Bond 25 Production Diary

1154315441546154815492565

Comments

  • Posts: 8,923
    I’m aware SP wasn’t their baby, but at the same time it was the most stale Bond outing we had gotten in a long time - if not ever. Not enough new, good ideas about it. From my understanding of the original script and what we got, there were both good and bad changes made.
  • edited May 2018 Posts: 2,879
    This is good. At least we won't have to put up with anymore wacky conspiracy theories about Craig being replaced even though he confirmed that he was returning on the Colbert show.

    Looking forward to finding out the new title and the plot. Let's hope Cashleypersia is wrong again like he was about naming the correct distributor. Just to clarrify, I'm not calling Cashley a liar. He might actually have someone close to Eon that's feeding him disinformation for various reasons. One of them being to test peoples' reactions to certain ideas and another to keep the media talking about Bond when there's nothing to discuss. For all we know the rookie MI6 agent might be the P&W subplot that they leaked to find out how that would go down and reconfirm their belief in Hodge's script being the way to go. Outside of Eon, who possibly knows?
  • Posts: 1,703
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I wonder how much of their script is going to be used, if any. Maybe they will use some ideas they liked from it? In any case, I bet P&W’s script and Hodge’s are radically different.

    If they used stuff from it P&W would still be credited....not sure on WGA specifics on how much but currently seems like this is completely Boyoe/Hodge's own idea
    Couple of questions:
    1. For someone who don't follow the whole studio thing, is 'Universal Pictures to partner on the worldwide release', as the statement says, the best solution, thinking about the other studios that might have got it instead?

    The frontrunner for a long while was Warner Bros. By placing the Wonder Woman sequel directly in Bond's way they ruled themselves out, Universal was realistically the only option Sony aside (Fox is about to get acquired by Disney, Paramount and Disney didn't bid). What is interesting however is the fact that it's MGM self distributing via their Annapurna venture in the US. One would think that for a huge tentpole like this they'd want a single studio to handle global marketing and distribution but given Bond' MGM association does make sense for them to try use B25 as part of their comeback to distribution. I'm guessing it will be a joint effort between the marketing bosses at Annapurna/MGM and Universal to coordinate everything and make sure everyone's on the same page with regards to the content. So more coordination will be required as there are more parties to please here.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited May 2018 Posts: 3,091
    Universal release Spectre in the Dutch cinema, but Fox stil did BD/DVD.

    But comment about Die Another Day it look like it wil be MGM/Universal movie like MGM/Fox then. Sony release DAD in America and that will Annapurna now. DVD was done by Fox.

    Universal possible mean return of ''Decca'' for the soundtrack. There did Spectre and some Universal movies. Will title singer from Universal too.

    Overall i think movie promotion of solo Universal like Jurassic World are good and not have much complanes as Paramount/Universal and Mission Impossible 6. Soundtrack is thing what give moost doubt in choose for Universal, that we don't get a soundtrack. The soundtracks of mi5 and Jurassic World look like les inportent for them. I think Bond buld enough trust for them and Universal wil ask Decca.

    Logo of Universal i expect wil be short version with minimum or no music. Playing with logo like there did with The thirth Mummy there can better keep for trailers. Or the logo must explode (what in my opnion works with the story) and turn in to maintile and will be second Bond movie after Dr no with no pretitle and again no gunbarrel. Stil can end titles with open light, the missing light of Spectre gunbarrel who in my opnion is left behind in maintiles of QOS.

    So far, it sound very good.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 2,271
    P&W basically took John Logan's plot outline for SP and rewrote the entire thing, omitting the "controversial" bits and filling the gaps of uninspired content (Ironic, isn't it?), but introduced the Brofeld angle in return.

    According to the leaks the brother angle was in Logan's scripts, though it did not initially feature Blofeld. Logan (and Mendes) wanted to use him, though, and that's why EON bought the rights back (though I'm pretty sure they eventually would have bought them anyway).
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Walecs wrote: »
    P&W basically took John Logan's plot outline for SP and rewrote the entire thing, omitting the "controversial" bits and filling the gaps of uninspired content (Ironic, isn't it?), but introduced the Brofeld angle in return.

    According to the leaks the brother angle was in Logan's scripts, though it did not initially feature Blofeld. Logan (and Mendes) wanted to use him, though, and that's why EON bought the rights back (though I'm pretty sure they eventually would have bought them anyway).
    Not sure if I recall that, then again I can't be sure if my memory serves me right. However, Logan's original concept of Blofeld had him being an African warlord. Then, apparently and very briefly, a female... interpretation of the character was also briefly discussed and dismissed.
  • edited May 2018 Posts: 10,314
    P&W basically took John Logan's plot outline for SP and rewrote the entire thing, omitting the "controversial" bits and filling the gaps of uninspired content (Ironic, isn't it?), but introduced the Brofeld angle in return.
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I’m aware SP wasn’t their baby, but at the same time it was the most stale Bond outing we had gotten in a long time - if not ever. Not enough new, good ideas about it. From my understanding of the original script and what we got, there were both good and bad changes made.

