Bond 23 delayed even further?

Alec 006 · January 2010

Work has been halted on the next Bond movie as reported here.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/149406/For-sale-James-Bond

Of course I am sure the Bond franchise will continue somewhere but this will most probably slow down the arrival of the next DC installment.

Loeffelholz · January 2010

Not to worry; in the grand tradtion of the tabloid press, they're recycling some old news with a fresh spin. We've known it was going to be a 3-year gap between Bonds almost since QoS came out. The state of MGM's ownership is a concern, but I doubt they'll refrain from starting pre-production on the one property that has guaranteed profit written all over it. Until we get into the fall without news of pre-production being underway, or get some other bad news in the interim, I think a November '11 release remains on track.

zig zag · January 2010

Loeffelholz wrote:

Not to worry; in the grand tradtion of the tabloid press, they're recycling some old news with a fresh spin. We've known it was going to be a 3-year gap between Bonds almost since QoS came out. The state of MGM's ownership is a concern, but I doubt they'll refrain from starting pre-production on the one property that has guaranteed profit written all over it. Until we get into the fall without news of pre-production being underway, or get some other bad news in the interim, I think a November '11 release remains on track.

Here,here. I agree.The press, I **** em !!

Yankee Mike Bravo · January 2010

The sale of MGM, which owns the Pink Panther franchise, comes after a year in which it released only the failed remake of Fame. Potential bidders include Time Warner, Lionsgate and News Corp.

I'm surprised not to see more international interest, like from sovereign wealth funds, Bollywood, China and Japan. The world loves American movies, and it'd be big bragging rights for any non-USAian to snap up an American studio.

chrisno1 · January 2010

To be fair, this wasn't a "news story"... standard movie gossip I thought. Having said that, I have my doubts about Eons abiltity to pull Bond23 out of the bag by Nov '11, esp as any MGM takeover could be a protracted affair and may not even start until the new financial year, when profits/loss acccounts will be up to date.

With that in mind MGW & BB are merely playing safe by putting Bond23 on the back- burner for a few months. Bond will be back I am sure.

Personal bet? They will wait until 2012. I've said it before, but it is the 50th anniversary year and I can see Eon thinking "what can we do to mark 50 years of the 007 franchise?"

Let's all watch the space!

HowardB · January 2010

I think MGM will be sold; it's just a matter of sorting out the financial pieces. Once the new ownership takes over, I would think that Bond 23 will be fast tracked (Bond is a key to MGM having any chance of pulling out of the financial muck). A late 2011 release is still a good bet (as was reinterated in previous posts, EON was planning on a three year wait for 23 anyway). Summer 2012 would also not be out of the question depending what the potential competition might be (no more Potters, Ironman II is this summer, maybe Spiderman 4?). I'm not too worried about Craig "aging out". He looks to be one of those facial and body types who may not look much different at 50 than he did at 40 (and with all the emphasis on fitness and working out he won't go to pot like some past Bonds). My preference is still late 2011 as I'm overdue for a Bond fix and am always curious where they will take it next.

Oracabessa · January 2010

This is what I read today, which led me to check for info here at AJB. The bottom line seems to be the financing. If EON was ponying up for production costs and all they were looking to MGM for was distribution, then that wouldn't be a big deal. As it is, the few productions MGM does have on it's slate won't be able to move forward until a sale is completed. After that it's a scheduling issue. What else does Craig have on his plate?

http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/01/04/james-bond-23-put-on-hold/

darenhat · January 2010

It's certainly an interesting dilemma. I'm not exactly sure how entangled Bond is with MGM and how much Eon actually holds. If financing was an issue, I'd think that Eon would be able to get another studio to pony up the bucks, provided they have the power to proceed with Bond as they wish. I never do pretend to understand the intricacies of legalism, especially where Bond is concerned.

I can't help but think of how Dalton's tenure was interrupted due to legal problems after his second film. Although, in this instance, I certainly wouldn't expect a serious delay, since it's in no one's best interest to prolong a business complication that prevents MGM from making any movies at all.

Oracabessa · January 2010

Well, from MGM's point of view, unless they are planning a fire sale and completely (and for good) shuttering their historic studio, then they really need to keep Bond going. Of course they need a stronger slate of films besides Bond, too. I can't help but to think that the Sam Mendes rumor has more to do with the Studio courting potential suitors and/or re-assuring those that they owe. Having a a tent pole project underway (with a built-in audience) certainly looks better than having nothing ready to go.

