Breaking news — Bond 23 with Craig officially canceled

[007]

It might be more than 3 years this time though.

[katied]

There must be a point where it would make more sense to reboot again with a new actor than let DC return 4+ years after he last played the role. They always get a short term boost & flurry of interest from recasting with the curiosity factor.

4-6 years= replace Craig. Sorry, I know that's an unpopular opinion with the pro- Craigs but what're they going to do if Craig comes back after that long?Plastic surgery(and lots of it)?Be realistic.

[Captain Nash]

Craigs looks are certainly not an issue, and I really think many of the comments on him looking too old are getting long in the tooth.
What about chubby Connery in DAF, or wrinkly Rog in AVTAK? Even dear old Pierce was starting to look a little rough around the edges in DAD, and would've looked past it for Bond 21.
Bond needs to look mature, and even if he's in his mid to late forties, Craig as Bond will still look the part.

[Capt. Sir Dominic Flandry]

"This parrot is not dead, it's sleeping. And Daniel Craig will be back for a 3rd Bond movie in 2014"

[Blowfeld]

A planned three-year break is different from a situation spiralling out of control, with the planned release dating at first being pushed back then postponed now apparently cancelled out right.

[katied]

It's not just Craig looking old..Will Craig still be physically able to play Bond in a few years(if it comes to that?) Do we want a Sir Rog/AVTAK situation again?I think not. Plus, will the public still care when he's done a string of flop films between now and when Bond 23 goes into production( *if* it does).

[Kristatos]

It's not just his age, though, it's whether audiences would want to see a third Craig film. After QOS, the series needs the shot in the arm that a new actor will provide. It pains me to say this, as a fan of Dalton's Bond, but I doubt Goldeneye would have done as well at the box office with Tim in the role. Craig fans need to also get real. QOS made less money at the box office than CR, even with 2 years of ticket price inflation and a shorter running time (allowing more performances in theaters) to help it along. it sold about half as many DVDs as CR*. It was the most front-loaded Bond film since detailed box office records began, making 40% of its gross in its opening weekend, whereas the Dalton and Brosnan films and CR were all in the 20-30% range, and Moore's films from MR onwards were typically in the 10-15% range. That's generally considered a key indicator of the film's "legs", with a front-loaded film indicating poor word of mouth. In all respects, QOS has the stench of failure about it and something has to change if the Brocs want to win those audiences back. Getting rid of Craig would be the most visible way to do it. But will Barbie's hormones triumph over her business sense?

*=in the US, I don't have the figures for worldwide DVD sales. Source: www.thenumbers.com

[The Sweeney]

Whether Craig comes back or not, I'm actually more concerned about the Bond franchise at present.
Will we see another Bond movie made in the next 5 years?

[JackWade CIA]

Understanding what they were attempting with Casino Royale Craig was a brilliant piece of casting. However it's completely understandable why a core group of fans would take offense. Royale was squarely aimed at a completely different audience, most Bond fans could take it for what it was worth a 21st century take on a classic fable that would never incorporate the fundamentals of the old series. It would be fine as that, no is need to confuse the matter, they are 2 completely different series with 2 completely different reasons for Bond. The issue I have is they had no plan for step 2, Quantum is a deplorable mess derailing the concept behind Royale. I doubt they would be able to get Craig's Bond back on track. In that way this hiatus is a blessing because it is more than likely they will not attempt it now.

Bond 23 already had problems like the writer walking off when Mendes joined the project. Besides the idea behind the story seemed very shaky at best, Blofeld in a skirt and the world is really "The Property of a Lady". You know that girl from the Mummy movies. Oh and something shocking would happen dear old M. On paper it may sound alright to some but in practice it gets twisted around. The script for Royale was was better than the movie they shot. I can't imagine even on paper Quantum seemed like good idea.

[katied]

The fact that MGM is suddenly in the s*** doesn't help the problems that EON were having with Bond 23. True, most of the things that were being floated out there were rumours(or were they?), but I think there were issues going on a long time before that.

[Blowfeld]

Whether Craig comes back or not, I'm actually more concerned about the Bond franchise at present.
Will we see another Bond movie made in the next 5 years?

This was always my concern when Daniel was cast. It was such a risk polluting the brand as they chose to. Bond has so many possibilities without rebooting or reducing the character to a thug. While Daniel is directly responsible for the majority of the decisions and other story aspects like the input he had in QoS and was getting for Bond 23. However he is in no way at fault for this unforeseeable calamity. Aside from MGM holding the purse strings the finger of blame has to fall towards EON, there has been some serious mismanagement of the franchise for some time now. I think fans regardless of their stripe are starting to realise it.

