MGM says the next Bond within 3 years

talos7talos7 New Orleans
edited March 2013 in Bond 26 & Beyond Posts: 8,072
http://collider.com/james-bond-24-sequel-release/


MGM Plans to Release the Next Bond Movie Within 3 Years; Director Will Be Announced Soon

by Brendan Bettinger Posted: March 19th, 2013 at 7:35 pm
Fifty years later, the Bond franchise is astoundingly stronger than ever, as Skyfall joined the $1 billion worldwide club in December. MGM understandably wants to jump back into the series sooner than later. On a conference call with investors, MGM CEO Gary Barber promised:


“We are currently developing the screenplay and working with our partners. We look forward to developing the script soon and signing a director. We are hoping within the next 3 years it will be released.” [Reuters]

Skyfall director Sam Mendes will not return, but Barber says they “look forward to announcing a director soon.” Mendes hatched a story idea with John Logan before he left, and Logan will stay on to write Bond 24. Daniel Craig is signed for at least two more films, so the immediate future of the Bond series is bright.
«13456713

Comments

  • Posts: 1,817
    If the source is reliable, why 3 years!!??
  • Posts: 498
    OH GOD,NO !! :-S
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Why is everyone so on edge? Three years is just a time frame. The screenplay seems to be going great, the search for a director bright and it seems we are on the right track for a Bond 24 release sooner rather than later.
  • Posts: 498
    Why is everyone so on edge? Three years is just a time frame. The screenplay seems to be going great, the search for a director bright and it seems we are on the right track for a Bond 24 release sooner rather than later.

    3 years would mean 2015 right ?
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited March 2013 Posts: 28,694
    Skyfail wrote:
    Why is everyone so on edge? Three years is just a time frame. The screenplay seems to be going great, the search for a director bright and it seems we are on the right track for a Bond 24 release sooner rather than later.

    3 years would mean 2015 right ?

    It depends. Like I said, it is just a time frame, and many things could change that could mean a release sooner than then. Late 2015/early 2016 seems to be the maximum time they are saying Bond 24 will release, so the more minimum and more likely choice for a release if all goes well is 2014.
  • Posts: 498
    Skyfail wrote:
    Why is everyone so on edge? Three years is just a time frame. The screenplay seems to be going great, the search for a director bright and it seems we are on the right track for a Bond 24 release sooner rather than later.

    3 years would mean 2015 right ?

    It depends. Like I said, it is just a time frame, and many things could change that could mean a release sooner than then. Late 2015/early 2016 seems to be the maximum time they are saying Bond 24 will release, so the more minimum and more likely choice for a release if all goes well is 2014.

    Thanks Brady
    @battleshipgreygt answered the question on the other thread , All my fears are put to rest now !

  • Posts: 6,601
    Skyfail wrote:
    Why is everyone so on edge? Three years is just a time frame. The screenplay seems to be going great, the search for a director bright and it seems we are on the right track for a Bond 24 release sooner rather than later.

    3 years would mean 2015 right ?

    It depends. Like I said, it is just a time frame, and many things could change that could mean a release sooner than then. Late 2015/early 2016 seems to be the maximum time they are saying Bond 24 will release, so the more minimum and more likely choice for a release if all goes well is 2014.

    They are not going to give out a reliable time frame just now. So within 3 years means everything between 2014 and 15 IMO. They just play it safe and I also believe rfather 14 then later.

    Hopeful also sounds the directors name SOON.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Germanlady wrote:
    Skyfail wrote:
    Why is everyone so on edge? Three years is just a time frame. The screenplay seems to be going great, the search for a director bright and it seems we are on the right track for a Bond 24 release sooner rather than later.

    3 years would mean 2015 right ?

    It depends. Like I said, it is just a time frame, and many things could change that could mean a release sooner than then. Late 2015/early 2016 seems to be the maximum time they are saying Bond 24 will release, so the more minimum and more likely choice for a release if all goes well is 2014.

    They are not going to give out a reliable time frame just now. So within 3 years means everything between 2014 and 15 IMO. They just play it safe and I also believe rfather 14 then later.

    Hopeful also sounds the directors name SOON.

    Exactly, they are saying three years just to play it safe, but I think they are planning for a release much sooner. I understand their strategy.
  • Posts: 366
    Mr.Craig should start the botox now.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    like everyone else has said... MGM is playing it safe by saying 3 years... they aren't saying that's how long it will be before the next one comes out - but more or less saying anywhere in that time frame, and no longer....

    what we currently know is that Logan is full steam ahead on the script (which means his treatment was approved by EON).. and the hunt has commenced for a director, since Mendes has graciously bowed out..

    ideally, i think MGM wants this out asap - preferably by fall 2014.. but, should EON need a little more time with either the script or director search, then they could feasibly push back to 2015 with no problem from the studio.. that is why MGM said 3 years.. but as of right now, all systems are 'go' for 2014...

    the real question is.... how long until Gustav_Graves shows up to polish one off about Christopher Nolan again?? lol
  • HASEROT wrote:
    MGM is playing it safe by saying 3 years
    Or maybe they're playing it "legally safe". I don't know the US law on that matter, but I guess a stockholder could sue them in case the Bond movie wasn't out within 2 years if they had given a 2 years delay at this conference call.