On the other hand, could this be Eon posturing to get MGM to move one way or the other (sell or try to continue on it's own).

"The beleaguered studio has left open the door to continue operating as a standalone entity or forming some kind of strategic partnership if MGM's 140 debtholders agree to do so, possibly through a prepackaged bankruptcy."

Here's the full Variety article.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118013365.html?categoryid=13&cs=1

HowardB · January 2010

I bet Sony would love to just buy MGM's Bond interests (as would some other studios). I'd personally love to see Bond back under the original United Artists logo.

PPK 7.65mm · February 2010

Hopefully soon the sale of MGM will be done and dusted, so Eon can move forward with Bond 23.

Besides the James Bond franchise has been MGM's ace in the hole since the start of the 2000's, with out Bond MGM would have had to close up shop some time ago given their track record of making really bad movies.

Mortimer_McGee · March 2010

Hopefully we will know more about MGM's fate soon. However, we are getting awfully close to that March 19th deadline they set for bids, so even this close, who knows where it will go from here.

Bond will be back. That much is almost certain. It's just a matter of when, and to whom the rights will belong to when he does.

fire and ice · March 2010

3years script treatment is not a bad thing. Craig has established himself now, be interesting to see where they go with his third movie, hopefully raise the bar further :-)

j.blades · March 2010

This probably means that Craig will only be able to this last film as Bond for, he would be nearly 50 when its time for bond 24, and knowing craig he'll probably want to leave on a high note. Its a shame though, if it were'nt for all these delays he could've done one more. And i know what your thinking "but his contract says he'll be around for four", but his contract only stippulates 3 movies with a possible 4th and as i stated above he'll skip out for the fourth.

Of course this also means even a longer delay between Bond 23 and Bond 24 because we'd need to find a new bond first before filming can commence. Its amazing how one delay can snowball, it really does suck.

thesecretagent · March 2010

I had a chat with him today and he said he's well up for a fourth.

j.blades · March 2010

But by then he'll be around 50 years old.

superdaddy · March 2010

If 23 comes out in say 2012 after all the finacial mess is sorted Dan will be 44 then 24 comes out 2014 Dans 46 not two old at all he could even do 25 in say 2016 and he will only be 48 only 2 years older than Sir Rog when he first took up the role and 2 years younger than Brosnan when he did DAD.
Also 2012 the 50th annivesary what a way to celebrate with a new movie and just think Dan could do with all plausability the last 3 remaining Fleming titles The Hildebrand Rarity[my favorite by the way],Risico and Property Of A Lady as to Judie Denchbeing in the next 3 I dont knowbut Iam talking about a purely age thing hereshe will be about 80 by 2016.
Then in 2019 new Bond Henry Cavill who will be 36,new M and Moneypenny played by Gemma Aterton who will be arouned 33,ok I
know she played Fields but who cares she would make a great Moneypenny.
Hopefully this just might cheer some people up that even a delay could still work out ok.
Hope every one has a great day.

thesecretagent · March 2010

The age thing is relative. Craig will look just as good when he nears fifty - but that's a long while off. Brosnan's well over fifty and would be quite capable to step back in IMO.

j.blades · March 2010

I see what you mean but, one must keep in mind that this is Bond at the begining of his carrer, when he was around 35- 37, I mean to have an actor thats nearing 50 (and i'm a fan of Craig dont get me wrong but, to) play a man in his late thirties, a man in the prime of his career, might be a bit of a stretch and Craig knows that, as hes read all the books. I dont know, something tells me that he'll resign before the fourth film for continuity sake. 8-) or something like that.

HowardB · March 2010

Hmm, an actor nearing 50 playing someone in their mid to late 30's.....that never happens lol.

zaphod · March 2010

superdaddy wrote:

If 23 comes out in say 2012 after all the finacial mess is sorted Dan will be 44 then 24 comes out 2014 Dans 46 not two old at all he could even do 25 in say 2016 and he will only be 48 only 2 years older than Sir Rog when he first took up the role and 2 years younger than Brosnan when he did DAD.
Also 2012 the 50th annivesary what a way to celebrate with a new movie and just think Dan could do with all plausability the last 3 remaining Fleming titles The Hildebrand Rarity[my favorite by the way],Risico and Property Of A Lady as to Judie Denchbeing in the next 3 I dont knowbut Iam talking about a purely age thing hereshe will be about 80 by 2016.
Then in 2019 new Bond Henry Cavill who will be 36,new M and Moneypenny played by Gemma Aterton who will be arouned 33,ok I
know she played Fields but who cares she would make a great Moneypenny.
Hopefully this just might cheer some people up that even a delay could still work out ok.
Hope every one has a great day.

