I guess that all could mean:
a) She is not in Bond 25
b) If she is in Bond 25, filming on the horse picture could be finished (or at least her scenes) by the end of November
c) It's nice that she got another nice part in another film
d) or....drum roll...Bond 25 is delayed
Lea Seydoux is also doing a movie where she plays the wife of Anders Baasmo Christiansen, who is world famous in Norway
The movie has no listed realease date or even year, but 2019 looks likely.
Oh Mr Bond. Why are you making us wait sooooo long. And still you get so much money!
"Sometimes the salaries quoted are projections based on potential earnings that are tied in with the star having a percentage of the gross."
During the Sony leak the productions costs for Boyle's terrible Steve Jobs movie were revealed. The "salaries" for the "stars" were surprisingly low. Like $100,000 and such like. These days its' probably mostly residuals paid after reaching breakeven. Like with the recent Avengers movie. Breakeven is apparently $600 million. Then the stars get their big pay from the "hollywood profits"
Forgive the painful attack of cynicism. I'm tired of the way EON is handling the franchise. 4 years between installments is simply a joke.
I can't wait for DC to move on. I think BB and MGW should also move on. Their stewardship has been patchy. And that is being generous.
Sigh. My impatience will pass. I've been a fan for decades. And will remain so.
Oh Mr Bond. Why are you making us wait sooooo long. And still you get so much money!
"Sometimes the salaries quoted are projections based on potential earnings that are tied in with the star having a percentage of the gross."
During the Sony leak the productions costs for Boyle's terrible Steve Jobs movie were revealed. The "salaries" for the "stars" were surprisingly low. Like $100,000 and such like. These days its' probably mostly residuals paid after reaching breakeven. Like with the recent Avengers movie. Breakeven is apparently $600 million. Then the stars get their big pay from the "hollywood profits"
Forgive the painful attack of cynicism. I'm tired of the way EON is handling the franchise. 4 years between installments is simply a joke.
I can't wait for DC to move on. I think BB and MGW should also move on. Their stewardship has been patchy. And that is being generous.
Sigh. My impatience will pass. I've been a fan for decades. And will remain so.
Your opinion is your opinion and you are entitled to it. However the popularity of the Craig Bond films would say differently.
My personal opinion is that they have been inconsistent but also had the gumption and foresite to do things a bit differently with the Craig films.
As far as the time between films, I think most would agree that four years is a bit much.
IMO, three years would probably be about right all things considered.
I think we, the true fans, always hold out hope that they will hit it out of the park with the next one. Having Boyle on board with a script by John Hodge gives me hope and optimism for the Craig era to go out on a high note.
On that basis, they should have started filming that Richard Curtis comedy by now, maybe even this week. And isn't social media brilliant. This 1 May tweet by a BBC reporter is a picture of them starting work on the Curtis/Boyle film. https://twitter.com/WaveneyGuy/status/991279539534880768
At least we know principal photography has started and I would imagine that it will be finished by August. I understand it usually takes 3-4 months to shoot a normal movie - not a Bond blockbuster, obviously. How you oversee the completion of a script for a $200 million movie while you're filming something else is anyone's guess.
Inflation adjusted figures, and recent raw box office numbers, confirm that Craig has been very popular.Depending how it is calculated CR, Skyfall and Spectre can be said to have performed as well as Thunderball and Goldfinger.
Creatively, Casino Royale is a masterpiece in the Bond movie canon IMHO. That is no mean achievement. And, I will admit, much of that is down to Craig's modern portrayal of JB. That can't be denied.
Measured by ticket admissions, of course, tells another story. Thunderball had over 150 million worldwide admissions. Goldfinger is the only other one to even come close to that. None of Craig's movies would even come near that number of cinema admissions. But, hey, different era, I guess.
However, I'm not enthusiastic about this combination of Boyle and Hodge for Bond 25. That's just personal. Maybe what Bond needs is a touch of Trainspotting added to the mix. I predict something idiosyncratic.