    The more I read these comments, the more a mess SP looks like, from the production side of things. What we got on screen wasn't really good, either, if you ask me (SP is currently ranked last on my list). We can only hope Bond 25 will be a smooth production in comparison.
    antovolk wrote: »
    Couple of questions:
    1. For someone who don't follow the whole studio thing, is 'Universal Pictures to partner on the worldwide release', as the statement says, the best solution, thinking about the other studios that might have got it instead?

    The frontrunner for a long while was Warner Bros. By placing the Wonder Woman sequel directly in Bond's way they ruled themselves out, Universal was realistically the only option Sony aside (Fox is about to get acquired by Disney, Paramount and Disney didn't bid). What is interesting however is the fact that it's MGM self distributing via their Annapurna venture in the US. One would think that for a huge tentpole like this they'd want a single studio to handle global marketing and distribution but given Bond' MGM association does make sense for them to try use B25 as part of their comeback to distribution. I'm guessing it will be a joint effort between the marketing bosses at Annapurna/MGM and Universal to coordinate everything and make sure everyone's on the same page with regards to the content. So more coordination will be required as there are more parties to please here.

    Thanks, that's an interesting read. Guess it looks like a reasonable way of doing the marketing and distribution. Know next to nothing about Annapurna; hopefully their involvement won't be a negative one.
  • Posts: 8,923
    It would be unlikely for Bond 25 to be a bigger mess than SP.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 2,271
    Walecs wrote: »
    P&W basically took John Logan's plot outline for SP and rewrote the entire thing, omitting the "controversial" bits and filling the gaps of uninspired content (Ironic, isn't it?), but introduced the Brofeld angle in return.

    According to the leaks the brother angle was in Logan's scripts, though it did not initially feature Blofeld. Logan (and Mendes) wanted to use him, though, and that's why EON bought the rights back (though I'm pretty sure they eventually would have bought them anyway).
    Not sure if I recall that, then again I can't be sure if my memory serves me right. However, Logan's original concept of Blofeld had him being an African warlord. Then, apparently and very briefly, a female... interpretation of the character was also briefly discussed and dismissed.

    I think you're right. I'm looking at this and it is actually unclear who and when they came up with the brother angle. But you're right in saying Logan initially wanted Blofeld to be an African warlord.
  • 00Agent00Agent "Relaxing at his usual suite in the Steinberger Hotel in Vienna."
    Posts: 3,735
    FoxRox wrote: »
    It would be unlikely for Bond 25 to be a bigger mess than SP.

    They could have stuck with P&W and Mendes if they were going for that.
  • mybudgetbondmybudgetbond The World
    Posts: 177
    Well that’s great news to wake up to! Can we please now put to rest any idea that Craig isn’t coming back?

    Roll on October 2019!
  • Goldeneye0094Goldeneye0094 Conyers, GA
    Posts: 464
    FINALLY!!!!! This has to be the best news I woke up to in a while!!!
  • Posts: 1,521
    Playing devil's advocate a bit here but anyone have a clue why a franchise as popular and enduring as James Bond has to have a one picture distribution deal? Seems a bit short-termism as a business model. Why not secure a multi-film distribution deal with a studio. Surely MGM and EON will have to start this distribution 'search' all over again once Bond 26 goes into production. Just seems a weird way to run a franchise.
  • Posts: 2,283
    Just heard this confirmation of Danny Boyle directing on the radio. If these script rumors are true, it’s hard to muster any excitement for the film, what with a supposed protege and a villain having yet another personal connection to Bond.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Bounine wrote: »
    Just heard this confirmation of Danny Boyle directing on the radio. If these script rumors are true, it’s hard to muster any excitement for the film, what with a supposed protege and a villain having yet another personal connection to Bond.
    Indeed.

    I'm keeping my rock bottom expectations where they are and then hopefully they can only go up once I see the film.
  • Posts: 4,886
    the only thing I am sad about @RC7: there was a recently banned member who insisted anything being said (whether from people on this site, or in the media), was absolutely not happening: no Craig, no Boyle, all B.S. and no one knew what the hell they were talking about...
  • Posts: 2,283
    Bounine wrote: »
    Just heard this confirmation of Danny Boyle directing on the radio. If these script rumors are true, it’s hard to muster any excitement for the film, what with a supposed protege and a villain having yet another personal connection to Bond.
    Indeed.

    I'm keeping my rock bottom expectations where they are and then hopefully they can only go up once I see the film.

    Very wise. I’ve been too disappointed in the past.