I have to disagree. One of the real changes in action movies in recent years since (dare I say it?) the Bourne movies is that the bar for action, and men of action has raised significantly. Indeed DC himself has played no small part in this. We can debate furious editing and hand-held camera usage as much as we like, but a creaky Sir Rog, or even worse an impalusable and obvious double just would not cut it any longer. Audineces, and perhaps particualrly Bond audinences need to believe that the guy on screen is capable of doing what we see. We know of course that he cant do all of it, but he must be credible. Therefore age is a factor. Brosnan looks terrific at the moment but I doubt that he could convince unless the story self consciously addressed the issue of 'aging action man' within the narrative arc (I would love to see this BTW) but Bond in movies has to be permanently at the top of his game.

j.blades · March 2010

Exactly {[]

thesecretagent · March 2010

j.blades wrote:

I see what you mean but, one must keep in mind that this is Bond at the begining of his carrer, when he was around 35- 37, I mean to have an actor thats nearing 50 (and i'm a fan of Craig dont get me wrong but, to) play a man in his late thirties, a man in the prime of his career, might be a bit of a stretch and Craig knows that, as hes read all the books. I dont know, something tells me that he'll resign before the fourth film for continuity sake. 8-) or something like that.

If continuity was an issue then Craig's M should have been a man - as she had already debuted in Goldeneye, Q should have been present and Felix should have been white. Strangely, both characters work and Q is hardly missed, so Craig should be able to pull off acting the part of a man ten years younger than himself. And as Bond ages about a year or two per book, I should imaging that in his mid to late forties, and undoubtedly extremely fit, Craig should be able to pull it off, as he'd be about the same age as the man he is playing. Besides, if actors only prtrayed people of their own age, we'd only be left with Twilight and Highschool Musical. :v

j.blades · March 2010

Right you are, we may get a fourth but, you cant deny that little plausibility of Dan walking out on it, it is very plausible, there may be another delay, which would make him over 50, see one can't anticipate stuff like this, however delays have been known to happen, and something tells me, maybe its intuition or an odd feeling, that craig wont make it for a fourth.

Loeffelholz · March 2010

Time will tell. He'll have the part until he gets bored with it, I think...and that could happen anytime.

thesecretagent · March 2010

I've always seen Craig as an actor who would use Bond as a springboard. I mean, he wasn't a huge household name when he got the role. I think Defiance was his best role to date (along with CR). Would he have got that without having played Bond? I see Craig walking when it suits, but not because he's personally worried about continuity. I still think he's the sort of guy to be fit and youthful enough to take on the role in five or six years though.

Loeffelholz · March 2010

No doubt about it. He's got all the tools to do it as long as he enjoys it. Brozzer used Bond money to start Irish Dreamtime, his own production company---Craig will likely do something similar, and good for him! Personally, I hope he continues to enjoy Bond, give it his own spin, and stick around for another couple or three pictures B-)

ExpatJB · March 2010

Loeffelholz wrote:

No doubt about it. He's got all the tools to do it as long as he enjoys it. Brozzer used Bond money to start Irish Dreamtime, his own production company---Craig will likely do something similar, and good for him! Personally, I hope he continues to enjoy Bond, give it his own spin, and stick around for another couple or three pictures B-)

I couldnt agree more. I just wish they would get on with it.

Perhaps they will rattle out two back to back this time, like many other franchises do these days. ?:) As long as it doesnt impact quality of course.

Barbel · March 2010

Loeffelholz wrote:

Time will tell. He'll have the part until he gets bored with it, I think...and that could happen anytime.

Not soon enough... I for one am thoroughly bored with the current direction the Bonds have been taking; CR is a classic mainly due to the Fleming elements (about time- that was the 3rd attempt!) but QoS lacks the distinctive 007 ingredients and I couldn't sit through another dose of that. Baby thrown out with the bathwater, methinks.

ExpatJB · March 2010

Heres a thought.

If Die Another Day was released next month, would everyone be happy with the direction Bond had moved to, post CR and QoS?

Because weve come and awfully long way from that kind of fancy.

Bond 23 delayed even further?

Comments