Talking with some people about this it seems like MGM is giving more attention to the Hobbit because it a ready to go project where Bond 23 had been shelved before they ever got to work on it. It seems to me like Barbara and Michael were acting the part of divas, they want so much to make the movie, they do not get it so they pout in their room. Then they try to go around their partners back to encourage another studio to buy out MGM's interest. Some of it is excusable as reasonable, I can't argue that. However if they had started production earlier like when MGM had the money to finance it for instance. They knew in 2008 another movie would be tricky with MGM backing it alone (Daniel was out there saying it). They did nothing but take a vacation and sit back and wait. It got worse so they officially sit back and do nothing. It seems some of the criticism about them using the MGM situation as an excuse to not make Bond films may have a little merit. If they wanted to make a Bond movie the way the Hobbit people want to make those movies they would find a way to make it happen. I just get the feeling from them that they don't care. Michael has done this most of his adult life and Barbara grew up in it, it feels to me like the payday was more important to them than the product put out or the people they work with.

Sorry to be so glum it's just I perceive the situation as dire. I felt the same way in the 90s althou then it really was all on the line. I had hoped they learned from that experience and would have never allowed it to happen again!

[Captain Nash]

http://www.mi6.co.uk/news/index.php?ite ... mi6&s=news

It has been a couple of months since EON Productions officially announced that work on the 23rd James Bond film had been put on hold.

The financial woes of MGM have damaged every active project at the studio, so news that 007 was on hiatus too was not a surprise to industry watchers.

"Due to the continuing uncertainty surrounding the future of MGM and the failure to close a sale of the studio, we have suspended development on 'Bond 23' indefinitely. We do not know when development will resume and do not have a date for the release of 'Bond 23,'" stated Michael G Wilson and Barbara Broccoli jointly.

However, it wasn't until UK rag The Daily Mirror stepped in with an anonymous quote that the mass media got in a tizz about the future of 007 and Daniel Craig's tenure in the role. This week, the paper claimed: "Members of the production crew have been told the Bond film has been canned."

James Bond is dead? No. Tabloid sensationalism? You bet.

Gossip Cop - a site that specializes in shooting down false media rumours - got a quote from a source close to Craig on the current "Bond axed" controversy. They said, "The situation remains exactly the same as for the last many months. The filmmakers formally announced then that the current production of Bond 23 was being postponed due to the issues relating to the sale of MGM. Nothing has changed and production is only postponed, not canceled.”


Gutted.

[oscartheman]

Gutted how?Gossip Cop is a tabloid source of its own still doesn't change the facts and only has meaning if you happen to like the term postponed over canceled better.

[Captain Nash]

Take a chill pill oscar. No need to get worked up over something we already know.
Was just posting the story for others to read.

[Mazer Rackham]

It doesn't the situation change much. Has The Daily Mirrors position the crew was being canceled been proven otherwise? I can't imagine why they were kept on standby. Doubtful.

Gossip Cop does do a service in a way, but with sources like "someone close to Craig"? Come on. Do a little better than that. That could be his gardener or the guy who washes his car at the Hollywood Car Wash. While good intentioned GP tend to lend themselves to being a mouthpiece for various parties, as the tabloids do.

[Omega]

A film site had the blurb saying Craig and Mendes will stay put as long as it take MGM to get straitened out. Actually the site backed down a little from when they first printed it. I just don't see it happening unless MGM fast tracks Bond 23, these guys are going to be finding work and can not hold a 8 month blank spot in their calendar for 2012 indefinitely. Honestly there is a lot of momentum for recasting just because it is exciting, more exciting than a known commodity.

People had plenty of reasons to think Pierce Brosnan would be in Bond 21 and Timothy Dalton in Bond 17. I do think Craig will hold on to the title as long as he can for the jobs it will land him but when time comes for Bond 23 in 2013 or 2014 he'll step aside.

[mcbride007]

I wish they could make the same film every two years like they used to. Now we have reboots and delays and it's kiling the longest running film series.

[Dr. No]

I take it nothing new has happened? Their history with Bond actors since Moore left has been crap. Can't be a coincidence did the movie industry change or did they is the question.
I feel bad for Craig in a way but he is better off today than he would be is he hadn't been hired, so there is that. Right now it doesn't seem likely he will come back which I see as a good thing, more than that after the recent history is feels less likely if this were the Moore or Connery Bond franchise I wouldn't believe a actor could be so easily tossed aside. After what happen with Dalton, quit or let go with honor I don't see any one as safe. Maybe overall this will turn out to be a good thing for the sereis.