On that basis, they should have started filming that Richard Curtis comedy by now, maybe even this week. And isn't social media brilliant. This 1 May tweet by a BBC reporter is a picture of them starting work on the Curtis/Boyle film. https://twitter.com/WaveneyGuy/status/991279539534880768
At least we know principal photography has started and I would imagine that it will be finished by August. I understand it usually takes 3-4 months to shoot a normal movie - not a Bond blockbuster, obviously. How you oversee the completion of a script for a $200 million movie while you're filming something else is anyone's guess.
He (Boyle) seemed very relaxed, confident and optimistic. Filming wrapped here last night. I'm not sure how much more they need to do They are currently in the process of taking stuff down and moving out.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Oh Mr Bond. Why are you making us wait sooooo long. And still you get so much money!
"Sometimes the salaries quoted are projections based on potential earnings that are tied in with the star having a percentage of the gross."
During the Sony leak the productions costs for Boyle's terrible Steve Jobs movie were revealed. The "salaries" for the "stars" were surprisingly low. Like $100,000 and such like. These days its' probably mostly residuals paid after reaching breakeven. Like with the recent Avengers movie. Breakeven is apparently $600 million. Then the stars get their big pay from the "hollywood profits"
Forgive the painful attack of cynicism. I'm tired of the way EON is handling the franchise. 4 years between installments is simply a joke.
I can't wait for DC to move on. I think BB and MGW should also move on. Their stewardship has been patchy. And that is being generous.
Sigh. My impatience will pass. I've been a fan for decades. And will remain so.
Your opinion is your opinion and you are entitled to it. However the popularity of the Craig Bond films would say differently.
My personal opinion is that they have been inconsistent but also had the gumption and foresite to do things a bit differently with the Craig films.
As far as the time between films, I think most would agree that four years is a bit much.
IMO, three years would probably be about right all things considered.
I think we, the true fans, always hold out hope that they will hit it out of the park with the next one. Having Boyle on board with a script by John Hodge gives me hope and optimism for the Craig era to go out on a high note.
I think most of us are unhappy about the gap. I agree the Craig tenure has been a mixed bag, but undeniably successful. When the dust has settled I think an interesting discussion will ensue re Daniel's influence (co stars, Director, script etc) A big point for me is how much of the delay has been about waiting for DC to commit. It may have been a big factor, but my guess is its just one of a number of reasons driving the hiatus. The really really interesting thing is what happens after 25. For the time being I'm optimistic that this could be fantastic and a great end for the Craig era. Here's hoping...
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
I agree on the huge wait and personally Don't believe any actor is worth putting a film on hold for four years. Bond is the star and the next actor will also have great success as will the the guy after that.
Then again I will forgive them everything if they give us something with Bond 25 as good as CR.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
He (Boyle) seemed very relaxed, confident and optimistic. Filming wrapped here last night. I'm not sure how much more they need to do They are currently in the process of taking stuff down and moving out.
I thought your previous comments about talking to Boyle were humorous. Is this comment genuine or are you joking again? If genuine, what's your role in film making?
Scrub that question, I just saw your post about it; you were there as your wife works in local radio. OK.
Interesting that Boyle is confident about a December shoot despite the apparent reduced pre-production time.
I wonder if the reason he is not official yet is that he doesn't have a contract as of now because of the legal implications and the fact that it, and other aspects of production, are dependent on distributor studio funding?
Measured by ticket admissions, of course, tells another story. Thunderball had over 150 million worldwide admissions. Goldfinger is the only other one to even come close to that. None of Craig's movies would even come near that number of cinema admissions. But, hey, different era, I guess.
It's really hard to compare because the eras are so different. In the 60's, the movie theaters were not competing with DVD's, premium cable TV, streaming services and of course giant widescreen HD TV's with High Def Surround sound systems. Unless you were willing to wait years to see a low def, edited for content, panned, scanned and cropped, interrupted by commercials version of a film on commercial network TV (remember the disgraceful butchering that was done to OHMSS) you went to a proper theater to see a film. Also, GF and TB were the peak of Bondomania. It was a cultural and entertainment phenomenon. I was there in the 60's with lines wrapping around a city block for GF and TB. When GF and TB opened in NYC, theaters had 'round the clock showings.
