, at least on this topic) NTTD's main competition in November is Dune. I like the source novel and the director Villeneuve and hopefully the market in October has room for both Bond and a tentpole sci-fi movie.
I think Mission Impossible 7 has a release date of Nov. 19th.
Some people would complain even if you hang them with a new rope
I'm starting to wonder how many children will have been conceived, born, and will be able to buy their own ticket between the announced release date and the actual one>
Does any one know if work has begun on the next Bond film? I mean preparing or even writing the script?
Surely, after all this delay, Eon will not wait until after NTTD is released to start work?
They could have had a script all ready to go since filming on NTTD ended?!
I'd hope that they've been putting some serious thought and work into the next Bond film, but I don't have any great confidence that the current situation will result in a shorter than usual gap between NTTD and Bond 26. There is probably doubt at EON about where to go next with the series, and possibly a lot may depend on how NTTD does financially and perhaps critically as well.
I turned 53 recently, so I'm in that nether region between fading youth and hitting people with my cane. My observations are personal and unscientific, but I encounter hundreds of people a week in my professional life, not to mention my cadre of friends online and in real life. Take them for what they are or don't.
Among people closer to my own age or older, going to the movie theater is not so big a deal anymore. We've done it enough, the experience is hardly different than it was 30-40 years ago except more expensive, and in particular, there is shared agreement that there's not much to see worth the trip. Bond movies draw a few more of us, but watching a blu-ray on a 70-inch LCD is good enough. Now, most of my close friends would probably be defined as film snobs, whatever that means, but that doesn't mean we're not averse to taking a chance on something.
Among people much younger than me, I don't hear much buzz about Bond. Now, obviously, somebody is going to see the movies or else they wouldn't be making hundreds of millions. But when I've raised the issue of NTTD being delayed, I haven't heard much in the way of anticipation or disappointment. I noticed the last go around with SPECTRE, the audience was mixed between young people and middle agers. I may have seen some gray heads, but if so, they didn't stand out.
Still, somebody is going to go see it, and if the past holds true, a lot of somebodies. But probably not me in the theater. I can check the DVD out of the library and watch it on the big screen at home.
good to see you Gassy, we haven't seen enough of you lately!
You're a year younger than me, so we're the same demographic. Was the Spy Who Loved Me also your first?
I saw a lot of films in the theatre over the last decade, but then I was living in smaller towns, smaller mom'n'pop theatres, cheaper ticket prices, different vibe.
Now I'm back in the city, actually all the theatres are the corporate run theme park style megaplexes where seats start at $15-, twice as much if you want your seat to vibrate or whatever the gimmick is. So I've been avoiding films I would have gone to see previously. Like you I wait for the dvd and borrow it from the library.
New James Bond would definitely be a special ocassion, but I was already not looking forward to the dehumanizing megaplex experience.
Still, I believe the big screen is the way these films are meant to be experienced, no matter how good our home theatres might be, noisy crowds and all.
Hey, CP, right back at you, buddy!
My first in-theater Bond, believe or not, was For Your Eyes Only -- my pal's birthday party. I was 13 or 14. My mom and dad let me watch Bond on TV, but though they were fans, they were concerned about what might not be cut out they didn't want me to see. To put that in perspective, they wouldn't take me to King Kong in 1976 because there's that brief bit of the lovely, lovely Jessica Lange topless. How times have changed.
But I'd been watching them on ABC for years. In fact, it weirded me out that different people were playing Bond when I was a kid, haha.
It's $10-12 a ticket here. Our multiplexes have the gigantic screens, but most are smaller and in rooms that are the size of the second-run theaters when I was a kid. So, that makes the experience even less impressive, like just being in a bigger living room.
The issue for me, though, is almost no movie today benefits from being on a larger screen. It's not like the older movies where the projection literally changes the quality of the image. For instance, I've seen 35 mm projections of Rear Window and North by Northwest. The color is astounding and the focus -- with the people sharper and the backgrounds typically less so -- make the images pop so they're almost 3D. But the image quality on a large LCD and a movie screen these days, especially if it's a digital recording being projected, is virtually the same. There's not much except the habit of seeing something on the big screen that is the draw.
A handful of directors know how to make a movie today that takes advantage of the bigger screen. The Coen Brothers, for instance, know how to frame and show images in creative and still traditional ways. For instance, the shootout in No Country for Old Men, where the guy is running from Chigurh, is rather brilliantly done, as are the scenes earlier where he comes across the drug massacre. But most directors today just shoot a movie like a TV show, with lots of close ups and CGI. If it's filmed like a TV show, I might as well just watch it on TV.
