EoN sells up - Amazon MGM to produce 007 going forwards (Heyman and Pascal confirmed as producers)

1899091929395»

Comments

  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited May 23 Posts: 9,602
    If the director is someone important, he/she will surely be the one to develop the project.

    When any director boards a project, they will help develop or continue developing the story according to their vision. Not just for Bond.
  • Posts: 5,278
    The worst thing they can do is a Craig movie without Craig.

    Sure (although I can see some broad ideas, tones, or themes from the Craig era being carried over, but that's not unusual and a Bond movie like that can still stand on its own two feet). But they don't have to make what they see as just a generic Bond film either. If anything I think that sense of disappointment in terms of audience reaction wouldn't be beneficial.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited May 23 Posts: 1,884
    007HallY wrote: »
    The worst thing they can do is a Craig movie without Craig.

    Sure (although I can see some broad ideas, tones, or themes from the Craig era being carried over, but that's not unusual and a Bond movie like that can still stand on its own two feet). But they don't have to make what they see as just a generic Bond film either. If anything I think that sense of disappointment in terms of audience reaction wouldn't be beneficial.

    After what I would call five tragic films, in terms of content themes, I really hope they don't go for a woman dying to motivate Bond or as a consequence of Bond again for at least one film. Let's try to have fun?
  • edited May 23 Posts: 5,278
    LucknFate wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    The worst thing they can do is a Craig movie without Craig.

    Sure (although I can see some broad ideas, tones, or themes from the Craig era being carried over, but that's not unusual and a Bond movie like that can still stand on its own two feet). But they don't have to make what they see as just a generic Bond film either. If anything I think that sense of disappointment in terms of audience reaction wouldn't be beneficial.

    After what I would call five tragic films, in terms of content themes, I really hope they don't go for a woman dying to motivate Bond or as a consequence of Bond again for at least one film. Let's try to have fun?

    I think they can and should do something different, but it’s difficult to imagine completely stripping Bond from some of the more ‘mature’ stuff the franchise proved it could do under EON. It’d be a shame to lose that edge and create something weak under the guise of ‘having fun’ at the expense of genuine thrills, spectacle, and creativity. One of Amazon’s challenges will be proving they can craft the best Bond film they can and are worthy of taking that mantle. They have to create something exciting and thrilling - they need to tell a great Bond story. Simply giving us a ‘fun’ little Bond film won’t be good enough.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    Posts: 1,884
    007HallY wrote: »
    LucknFate wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    The worst thing they can do is a Craig movie without Craig.

    Sure (although I can see some broad ideas, tones, or themes from the Craig era being carried over, but that's not unusual and a Bond movie like that can still stand on its own two feet). But they don't have to make what they see as just a generic Bond film either. If anything I think that sense of disappointment in terms of audience reaction wouldn't be beneficial.

    After what I would call five tragic films, in terms of content themes, I really hope they don't go for a woman dying to motivate Bond or as a consequence of Bond again for at least one film. Let's try to have fun?

    I think they can and should do something different, but it’s difficult to imagine completely stripping Bond from some of the more ‘mature’ stuff the franchise proved it could do under EON. It’d be a shame to lose that edge and create something weak under the guise of ‘having fun’ at the expense of genuine thrills, spectacle, and creativity. One of Amazon’s challenges will be proving they can craft the best Bond film they can and are worthy of taking that mantle. They have to create something exciting and thrilling - they need to tell a great Bond story. Simply giving us a ‘fun’ little Bond film won’t be good enough.

    I think I'm asking for Casino Royale, minus Vesper, but I don't know what you'd replace her with? Blofeld somehow? I mean in terms of tone and action. Very inventive screen action paired with nice drama and tense poker scenes. If they can do something like that again, I think everybody will be happy. Perhaps just something fresh would be fun enough, I don't mean it has to be kiddy or slapstick.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,723
    The worst thing they can do is a Craig movie without Craig.

    I tend to agree. And similarly, I don't think they should try to mimic Mendes. Or Marvel.

    Producing Bond 26 is going to be a daunting task.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited May 23 Posts: 2,597
    LucknFate wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    LucknFate wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    The worst thing they can do is a Craig movie without Craig.

    Sure (although I can see some broad ideas, tones, or themes from the Craig era being carried over, but that's not unusual and a Bond movie like that can still stand on its own two feet). But they don't have to make what they see as just a generic Bond film either. If anything I think that sense of disappointment in terms of audience reaction wouldn't be beneficial.

    After what I would call five tragic films, in terms of content themes, I really hope they don't go for a woman dying to motivate Bond or as a consequence of Bond again for at least one film. Let's try to have fun?

    I think they can and should do something different, but it’s difficult to imagine completely stripping Bond from some of the more ‘mature’ stuff the franchise proved it could do under EON. It’d be a shame to lose that edge and create something weak under the guise of ‘having fun’ at the expense of genuine thrills, spectacle, and creativity. One of Amazon’s challenges will be proving they can craft the best Bond film they can and are worthy of taking that mantle. They have to create something exciting and thrilling - they need to tell a great Bond story. Simply giving us a ‘fun’ little Bond film won’t be good enough.

    I think I'm asking for Casino Royale, minus Vesper, but I don't know what you'd replace her with? Blofeld somehow? I mean in terms of tone and action. Very inventive screen action paired with nice drama and tense poker scenes. If they can do something like that again, I think everybody will be happy. Perhaps just something fresh would be fun enough, I don't mean it has to be kiddy or slapstick.

    This certainly wouldn't hurt @LucknFate Maybe @007HallY meant something along those lines as well. But funnily, since Amazon paid that much, don't we think they might be looking to emulate or best the only billion dollar Bond film? Which is SF. Not saying they should. Just a thought. But personally, I want something in the mold of TLD/GE, but a similar or better style of SF, wouldn't hurt.
  • edited May 23 Posts: 5,278
    LucknFate wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    LucknFate wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    The worst thing they can do is a Craig movie without Craig.