Measured by ticket admissions, of course, tells another story. Thunderball had over 150 million worldwide admissions. Goldfinger is the only other one to even come close to that. None of Craig's movies would even come near that number of cinema admissions. But, hey, different era, I guess.
It's really hard to compare because the eras are so different. In the 60's, the movie theaters were not competing with DVD's, premium cable TV, streaming services and of course giant widescreen HD TV's with High Def Surround sound systems. Unless you were willing to wait years to see a low def, edited for content, panned, scanned and cropped, interrupted by commercials version of a film on commercial network TV (remember the disgraceful butchering that was done to OHMSS) you went to a proper theater to see a film. Also, GF and TB were the peak of Bondomania. It was a cultural and entertainment phenomenon. I was there in the 60's with lines wrapping around a city block for GF and TB. When GF and TB opened in NYC, theaters had 'round the clock showings.
I've been told by guys who were around during the Connery films like yourself that Skyfall is as close as we'll probably get to recapturing that Bondmania in the modern era.
He (Boyle) seemed very relaxed, confident and optimistic. Filming wrapped here last night. I'm not sure how much more they need to do They are currently in the process of taking stuff down and moving out.
I thought your previous comments about talking to Boyle were humorous. Is this comment genuine or are you joking again? If genuine, what's your role in film making?
Scrub that question, I just saw your post about it; you were there as your wife works in local radio. OK.
Interesting that Boyle is confident about a December shoot despite the apparent reduced pre-production time.
I wonder if the reason he is not official yet is that he doesn't have a contract as of now because of the legal implications and the fact that it, and other aspects of production, are dependent on distributor studio funding?
Not quite.its just that he is shooting his current film where I live and I literally bumped into him (it's a small place)
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Depending on your view of capitalism and the movie business, you may think waiting for Craig to make his mind up, even when he said he'd only return "for the money" and Variety reporting Craig is to get $25 million... you could argue the whole thing stinks.
A new actor would cost a fraction of that fee. And I'm sure the new guy wouldn't moan about the hard work etc. Personally I wish Craig would leave the role. He's not worth 25 million and it's doubtful Bond 25 will break a billion.
I think we should all soak in the lead up to Bond 25 and the film - even if it doesn’t reach the heights of CR or Skyfall - because we’ll probably end up waiting five years for Bond 26. This one just feels like the end of an era, and maybe not just the Craig era.
Depending on your view of capitalism and the movie business, you may think waiting for Craig to make his mind up, even when he said he'd only return "for the money" and Variety reporting Craig is to get $25 million... you could argue the whole thing stinks.
A new actor would cost a fraction of that fee. And I'm sure the new guy wouldn't moan about the hard work etc. Personally I wish Craig would leave the role. He's not worth 25 million and it's doubtful Bond 25 will break a billion.
Not a fan, I take it.
And it's not the worst thing in the world for a film star's movie not to "break a billion."
I agree on the huge wait and personally Don't believe any actor is worth putting a film on hold for four years. Bond is the star and the next actor will also have great success as will the the guy after that.
Then again I will forgive them everything if they give us something with Bond 25 as good as CR.
That is the ONLY reason I will forgive them for making us wait 4 years. They can't blame Writer's Guild strikes on this one. (Quantum) Maybe they're just trying to avoid the inevitable renewal which will be needed after DC.
Inflation adjusted figures, and recent raw box office numbers, confirm that Craig has been very popular.Depending how it is calculated CR, Skyfall and Spectre can be said to have performed as well as Thunderball and Goldfinger.
...
Measured by ticket admissions, of course, tells another story. Thunderball had over 150 million worldwide admissions. Goldfinger is the only other one to even come close to that. None of Craig's movies would even come near that number of cinema admissions. But, hey, different era, I guess.