  • Posts: 6,601
    Another good indication for rather sooner then later is the fact, that DC seems to hit the gym almost on a daily base going by pap pics and tweets. To me, that means, he doesn't want to let the Bond bod go and he doesn't need it for Broadway and he isn't doing it for fun, since he finds it utterly boring.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited March 2013 Posts: 4,399
    HASEROT wrote:
    MGM is playing it safe by saying 3 years
    Or maybe they're playing it "legally safe". I don't know the US law on that matter, but I guess a stockholder could sue them in case the Bond movie wasn't out within 2 years if they had given a 2 years delay at this conference call.

    i'm not sure either... i'm not sure how MGM does business between themselves and EON.. but since they are under new management, and since these 3 Craig films have grossed nearly 2.5 billion - i'm sure they'll let EON take their time - within reason that is... but i don't think there is anything legal about saying "we expect the next film in 2 years" and then in 2 years it doesn't happen... things happen in the film world all the time that create delays (look at the MGM financial crisis which delayed Bond23 from 2011 to 2012... or even EON's legal troubles in the early 90s that delayed Bond for 6 years, when they had planned on a Bond film in 1991 - and then also in 1993.) ... i just think he was being generous in a time frame, understanding that they don't want to kill the golden goose by forcing them to work under a looming deadline..
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 2,015
    HASEROT wrote:
    but i don't think there is anything legal about saying "we expect the next film in 2 years" and then in 2 years it doesn't happen...

    At an investor conference call that has to be legally put publicly online, when answering a stockholder question on the matter ? I don't think it's the usual PR at all, most questions about specific financial data for the near future were left unanswered. They never even said once the next two Hobbit "should" have similar success for instance (or "flop", according to some box office lunatics !). But their release date are announced now officially in their financial reports. Hence all the stories you read about so many movies put into production with a release date that cannot be movied, IMO.

  • edited March 2013 Posts: 11,119
    I'm not going to discuss Christopher Nolan here guys :-). No worries. But as I said in this topic before, http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/5951/confirmed-sam-mendes-will-not-direct-bond-24/p11, it is way more realistic to look at a (November) 2015 release.
    Hey guys. 'Skyfall' came four years after 'Quantum Of Solace'. Moreover, I also suggest a 2015 release, which IMO is even better.
    Samuel001 wrote:
    I agree. Not a chance. All signs have been pointing to November 2014 for a while now. Every two years is the plan and that will be stuck to, with any luck.

    Perhaps we all can agree with a November 2015 release then :-)?........

    Why I constantly said a November 2015 release is more realistic:
    A) Today's Bond productions, especially since 'Skyfall' have become way bigger than the late Dalton, early Brosnan Bond films.
    B) Two year gaps are not so favourite anymore if you ask Michael and Barbara. A stellar production like Bond 24 needs plentiful pre-production time, not to mention all the screenplay polish work. Right after production of 'TWINE' I can recall Michael and Barbara saying they want to take it a bit more easy and expand the gap to 3 years.
    C) As of 'Skyfall', EON now favours bigger name actors and bigger name crew. The Oscar heavy cast/crew is in part the reason for the 1.1 Billion worldwide gross. To get those bigger names on board, one needs to take into account scheduling conflicts way sooner than in the past. A 3 year gap therefore seems more realistic.
    D) 'Quantum Of Solace' and 'Tomorrow Never Dies' are IMO good examples of Bond productions that felt rushed, thus lacking quality.
    E) A longer gap has never hurted a Bond film, quality-wise. Most of the time it actually helped the film from a quality point of view.
    F) Now from an MGM marketeer point of view....what would you choose? A) A 2-year gap, resulting in a more or less secure worldwide gross of, let's say, $750 Million worldwide? Or B) A 3-year gap, trying to match the $1.1 Billion of 'Skyfall', thus continueing the 'Skyfall' legacy in all its facets? I'm pretty certain Gary Barber would choose option B) for a try. For MGM the Bond franchise is important, but turning it into a Nolan-like money crashing franchise is even better.
    G) I want not only an OK Bond film with 'good action' (damn, this sounds cheap). No, I want to have a mindblowing stand-alone high quality film as well. 'Skyfall' gave us such an espionage thriller. But to get such a film, especially we Bond fans need to be more patient dammit.