    Sure (although I can see some broad ideas, tones, or themes from the Craig era being carried over, but that's not unusual and a Bond movie like that can still stand on its own two feet). But they don't have to make what they see as just a generic Bond film either. If anything I think that sense of disappointment in terms of audience reaction wouldn't be beneficial.

    After what I would call five tragic films, in terms of content themes, I really hope they don't go for a woman dying to motivate Bond or as a consequence of Bond again for at least one film. Let's try to have fun?

    I think they can and should do something different, but it’s difficult to imagine completely stripping Bond from some of the more ‘mature’ stuff the franchise proved it could do under EON. It’d be a shame to lose that edge and create something weak under the guise of ‘having fun’ at the expense of genuine thrills, spectacle, and creativity. One of Amazon’s challenges will be proving they can craft the best Bond film they can and are worthy of taking that mantle. They have to create something exciting and thrilling - they need to tell a great Bond story. Simply giving us a ‘fun’ little Bond film won’t be good enough.

    I think I'm asking for Casino Royale, minus Vesper, but I don't know what you'd replace her with? Blofeld somehow? I mean in terms of tone and action. Very inventive screen action paired with nice drama and tense poker scenes. If they can do something like that again, I think everybody will be happy. Perhaps just something fresh would be fun enough, I don't mean it has to be kiddy or slapstick.

    I’d say the best thing they can do is make the best Bond film they can. I don’t think they should obsess over being different to the Craig films as such, but neither should they copy them without making it their own (even Fleming had Bond falling love more and the women dying more than once. Even Horowitz did it).

    What they’ll do I don't know in practice. But it should be exciting and a gripping story with spectacle (stunts etc).
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,602
    For what it's worth, I don't think Amazon will try and emulate any one Bond picture.

    They bought this IP because they feel they can produce audience friendly movies that will make buckets load of cash, worldwide.

    And like any good producers, they, and their team, will knock their heads together and make a list in their writers/boardroom of what makes James Bond, James Bond, and; the general elements of what historically has made the best Bond films resonate with the public.

    On top of that, they'll also look at contemporary films and streaming in the genre that people watch, and have been successful.

    After that, they'll have a more crystalized vision of what they want to bring to today's (tomorrow's) audiences.

    They'll hire the best writers to put that vision in story form.

    The best director to shoot the hell out of the vision.

    The best man available that will tick as many boxes as possible.

    Then they'll take all of this and try and make the best picture they can.

    But once any producers try and emulate or re-create what's come before, they usually fail and make a watered-down version of the original. I think a trap like this is very much in the minds of Pascal and Heyman.

    They don't want to try and make an EoN Bond film. They want to continue a recognizable brand, yes, but with their own unique vision (or what was the point in taking the job?). Just as you can't have another Connery or Lazenby or Moore or Dalton or Brosnan or Craig, on a larger scale, there will never be another EoN like Bond picture because what they put into their films was their creative DNA and it can't simply be replicated.

    Amazon, and their producers, will keep a recognizable brand (hopefully), but will pour their own creative DNA into it, and it will feel, and should feel, a little different than what's come before (but the same, as the film industry likes to say).

    People say making a Bond picture isn't rocket science.

    It's not brain surgery either.

    Or manufacturing a new line of original cars...

    But there are plenty of traps this venture could fall into.

    And it most definitely is, as @echo said, a daunting task.
  • Posts: 1,995
    The current EON is not the same EON as 60 years ago. That DNA changed a long time ago.

    I still think that adapting novels is the best way to stay fresh and not fall into pastiche.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited May 23 Posts: 9,602
    The current EON is not the same EON as 60 years ago. That DNA changed a long time ago.

    I still think that adapting novels is the best way to stay fresh and not fall into pastiche.

    One of the original producers continued to evolve after his partner and he parted ways.

    He brought up a new generation, under his guidance and the creative DNA continued to evolve under his watchful eye until the end of his life.

    No, @DEKE_RIVERS , the creative DNA just changed hands to a wholly new set of creatives with the only connection being one of the producers worked alongside the old guard where she oversaw the release and distribution of three of the last five films.
  • Posts: 1,995
    Classic Bond died with Richard Maibaum and before that the Bond series had already changed a lot.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,602
    Classic Bond died with Richard Maibaum and before that the Bond series had already changed a lot.

    @DEKE_RIVERS , I think you only post to be contrarian. I hope you enjoy mainly writing to oppose others.

    Most of the time I have absolutely no understanding what you’re trying to articulate.

    But you keep being you, bud 👍🏻!
  • Posts: 1,995
    What? It's crystal clear.

    I'm not saying anything that people can't see with their own eyes.

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,602
    What? It's crystal clear.

    I'm not saying anything that people can't see with their own eyes.

    That’s ok Deke. I’m in Deketown again, where nothing and everything makes sense. It’s not rocket science, after all.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 14,433
    The new producers can out-Craig Craig.

    With humor.

  • I think “going back to Fleming” is always a good course corrective when setting out a new Bond path since the films typically get further away from that as they go in favor of spectacle (though I suppose NTTD had light nods to YOLT). Whether that’s Casino Royale-ing Moonraker or just making a (comparatively) small scale espionage driven film with a Fleming favor and some previously unused elements.

    But who knows if these producers have the same reverence for Fleming or feel his material has been mined, maybe they just want to put their own stamp on it or purely use the films as reference points? Certainly there are a lot more questions in the air for this next Bond film than perhaps there ever has been before. I just hope they retain Bond’s edge and put all the money on the screen.
Sign In or Register to comment.