Reading these obits on James Bond, I think reports of 007′s motion picture demise because of MGM’s near-bankruptcy have been greatly exaggerated. Despite an article out of the UK that spread virally, insiders insist nothing tangible has happened. While Sony, Fox, and Warner Bros would love to grab the Eon Productions franchise, I’m told reliably that as long as MGM’s debt restructuring is preceded by a pre-packaged bankruptcy, Bond isn’t going anywhere. [UPDATE: “You are absolutely right, there is no new news. Development will resume once MGM is viable again, as Danjaq can't go anywhere without them. So all bets are off. No idea when this will get resolved,” a source integral to the Bond franchise told Deadline London editor Tim Adler today. Eon is a subsidiary of Danjaq, the Broccoli family holding company responsible for the copyright and trademarks to everything James Bond on screen.] While the studio’s beleaguered backers unwisely allowed MGM and its library to languish by not making new movies and benching MGM’s creative and marketing/distribution executives while it staged a futile sales auction that attracted bottom-fishing bids, MGM has made sure to meets the minimum obligations to its two gems, James Bond and The Hobbit. The studio is mulling whether to change its lethargic strategy and free up money for back-to-back Hobbit films to keep the first film on track for a December 2012 release. That’s because Peter Jackson is willing to direct the films but might not if those release dates get pushed. There is no such ticking clock on 007.
As Deadline has reported, director Sam Mendes responded to the Bond delay by setting a feature adaptation of the Ian McEwan novel On Chesil Beach (he hopes Carey Mulligan will star) and directing the Broadway-bound musical adaptation of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Daniel Craig is taking other jobs, too. He’s starring in Cowboys & Aliens and negotiating to star in the David Fincher-directed The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. I’m told both talents fully plan to come back to James Bond after MGM sorts itself out. That game plan — Spyglass and Summit are believed to be the front runners to steer the studio — should be in place by the early fall, I’m told. If Spyglass wins the day and the studio sheds its distribution/marketing unit, Bond will have several studios chasing it, and the winner will likely make a deal that includes servicing the MGM library, a labor intensive enterprise.






No fun in a bond movie without the gadgets and style.
Pls bring back the gadgets this time.
I thought Steve McQueen made a great Bond! LOL
David Tennant should be the next Bond .
He makes a great doctor and would be even better as Bond.
Craig is the best Bond by far, but has yet to be in the best Bond film.
Craig is a very fine actor, and a terrible Bond. He has all the physical shortcomings that made Moore’s action scenes so ridiculous, what with his real-life acknowledged fears and his almost frail physical action (look closely and you’ll see the gaps and misses)without any of the easy charm that made Moore suave. Brosnan was an awesome Bond, if only he had been given decent scripts to work with. Brosnan would have made Casino Royale an almost perfect movie. Good writing with the right casting. Quantum of Solace was just crap, which just goes to show what happens when a mediocre Bond gets a bad script. Brosnan got bad scripts and still came out looking like Bond.
If Connery has been as smooth in his younger years as Bond as he got to be later in life he would have been perfect as well. He just had a few too much rough edges then.
Quantum was a terrible script. The only enjoyable parts were the meticulous action sequences and Marc Forster didn’t even direct those. His second unit did. Flemming would be spinning in his grave to see how un-suave Craig is. Although, I agree, he is agreat actor, “Enduring Love” – amazing performance.
Ian Flemmng’s James Bond had a scar on his cheek and smoked a hell of a lot. No Bond in the films appear to be anything like in the books.
Daniel Craig at least has the blood thirsty emotions of the Bond from the books.
I think Daniel Craig has been superb as 007. He played a tough and realistic Bond that Ian Fleming would have been proud of. Craig is similar to Timothy Dalton in a way but without the moodiness.
It would be great to see Craig return to do further Bond movies – he was far better than Pierce Brosnan who seemed too suave for the role.
Craig always struck me as the tough guy that Bond would fight in the movies, like when Bond/Connery fought Robert Shaw in “From Russia with Love”. In other words, Craig looks like a great bad guy but not the suave 007. But Craig was good in Casino Royale and he had a good story/script to work with. I know Hollywood likes to “reboot” movie characters all the time like they did with Bond but I think they went overboard. More realistic characters and griping, exciting storylines are always welcome but did they really need to squeeze ALL of the charm and playfulness out of Bond?
I hate the new bond movies. They’re no fun! No gadgets, no quips, no humor.
I hate the new bond movies. They’re no fun! No gadgets, no tongue in cheek quips, no humor!!!