I do hear some talk about Bond among younger people, but naturally it's nowhere near the level it must have been in the 60's and 70's. And I too feel there is less content for me at the cinema than there was before. It looks like most of the movies are superhero movies or animation.
Personally, I think Eon have become complacent with James Bond. The biggest mistake was the long periods between films. There is no excuse for it.
The gap that James Bond leaves by the years between films will always be quickly filled by other 'heroes'.
I think that the majority of people who go to watch a James Bond film are not fans of Bond but just fans of action films. They would not really care if no more Bond films were made.
I would like to see a film every two years when the next actor takes over. I don't think this is unreasonable.
I think a Bond film every two years is urealistic and could frankly damage the quality of the movies. 3-4 years is more realistic and an ideal solution. Also ideally EON should hire more than one team of scriptwriters to have stories ready earlier and cut the time between movies. They did this after LTK.
I realised scripts have to be tailored to the next Bond actor, that's more about the amounts and type of humor, speach patterns, the physical ability of the actor etc. Treatments and first drafts shouldn't be a problem. Even if the scripts aren't filmed they'll probably use elements from unused scripts, as they did in several of Brosnan's Bonds.
Comments
If this is correct I think this is the right move. Vaccinations will start for the general populations in around April (just a guestimation) and old people and high-risk groups are not the core audience for Bond. Perhaps for "Death on the Nile" :v
But most of the people who want to get vaccinated will be by November, at least in the developed world that's bought up 80% of this year's vaccines. If EON confirms November soon they can keep their powder dry for the fall.
VOD, streaming etc has worked out well for many lesser releases but the two experiments with big tentpole films has been a bit of a bumpy ride. Mulan suffered as many people balked at the idea of paying a premium fee (around $30.00) on top of the monthly fee they pay for Disney+. Wonder Woman 1984, while initial numbers were high, at least people could see it without paying a premium in addition to the monthly HBO Max fee but the film is not very good and there were technical problems with streaming the film because of bandwidth limitations and the large number of people trying to stream the film especially during the holiday season. When I watched WW 1984 on New Years Eve the film froze on 3 occassions and I had to wait 15 minutes plus for it to buffer each time....not a fun experience, especially for such a meh film. If that was NTTD to having those kind of technical issues, I would have been livid.
I think "old" people are the target audience for a film series going back to 1962. A new James Bond film in the theaters is like a classic rock band touring yet again, of interest mostly to who grew up with the series. The young folk have other film franchises they regard as their own.
and maybe like the classic rock audience, the potential market for a new Bond film is more valuable to the theatre owners because the older nostalgia driven market has more money to spend (middle aged boomers with grownup salaries, retired folk with pensions) and is more likely to go to an actual theatre rather than be content streaming.
IG: @thebondarchives
Check it out, you won’t be disappointed
I think they need a date secured far in advance in case they do want to release it then. And I like having a date to look forward to, even if it does change again. It would feel less hopeful to me if there were no release date.
Exactly. If it's playing in theaters, they need to plant a flag and "claim" a weekend. An interesting wrinkle in that model is that now no one knows exactly when all the WB films will be hitting HBO Max, as the release date strategy no longer applies.
I've never seen the cinema audience at James Bond movies broken down by age, so I can't say anything for sure. I'm guessing the average age is higer than for superhero movies, but I can't remember noticing many gray-haired people at the cinema when a Bond movie is shown. My impression is that old people mainly show up for epics about WWII, the royal family or ideally both.
I'm not even sure we define "old" the same way. Here people above the age 70, especially those living at homes for the elderly and often aged 90+ get vaccinated now. You may have thought about a slightly younger age group.
I was thinking about me, and folks on this forum who have a year or two on me. I'm feeling pretty ancient and obsolete these days. But I'm definitely nowhere near the front of the vaccine line, not should I be.
But real point I was trying to make was the Classic Rock audience analogy, I do think the Bond fan demographic may skew similarly and be more inclined to see a film in a theatre, whenever possible again, even if it is already available to stream online.
I think they could release this film online now, make some of their money back, and we'd all still go see the exact same film in the theatre whenever it is possible even if it is a year later.
Maybe make the eventual theatrical release an extended version or Directors Cut, just as an added attraction.
here is some more to add on the redelay delay hehe
Nice to get it cleared up. But I think it will be reasonably safe to go to the cinema by November. Enough people will be vaccines by then and we can't expect life to be 100% safe.