...
thanks for the stats. I would never have guessed Craigs films were comparable to Goldfinger/Thunderball in ticket sales. Those two were the Titanic/Avatar of their day, and everybody's always complaining Craig's films aren't competing with this franchise or that franchise. Individual admissions are the measure to look at, rather than total cash returns.
It still may be hard to compare. In those days, movies were first run for months and months, and then returned the next year for double features, small neighbourhood theatres, drive-ins etc. These days, if a film does not break box office records the very first weekend, it is gone.
But after that brief run at the theatres a new film is almost immediately available on dvd, nettflixx etc. I presume that gets measured, or should since that's how most folks do end up viewing new films (theatre going in general is unpopular). Don't know how they measured all the second-run ticket sales back in the day, let alone Sunday Night ABC broadcasts a decade later.
Still, the general point is Craig's Bond movies do put the bums in the seats, so why mess with success? And as popular as Goldfinger/Thunderball once were, many of the original audience are unfortunately no longer with us, whereas Craig's new generation of fans are precisely the young cash-silly demographic big film distributors are aiming for. So if I was a cigar smoking executive, that is who I'd be catering to. Meaning we can probably expect more of the same.
So I'm going to quit worrying about Bond25. When it comes out I'll see it, of course, but there's other films that scratch my itch. The trailer for The Incredibles sequel has glimpses of a Adam style villain's HQ and hints of Barry style music. Brad Bird and PIXAR know what I want to see.
I agree on the huge wait and personally Don't believe any actor is worth putting a film on hold for four years. Bond is the star and the next actor will also have great success as will the the guy after that.
Then again I will forgive them everything if they give us something with Bond 25 as good as CR.
That is the ONLY reason I will forgive them for making us wait 4 years. They can't blame Writer's Guild strikes on this one. (Quantum) Maybe they're just trying to avoid the inevitable renewal which will be needed after DC.
Opposite to what they had done with Pierce Brosnan, feeling like they had to re-boot and move on or risk becoming irrelevant and passe I truly believe that EON was not ready to move on from Craig and was willing to wait rather than re-casting prematurely.
Interestingly, the average time frame between the Mission Impossible films has been around 4 and a quarter years with the longest break being 6 years and the shortest 3 years for the latest film. Of course my guess is that Cruise has made a lot more films in between than Craig has but Cruise is also a much bigger star than Craig.
Depending on your view of capitalism and the movie business, you may think waiting for Craig to make his mind up, even when he said he'd only return "for the money" and Variety reporting Craig is to get $25 million... you could argue the whole thing stinks.
A new actor would cost a fraction of that fee. And I'm sure the new guy wouldn't moan about the hard work etc. Personally I wish Craig would leave the role. He's not worth 25 million and it's doubtful Bond 25 will break a billion.
I understand your view and to some extent share it. That said Daniel is highly bankable in the role and a new, cheaper actor represents a risk (remember Craig was once that cheaper actor) I think that after 25 the change will be welcome. That does not stop me really looking forward to this one. Perhaps even more so as for me Spectre was a disappointment so I'm hoping he goes out on a high. Like TP anything in shouting distance of CR would mean all is forgiven.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Interestingly, the average time frame between the Mission Impossible films has been around 4 and a quarter years with the longest break being 6 years and the shortest 3 years for the latest film. Of course my guess is that Cruise has made a lot more films in between than Craig has but Cruise is also a much bigger star than Craig.
That's a good point about the MI franchise. And,because of good creative decisions, it has gone from strength to strength. So, maybe we should trade off quality for length of wait. They might have waited until after the Writer's Guild strike with Quantum. Then we would have got a better movie.
Comments
I guess that all could mean:
a) She is not in Bond 25
b) If she is in Bond 25, filming on the horse picture could be finished (or at least her scenes) by the end of November
c) It's nice that she got another nice part in another film
d) or....drum roll...Bond 25 is delayed
I am leaning toward a or b
The movie has no listed realease date or even year, but 2019 looks likely.
"Sometimes the salaries quoted are projections based on potential earnings that are tied in with the star having a percentage of the gross."