    Here you got it guys. Enough reasons to embrace a November 2015 release. Gary Barber is right. I actually advice him to greenlight a November 2015 release.
  • Posts: 6,601
    Not one reason for me to EMBRACE Nov 15 - not one. Like its been said so many times before - a longer gap is not necessarely resulting in a better film. Forget QOS as an example. It was hurt by the strike and crappy editing, not a 2 years gap.

    And why are you so obsessed with Nolan? Personally I don't even WANT the guy. I want a Bond film by and not Nolans Bond film.

    IMO all signs direct towards a 14 release, as it should be.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited March 2013 Posts: 4,399
    i embrace nothing until it's official. ;)
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited March 2013 Posts: 4,399
    Gary Barber also went on to say..

    "they are currently developing a screenplay.." (which basically means, writing the script) - which Logan has already confirmed.. that puts us on track for 2014... remember, preproduction on Bond 24 started during the making of and release of Skyfall.. so it's not like EON has been sitting on their hands this entire time..

    but Barber also said that they (EON) plan to announce a new director soon... soon to me, means within a couple months - you don't hire on a director now, and then wait until January 2015 to start principal photography.... again, the only reason they did with Bond 23 and Mendes, was because they had no other choice thanks to MGM's troubles - nothing more nothing less - the extra year was not EON's doing, despite what some people refuse to accept.

    so with that being said...

    ...2014
  • Posts: 9,808
    I think 2014 looks very likely
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 2,115
    When MGM was in bankruptcy court in 2010, it filed a business plan. That included getting the Bond movies back on an every-other-year schedule: Bond 23 in 2012, Bond 24 in 2014, Bond 25 in 2016.

    In November, MGM had an investor call (I listened to a replay), The CEO said he was "hopeful" that Bond 24 could come out in '14 but it'd be out in '15 for sure.

    On March 19, the CEO made the comments quoted earlier (I listened to that replay also) about Bond 24 coming out within the next three years. He said nothing about 2014 specifically. Of course, 2014 is part of the"within three years" timeframe.

    The only for sure trend: MGM has gone from being very specific (in the business plan filed in bankruptcy court) to less specific (contrasting the November and March investor calls). Obviously, MGM's finances are in much better shape and it has more flexibility concerning Bond 24's release date (also it has two more Hobbit movies in the pipeline in the interim).

    If you want to listen to the call yourself, go to www.mgm.com. Look for the investors relation icon at the bottom of the screen. Gary Barber's comments about Bond 24 timing occur during the Q and A session, which starts about halfway through.
  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    Posts: 2,044
    It is great news, to know that there will be a Bondfilm and more information about it soon. It is also interesting that "Mendes has hatched a story with John Logan". So, Mendes has a say afterall in the upcoming film!
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 11,119
    Germanlady wrote:
    Not one reason for me to EMBRACE Nov 15 - not one. Like its been said so many times before - a longer gap is not necessarely resulting in a better film. Forget QOS as an example. It was hurt by the strike and crappy editing, not a 2 years gap.

    And why are you so obsessed with Nolan? Personally I don't even WANT the guy. I want a Bond film by and not Nolans Bond film.

    IMO all signs direct towards a 14 release, as it should be.

    I think there's no reason to react, to comment so......violently hehe. The only thing you do...is getting irritated by me, which makes you forget writing down a good set of arguments why you are against a November 2015 release :-).

    I am not 'obsessed' with Nolan. That's a misinterpretation of things. Yes, I admire him, but that's something different than being obsessed by him :-). My flat is full of Danish design, and movie posters from Nolan are nowhere to be seen. I don't even have Batman sheets @Germanlady :-).

    Because foremost I am a Bond fan. Yes, a Bond fan. And everything I post in here is dedicated to that....and not to create some kind of violent takeover from Mr Nolan. Sjees :-).
  • Posts: 4,403
    Personally I think 2015 is most likely, if it was Nov 2014 I'm convinced we would have heard by now. However, if 2014 is indeed the case the news may break very soon.

    Also I think Barber's comments are just being overly cautious, he's basically saying a Bond film is coming sometime in the future to appease the investors. I think its safer in these situations to be a little cautious, remember when MGM were issuing their expectations on SF's BO they said the film will likely deliver $800m worlwide even though SF was doing great guns at the time. I think the '3 years' comments are just them being equally as cautious
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 498
    EDIT
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 498
    Germanlady wrote:
    Not one reason for me to EMBRACE Nov 15 - not one. Like its been said so many times before - a longer gap is not necessarely resulting in a better film. Forget QOS as an example. It was hurt by the strike and crappy editing, not a 2 years gap.