Among people closer to my own age or older, going to the movie theater is not so big a deal anymore. We've done it enough, the experience is hardly different than it was 30-40 years ago except more expensive, and in particular, there is shared agreement that there's not much to see worth the trip. Bond movies draw a few more of us, but watching a blu-ray on a 70-inch LCD is good enough. Now, most of my close friends would probably be defined as film snobs, whatever that means, but that doesn't mean we're not averse to taking a chance on something.
Among people much younger than me, I don't hear much buzz about Bond. Now, obviously, somebody is going to see the movies or else they wouldn't be making hundreds of millions. But when I've raised the issue of NTTD being delayed, I haven't heard much in the way of anticipation or disappointment. I noticed the last go around with SPECTRE, the audience was mixed between young people and middle agers. I may have seen some gray heads, but if so, they didn't stand out.
Still, somebody is going to go see it, and if the past holds true, a lot of somebodies. But probably not me in the theater. I can check the DVD out of the library and watch it on the big screen at home.
Tbh I can wait...
You're a year younger than me, so we're the same demographic. Was the Spy Who Loved Me also your first?
I saw a lot of films in the theatre over the last decade, but then I was living in smaller towns, smaller mom'n'pop theatres, cheaper ticket prices, different vibe.
Now I'm back in the city, actually all the theatres are the corporate run theme park style megaplexes where seats start at $15-, twice as much if you want your seat to vibrate or whatever the gimmick is. So I've been avoiding films I would have gone to see previously. Like you I wait for the dvd and borrow it from the library.
New James Bond would definitely be a special ocassion, but I was already not looking forward to the dehumanizing megaplex experience.
Still, I believe the big screen is the way these films are meant to be experienced, no matter how good our home theatres might be, noisy crowds and all.
I think Mission Impossible 7 has a release date of Nov. 19th.
I'll fix it immediately.
Surely, after all this delay, Eon will not wait until after NTTD is released to start work?
They could have had a script all ready to go since filming on NTTD ended?!
Great suggestion. Done and done!
I'd hope that they've been putting some serious thought and work into the next Bond film, but I don't have any great confidence that the current situation will result in a shorter than usual gap between NTTD and Bond 26. There is probably doubt at EON about where to go next with the series, and possibly a lot may depend on how NTTD does financially and perhaps critically as well.
My first in-theater Bond, believe or not, was For Your Eyes Only -- my pal's birthday party. I was 13 or 14. My mom and dad let me watch Bond on TV, but though they were fans, they were concerned about what might not be cut out they didn't want me to see. To put that in perspective, they wouldn't take me to King Kong in 1976 because there's that brief bit of the lovely, lovely Jessica Lange topless. How times have changed.
But I'd been watching them on ABC for years. In fact, it weirded me out that different people were playing Bond when I was a kid, haha.
It's $10-12 a ticket here. Our multiplexes have the gigantic screens, but most are smaller and in rooms that are the size of the second-run theaters when I was a kid. So, that makes the experience even less impressive, like just being in a bigger living room.
The issue for me, though, is almost no movie today benefits from being on a larger screen. It's not like the older movies where the projection literally changes the quality of the image. For instance, I've seen 35 mm projections of Rear Window and North by Northwest. The color is astounding and the focus -- with the people sharper and the backgrounds typically less so -- make the images pop so they're almost 3D. But the image quality on a large LCD and a movie screen these days, especially if it's a digital recording being projected, is virtually the same. There's not much except the habit of seeing something on the big screen that is the draw.
A handful of directors know how to make a movie today that takes advantage of the bigger screen. The Coen Brothers, for instance, know how to frame and show images in creative and still traditional ways. For instance, the shootout in No Country for Old Men, where the guy is running from Chigurh, is rather brilliantly done, as are the scenes earlier where he comes across the drug massacre. But most directors today just shoot a movie like a TV show, with lots of close ups and CGI. If it's filmed like a TV show, I might as well just watch it on TV.
The gap that James Bond leaves by the years between films will always be quickly filled by other 'heroes'.
I think that the majority of people who go to watch a James Bond film are not fans of Bond but just fans of action films. They would not really care if no more Bond films were made.
I would like to see a film every two years when the next actor takes over. I don't think this is unreasonable.
I realised scripts have to be tailored to the next Bond actor, that's more about the amounts and type of humor, speach patterns, the physical ability of the actor etc. Treatments and first drafts shouldn't be a problem. Even if the scripts aren't filmed they'll probably use elements from unused scripts, as they did in several of Brosnan's Bonds.