    The rumors about it being a light hearted film further hinders my excitement. Craig is better in darker Bond films.
  • edited May 2018 Posts: 1,703
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    Playing devil's advocate a bit here but anyone have a clue why a franchise as popular and enduring as James Bond has to have a one picture distribution deal? Seems a bit short-termism as a business model. Why not secure a multi-film distribution deal with a studio. Surely MGM and EON will have to start this distribution 'search' all over again once Bond 26 goes into production. Just seems a weird way to run a franchise.

    Probably because of this being Craig's last, or...those rumours of EON selling their stake of the franchise off after this film. But if things works out for this they'll just renew the deal. It's evident EON wanted to get away from Sony, hence opening up the bidding war after SP as opposed to renewing the deal.
    P&W basically took John Logan's plot outline for SP and rewrote the entire thing, omitting the "controversial" bits and filling the gaps of uninspired content (Ironic, isn't it?), but introduced the Brofeld angle in return.
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I’m aware SP wasn’t their baby, but at the same time it was the most stale Bond outing we had gotten in a long time - if not ever. Not enough new, good ideas about it. From my understanding of the original script and what we got, there were both good and bad changes made.

    The more I read these comments, the more a mess SP looks like, from the production side of things. What we got on screen wasn't really good, either, if you ask me (SP is currently ranked last on my list). We can only hope Bond 25 will be a smooth production in comparison.
    antovolk wrote: »
    Couple of questions:
    1. For someone who don't follow the whole studio thing, is 'Universal Pictures to partner on the worldwide release', as the statement says, the best solution, thinking about the other studios that might have got it instead?

    The frontrunner for a long while was Warner Bros. By placing the Wonder Woman sequel directly in Bond's way they ruled themselves out, Universal was realistically the only option Sony aside (Fox is about to get acquired by Disney, Paramount and Disney didn't bid). What is interesting however is the fact that it's MGM self distributing via their Annapurna venture in the US. One would think that for a huge tentpole like this they'd want a single studio to handle global marketing and distribution but given Bond' MGM association does make sense for them to try use B25 as part of their comeback to distribution. I'm guessing it will be a joint effort between the marketing bosses at Annapurna/MGM and Universal to coordinate everything and make sure everyone's on the same page with regards to the content. So more coordination will be required as there are more parties to please here.

    Thanks, that's an interesting read. Guess it looks like a reasonable way of doing the marketing and distribution. Know next to nothing about Annapurna; hopefully their involvement won't be a negative one.

    If anything it's a positive. They've got a great rep in the indie world, they are still only building their distribution network in the US but the fact that they're essentially being MGM's new distribution backend is interesting. But I'm sure it'll be all good. Coming from an indie background means they are willing to take more risks and be more inventive marketing wise, working with Universal means they have more global scale with the campaign.

    A couple facts I forgot to mention, obviously Universal is already working with Boyle on the Beatles musical (and I wouldn't be surprised if Boyle did weigh in on this, makes the whole PR aspect for him a lot easier if same team manages both the films he's got coming out within a month and a bit of each other), and the Sony marketing execs who worked on the previous Craig films are now at Annapurna.
  • Posts: 1,521
    Bounine wrote: »
    Just heard this confirmation of Danny Boyle directing on the radio. If these script rumors are true, it’s hard to muster any excitement for the film, what with a supposed protege and a villain having yet another personal connection to Bond.

    Bounine - times have moved on. If some fans want major changes to Bond - the type of storylines we see - we need Barbara Broccoli to step down. I think the emotional backstory storylines stem from her. While she has ultimate control over plot I can't see a non-personal plot. The days of Roger Moore/Sean Connery type Bond plots - Bond without any backstory or "don't make it personal!" subplots - are long gone.

    Perhaps the next Bond actor will bring something new, perhaps his casting will make B Broccoli and the writers reassess things but I doubt it. The more emotionally charged Bond is popular with the audience so why change it?
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Bounine wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    Just heard this confirmation of Danny Boyle directing on the radio. If these script rumors are true, it’s hard to muster any excitement for the film, what with a supposed protege and a villain having yet another personal connection to Bond.
    Indeed.

    I'm keeping my rock bottom expectations where they are and then hopefully they can only go up once I see the film.

    Very wise. I’ve been too disappointed in the past.