[Omega]

RT had this and they are normally pretty good.

JAMES BOND'S LICENSE TO KILL MAY BE REVOKED

As movie fans continue to recover from the possibility that MGM's financial woes may prevent us from ever seeing two awesome The Hobbit movies, there was a lot of news this week about MGM's other hugely popular franchise: James Bond. It was just a few months ago that we were hoping to soon see the third Daniel Craig-starring Bond movie directed by Sam Mendes (American Beauty, Road to Perdition) from a script by Peter Morgan (The Queen, Frost/Nixon). And now, not only is that project on hold (as reported a few months ago), "James Bond 23" might be totally scrapped altogether. Now, EON will probably eventually find some way to revive James Bond, but the real immediate issue is that the longer this particular version of James Bond is delayed, the less likely it will be that we ever see it happen. And that includes the very idea of Daniel Craig as our current leaner, meaner Bond for the 21st century. By the time Bond gets revived, we might be hearing stories about younglings like Robert Pattinson being considered for the role (I mostly kid, but a big part of me knows that's not entirely impossible). If there was good news on the James Bond front this week, it came from Inception/The Dark Knight director Christopher Nolan who said on the red carpet this week that he'd "love to do a Bond film." That doesn't mean that he will direct one, but it's nice to know that one of the directors most in a position to get dream projects made has an interest. Meanwhile, in other MGM franchise news, the company is reportedly considering the possibility of selling off its rights to The Hobbit to New Line Cinema and Warner Bros for the extra cash to help the studio recover as a whole. Of course, in Monopoly terms, that would sort of be like auctioning off Boardwalk so that you can build houses on Baltic.

And they had this which made me wonder if a Morgan Bond might be ok.

#6 JOHN LE CARRE'S VERY BRITISH CLASSIC GETS A VERY BRITISH CAST

That headline was written before this writer realized that Michael Fassbender is actually German-Irish, but it still basically gets the point across, even if it's only 75% correct. Ralph Fiennes, Colin Firth, Gary Oldman and Michael Fassbender have signed on to star in the upcoming adaptation of John Le Carre's Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. The Working Title/Studio Canal coproduction will mark the English-language debut of director Tomas Alfredson, whose vampire drama Let the Right One In still stands as one of the best foreign-language imports of recent years. Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy is the story of George Smiley, a prematurely-retired intelligence expert who is brought back to service to help find a spy who is working within the upper tiers of the UK's Secret Intelligence Service. Le Carre's novel, which was previously adapted as a 1979 British TV series starring Sir Alec Guinness, was adapted by screenwriter Peter Morgan (The Queen, Frost/Nixon), who has also recently worked on the next James Bond project (see above). Filming of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy will start in London in October.

[Omega]

Bumming around the internet this morning. The majority of films sites are convinced Bond 23 is canned, a select few are going on about how wonderful Sam Mendes could have been, one guy admitted he did't like Bond movies but Mendes would have been great and it would have been great to see how he changed the character. Someone else said it would be an emotionally driven Bond, We've had two of those and they were not that good. I thought the promise of Bond 23 was they were going to make better getting back to the basics not try to redeem Qos. I think the only reason Cr worked on whatever levels it did was the core of the story was from a book and some people didn't notice the emotional bagged they stapled or how weak and pretentious it was didn't bother enough people. The other thing is Craig is mostly emotionless in his movies I do not see where they are coming up with some of this stuff.

Looking around the big thing seems to me to be the whole Craig and Mendes are not going anywhere headline seems to be from a fanboy wings of something. It will make other fans boys happy but I don't think it is in reality. There was talk like yeah it is postponed but next April they start on it again and Sam and Craig will be at it. Where do they get this? April 2011 start? How is that even possible. It is not. My guess is Sam and Craig would try to do a 2012 Bond, but that would be a big mistake because it would be rushed and following the mistakes they made for the last two. Also by 2012 for an anniversary Bond it is played out and not good idea. Unless it is a recast and reboot of the origin story. I looked it up guess what before 2002 there were no anniversary films so it is not that important.

My last best guess is if by this time next year Bond 23 is not in production getting ready to film earl 2012, Craig is gone. Beyond 2012 to 2013 2014 he will be too old to continue. He might be physically able to do it but then he did have complaints about everything hurting after Qos, but his looks will be long past pretending old people think he looks young, cause young people never thought he looked young to begin with.