During the Sony leak the productions costs for Boyle's terrible Steve Jobs movie were revealed. The "salaries" for the "stars" were surprisingly low. Like $100,000 and such like. These days its' probably mostly residuals paid after reaching breakeven. Like with the recent Avengers movie. Breakeven is apparently $600 million. Then the stars get their big pay from the "hollywood profits"
Forgive the painful attack of cynicism. I'm tired of the way EON is handling the franchise. 4 years between installments is simply a joke.
I can't wait for DC to move on. I think BB and MGW should also move on. Their stewardship has been patchy. And that is being generous.
Sigh. My impatience will pass. I've been a fan for decades. And will remain so.
Your opinion is your opinion and you are entitled to it. However the popularity of the Craig Bond films would say differently.
My personal opinion is that they have been inconsistent but also had the gumption and foresite to do things a bit differently with the Craig films.
As far as the time between films, I think most would agree that four years is a bit much.
IMO, three years would probably be about right all things considered.
I think we, the true fans, always hold out hope that they will hit it out of the park with the next one. Having Boyle on board with a script by John Hodge gives me hope and optimism for the Craig era to go out on a high note.
‘Yes I believe I’m contracted to be in it… but I think it’s not happening until the end of the year. I know as much as you do.’
http://metro.co.uk/2018/05/11/ben-whishaw-thrilled-danny-boyles-involvement-bond-25-7536555/?ito=cbshare
But, I guess contracted just refers to the standard 3 movie deal, and Bond 25 will be his third movie.
The Metro story also goes on to repeat an old quote of Boyle's from March, "I am working on a Richard Curtis script at the moment. We hope to start shooting that in 6 or 7 weeks," which is from a 14 March story in a US publication also called Metro.
https://www.metro.us/entertainment/movies/danny-boyle-confirms-that-he-is-directing-james-bond-25
On that basis, they should have started filming that Richard Curtis comedy by now, maybe even this week. And isn't social media brilliant. This 1 May tweet by a BBC reporter is a picture of them starting work on the Curtis/Boyle film.
https://twitter.com/WaveneyGuy/status/991279539534880768
And here's a local newspaper story about the start of filming.
http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/boyle-curtis-film-halesworth-1-5502437
At least we know principal photography has started and I would imagine that it will be finished by August. I understand it usually takes 3-4 months to shoot a normal movie - not a Bond blockbuster, obviously. How you oversee the completion of a script for a $200 million movie while you're filming something else is anyone's guess.
Creatively, Casino Royale is a masterpiece in the Bond movie canon IMHO. That is no mean achievement. And, I will admit, much of that is down to Craig's modern portrayal of JB. That can't be denied.
Measured by ticket admissions, of course, tells another story. Thunderball had over 150 million worldwide admissions. Goldfinger is the only other one to even come close to that. None of Craig's movies would even come near that number of cinema admissions. But, hey, different era, I guess.
However, I'm not enthusiastic about this combination of Boyle and Hodge for Bond 25. That's just personal. Maybe what Bond needs is a touch of Trainspotting added to the mix. I predict something idiosyncratic.
He (Boyle) seemed very relaxed, confident and optimistic. Filming wrapped here last night. I'm not sure how much more they need to do They are currently in the process of taking stuff down and moving out.
I think most of us are unhappy about the gap. I agree the Craig tenure has been a mixed bag, but undeniably successful. When the dust has settled I think an interesting discussion will ensue re Daniel's influence (co stars, Director, script etc) A big point for me is how much of the delay has been about waiting for DC to commit. It may have been a big factor, but my guess is its just one of a number of reasons driving the hiatus. The really really interesting thing is what happens after 25. For the time being I'm optimistic that this could be fantastic and a great end for the Craig era. Here's hoping...
Then again I will forgive them everything if they give us something with Bond 25 as good as CR.
I thought your previous comments about talking to Boyle were humorous. Is this comment genuine or are you joking again? If genuine, what's your role in film making?
Scrub that question, I just saw your post about it; you were there as your wife works in local radio. OK.
Interesting that Boyle is confident about a December shoot despite the apparent reduced pre-production time.