    The rumors about it being a light hearted film further hinders my excitement. Craig is better in darker Bond films.
    I am praying to God, Allah, Bhudda and the Flying Spaghetti Monster that this female protege idea isn't true. Absolutely dismal idea but one which sounds like it probably is true due to the pressure for them to deliver a #metoo friendly Bond film.
  • Posts: 2,879
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    Playing devil's advocate a bit here but anyone have a clue why a franchise as popular and enduring as James Bond has to have a one picture distribution deal? Seems a bit short-termism as a business model. Why not secure a multi-film distribution deal with a studio. Surely MGM and EON will have to start this distribution 'search' all over again once Bond 26 goes into production. Just seems a weird way to run a franchise.
    My guess: if MGM find a buyer or are taken over by another studio then they won't need to go into partnership with the likes of Sony or Universal again, considering that the new owner will handle this side of the business in future. For instance, if Disney are successful in buying up MGM before B26 goes into production then they're not going to want Universal involved.
  • Posts: 1,703
    bondsum wrote: »
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    Playing devil's advocate a bit here but anyone have a clue why a franchise as popular and enduring as James Bond has to have a one picture distribution deal? Seems a bit short-termism as a business model. Why not secure a multi-film distribution deal with a studio. Surely MGM and EON will have to start this distribution 'search' all over again once Bond 26 goes into production. Just seems a weird way to run a franchise.
    My guess: if MGM find a buyer or are taken over by another studio then they won't need to go into partnership with the likes of Sony or Universal again, considering that the new owner will handle this side of the business in future. For instance, if Disney are successful in buying up MGM before B26 goes into production then they're not going to want Universal involved.

    Completely forgot about the MGM sale aspect
  • Posts: 3,000
    Great news to wake up to today!

    Some really interesting nuggets of information.

    Firstly, Boyle and Hodge are signed on officially. Interestingly, I thought Hodge may have been working off the P&W script. However, that is clearly not the case. I also suspected that Eon may announce a second writer on the film. This would be the first time since the TND that a sole writer has been credited for a Bond film.

    Also the announcement of an actual production start date is very intriguing and slightly unusual. But it means that Bond 25 has 6 months of pre-production before principal photography.

    I never thought that Eon would go for Universal (they were never front-runners at any stage). But it makes heaps of sense in context. Clearly, Eon have listened to Danny Boyle who has a very strong relationship with Universal. Both Steve Jobs and the Beatles musical are Universal films. Clearly Boyle feels comfortable there.

    I'm not a huge fan of their logo (I'd grown very accustomed to the Columbia lady)


    I love Annapurna's more edgy logo though


    Will international audiences still get the Annapurna logo alongside the MGM and Universal logos?

    Also Universal has some big properties and Bond fits comfortably with them. None are big Marvel/Star Wars/DC titles that would overwhelm Bond.

    Jurassic World
    The Fast and Furious films
    Despicable Me
    The Secret Life of Pets
    Pacific Rim
    Fifity Shades of Grey
    Insidous
    The Bourne films

    They also have big Oscar and prestige clout:

    Darkest Hour
    Get Out
    Phantom Thread
    The Post
    Hail, Caesar!

  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,531
    When they say that production is starting on 3 December, do they mean principal photography or the press announcement?
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 2,271
    Bounine wrote: »
    Just heard this confirmation of Danny Boyle directing on the radio. If these script rumors are true, it’s hard to muster any excitement for the film, what with a supposed protege and a villain having yet another personal connection to Bond.

    I doubt they are. So far everything CashleyPersia reported was fake (he said Nolan would direct and Craig wouldn't return and recently affirmed Warner would distribute) or reported by someone else before he did (he said Boyle would direct after other tabloids/websites reported so).

    There is no reason to believe the understudy and villain-with-personal-connection are true.
  • Posts: 4,886
    When they say that production is starting on 3 December, do they mean principal photography or the press announcement?

    Principal photography-- first day of shooting: Dec 3.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 9,881
    “Let the mayhem begin”.
  • Posts: 4,886
    Walecs wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    Just heard this confirmation of Danny Boyle directing on the radio. If these script rumors are true, it’s hard to muster any excitement for the film, what with a supposed protege and a villain having yet another personal connection to Bond.

    I doubt they are. So far everything CashleyPersia reported was fake (he said Nolan would direct and Craig wouldn't return and recently affirmed Warner would distribute) or reported by someone else before he did (he said Boyle would direct after other tabloids/websites reported so).

    There is no reason to believe the understudy and villain-with-personal-connection are true.

    I wouldn't outright dismiss Cashley-- he's got a lot right too. He has been clear that the info he's picking up is industry chatter, so he can't give anything an official guarantee. He's passing on what he's been hearing. And he does sound like he does work in the film industry in some capacity.
  • barryt007barryt007 Getting counselling by Sir Roger over how to kill Kara Milovy
    Posts: 18,462
    If Universal are involved then that's brilliant,and should get things moving !!

    Also,staff members in my office here have seen the Danny Boyle news on the BBC News website and have reacted very positively indeed !
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    edited May 2018 Posts: 1,531
    peter wrote: »
    When they say that production is starting on 3 December, do they mean principal photography or the press announcement?

    Principal photography-- first day of shooting: Dec 3.

    So that means that the announcement(s) will be the week before, since the 3rd is a Monday.

    SPECTRE's was on a Thursday IIRC.. B25's presumably on 29 November then?
Sign In or Register to comment.