    And why are you so obsessed with Nolan? Personally I don't even WANT the guy. I want a Bond film by and not Nolans Bond film.

    IMO all signs direct towards a 14 release, as it should be.

    I think there's no reason to react, to comment so......violently hehe. The only thing you do...is getting irritated by me, which makes you forget writing down a good set of arguments why you are against a November 2015 release :-).

    I am not 'obsessed' with Nolan. That's a misinterpretation of things. Yes, I admire him, but that's something different than being obsessed by him :-). My flat is full of Danish design, and movie posters from Nolan are nowhere to be seen. I don't even have Batman sheets @Germanlady :-).

    Because foremost I am a Bond fan. Yes, a Bond fan. And everything I post in here is dedicated to that....and not to create some kind of violent takeover from Mr Nolan. Sjees :-).

    You do have a point ^

    I myself love Nolan because he can handle action way better than Mendes can and the fights are choreographed very well.He comes up with the most unique concepts, handles the most brilliant scripts with hardly any plot holes (more than what I can say for Logan) and comes up with an all round compelling story. His team are very creative.

    Now that being said you must realise Nolan has a some what set group of actors he likes to work with .It just doesen't seem likely for him to come in on Craig's tenure.He is also working on interstellar which will mostly turn out to be the same hit that inception was .There's no denying the fact that he's interested to do Bond and Babs also mentioned they would be delighted to have him. In the forseeable future for Craigs remaining 2 or 3 it just doesen't seem possible.

    Now jump starting the next Bond with a fresh actor and his crew seems very much likely
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    A great director should be able to work with actors outside of their usual suspect of collaborators and I do think Nolan is a very good director but he's mostly weak in executing action. The action in his batman movies were unimpressive for me, the only interesting thing he did was the batman vs bane fight. However, the action in inception was better realised but still, the man needs to utilise a second unit.
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 498
    doubleoego wrote:
    A great director should be able to work with actors outside of their usual suspect of collaborators and I do think Nolan is a very good director but he's mostly weak in executing action. The action in his batman movies were unimpressive for me, the only interesting thing he did was the batman vs bane fight. However, the action in inception was better realised but still, the man needs to utilise a second unit.

    Its not that he cannot work outside his collaborators , Take DiCaprio, Nolan worked with him only once and made a hit. Its just that he has a preference. Its something the industry respects.

    Honestly speaking last year if someone asked me if Nolan was a good choice . I would say no , he can't handle action as good as Campbell or Forster. After Skyfall came out and I saw how weak the action was. I learnt to stop being very picky and I started thinking at least someone who can do a better job then Mendes.

    Judging by how good the Bane vs Batman fights were and the sheer scale of huge mobs clashing together, its evident that Nolan has learnt a thing or two along his action movie career.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    Personally, TDKR was my biggest disappointment last year. Still a good film but nowhere near the quality of TDK or BB (my personal favourite of his Batman trilogy). Although I find Nolan a very talented director (one of my favourites, to be honest) I agree with @doubleoego, he's not a good action director. The problem is that he likes having control over everything in a film, which means he has no second unit, he writes, directs and produces which invalidates him more or less when it comes to directing a Bond film. And although he has worked only once with some actors his films (including Inception) tend to have the same central core of actors, which leads us again to the control issue.
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 498
    Sandy wrote:
    Personally, TDKR was my biggest disappointment last year. Still a good film but nowhere near the quality of TDK or BB (my personal favourite of his Batman trilogy). Although I find Nolan a very talented director (one of my favourites, to be honest) I agree with @doubleoego, he's not a good action director. The problem is that he likes having control over everything in a film, which means he has no second unit, he writes, directs and produces which invalidates him more or less when it comes to directing a Bond film. And although he has worked only once with some actors his films (including Inception) tend to have the same central core of actors, which leads us again to the control issue.

    Him having a lot of control isn't an issue to be raised as long as he can do a good job but I do agree the action is. I mentioned him because in his last movie he did splendid work on action and was poles apart from Skyfall in terms of action .

    Actually the best solution for us Bond fans would be to get a director who would be miles ahead of both Mendes and Nolan, Someone who can do action on the calibre of Campbell or Forster.
    Sandy wrote:
    Personally, TDKR was my biggest disappointment last year. Still a good film but nowhere near the quality of TDK or BB (my personal favourite of his Batman trilogy).

    Strange!
    I've noticed this quite often, a lot of Bond fans picked Batman Begins as their favourite of the trilogy. My favourite would be TDKR. :P

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,700
    Skyfail wrote:
    Strange!
    I've noticed this quite often, a lot of Bond fans picked Batman Begins as their favourite of the trilogy. My favourite would be TDKR. :P
    It's mine as well, it had a simple magic to it- the others are so busy IMO...
Sign In or Register to comment.