I wonder if the reason he is not official yet is that he doesn't have a contract as of now because of the legal implications and the fact that it, and other aspects of production, are dependent on distributor studio funding?
It's really hard to compare because the eras are so different. In the 60's, the movie theaters were not competing with DVD's, premium cable TV, streaming services and of course giant widescreen HD TV's with High Def Surround sound systems. Unless you were willing to wait years to see a low def, edited for content, panned, scanned and cropped, interrupted by commercials version of a film on commercial network TV (remember the disgraceful butchering that was done to OHMSS) you went to a proper theater to see a film. Also, GF and TB were the peak of Bondomania. It was a cultural and entertainment phenomenon. I was there in the 60's with lines wrapping around a city block for GF and TB. When GF and TB opened in NYC, theaters had 'round the clock showings.
Not quite.its just that he is shooting his current film where I live and I literally bumped into him (it's a small place)
A new actor would cost a fraction of that fee. And I'm sure the new guy wouldn't moan about the hard work etc. Personally I wish Craig would leave the role. He's not worth 25 million and it's doubtful Bond 25 will break a billion.
Not a fan, I take it.
And it's not the worst thing in the world for a film star's movie not to "break a billion."
That is the ONLY reason I will forgive them for making us wait 4 years. They can't blame Writer's Guild strikes on this one. (Quantum) Maybe they're just trying to avoid the inevitable renewal which will be needed after DC.
It still may be hard to compare. In those days, movies were first run for months and months, and then returned the next year for double features, small neighbourhood theatres, drive-ins etc. These days, if a film does not break box office records the very first weekend, it is gone.
But after that brief run at the theatres a new film is almost immediately available on dvd, nettflixx etc. I presume that gets measured, or should since that's how most folks do end up viewing new films (theatre going in general is unpopular). Don't know how they measured all the second-run ticket sales back in the day, let alone Sunday Night ABC broadcasts a decade later.
Still, the general point is Craig's Bond movies do put the bums in the seats, so why mess with success? And as popular as Goldfinger/Thunderball once were, many of the original audience are unfortunately no longer with us, whereas Craig's new generation of fans are precisely the young cash-silly demographic big film distributors are aiming for. So if I was a cigar smoking executive, that is who I'd be catering to. Meaning we can probably expect more of the same.
So I'm going to quit worrying about Bond25. When it comes out I'll see it, of course, but there's other films that scratch my itch. The trailer for The Incredibles sequel has glimpses of a Adam style villain's HQ and hints of Barry style music. Brad Bird and PIXAR know what I want to see.
Opposite to what they had done with Pierce Brosnan, feeling like they had to re-boot and move on or risk becoming irrelevant and passe I truly believe that EON was not ready to move on from Craig and was willing to wait rather than re-casting prematurely.
Interestingly, the average time frame between the Mission Impossible films has been around 4 and a quarter years with the longest break being 6 years and the shortest 3 years for the latest film. Of course my guess is that Cruise has made a lot more films in between than Craig has but Cruise is also a much bigger star than Craig.
http://metro.co.uk/2018/05/11/ben-whishaw-thrilled-danny-boyles-involvement-bond-25-7536555/
I understand your view and to some extent share it. That said Daniel is highly bankable in the role and a new, cheaper actor represents a risk (remember Craig was once that cheaper actor) I think that after 25 the change will be welcome. That does not stop me really looking forward to this one. Perhaps even more so as for me Spectre was a disappointment so I'm hoping he goes out on a high. Like TP anything in shouting distance of CR would mean all is forgiven.
That's a good point about the MI franchise. And,because of good creative decisions, it has gone from strength to strength. So, maybe we should trade off quality for length of wait. They might have waited until after the Writer's Guild strike with Quantum. Then we would have got a better movie.
It definitely won't be that, N24.
Will "Property of a Lady" work better?
I'd love to see them use another Fleming
Title, but my hopes aren't high.
Risiko is a very good title. But if the main villan is female, the odds of the title being "Property of a Lady" are pretty good.