Bond 23 Gets The Axe
As a huge James Bond fan, this news depresses the hell out of me. According to the Mirror, the newest chapter in the spy series has been shut down due to MGM’s ongoing financial woes. The studio, which has been home to 007 since the beginning, is drowning in debt and in need of a life preserver. Sadly, no one is coming to their rescue. Daniel Craig will likely never driving an Aston Martin again, at least for a salary. Depressing.
The as of yet untitled Bond 23 was to be directed by Sam Mendes, but it’s likely he’ll pursue other projects since the flick is in limbo. Too bad. It would have been interesting to see how someone of Mendes’ talents would approach the Bond universe.
So, for now, the franchise is dead. As are all of MGM’s properties, including the much discussed The Hobbit, which is suffering from its own set of delays and problems. Perhaps some kind soul with a heart of gold and a bank account to match will ride in on white steed to save the day. But until that day comes, we’re all left to wonder.
I dig Craig as Bond and was eager to see how he tackled the role his third time out. Casino Royale was brilliant, while Quantum of Solace fell a bit flat. Word is it could be years before 007 resurfaces. Ugh. I need a drink. Shaken, not stirred, of course.
[Via FilmDrunk]
[...] could be years before 007 resurfaces. Ugh. I need a drink. Shaken, not stirred, of course. Source: Bond 23 Gets The Axe | FlickSided Reply With Quote [...]
That is really a sad story.
Well, if MGM, like most Hollywood movie companies, stopped churning out crap movies they wouldn’t have such financial woes. Most of them operate on the “well, it’s a write off” model of business. Seriously, did anyone question a comedy-action movie with Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz? The “big-names + whatever-you-put-on-paper plot x lots of chase scenes and pyrotechnics” formula isn’t working. A movie about a woman with a crazy Greek family dating a hippie starring an unknown middle-aged actress, a B-level TV star produced by the wife of a movie star did better.
MGM, I have a little suggestion, try lets say with the Hobbit project, sell right now $5 down load coupons that can be used to legally download a high def. version of the film the same day it is released. Why not give it a try. You can only lose more money if you keep doing things the old way. I will not see a movie at the theator for $14 , just to have idiots disturb my movie watching pleasure. That is why I have a home theater setup. Please release movies for download on opening day, I like the movies you make and would Pay(invest) in advance for titles I Like, the hobbit for example.
[...] MGM’s ongoing financial woes. The studio, which has been home to 007 since the beginning, is drowning in debt and in need of a life preserver. Sadly, no one is coming to their rescue. Daniel Craig will likely never driving an Aston Martin again, at least for a salary. Depressing. Read ahead [...]
MGM is going broke because they ruined the franchise in the last 2 movies.
They took out all the cool gadgets, No Q Gadgets?
The Leader of the agency appears to be an aging lesbian.
They stripped bond down, tied him to a chair, beat him with a rope, and emasculated him.
They removed the Bond Girls, and the Bond music, both at the start and during the flick.
The last 2 movies were not the classic James Bond flicks, they took out all the cool parts that made the franchise.
Bring back the mini foldup jet!
Give that Aston Martin some gadgets and guns!
Bring back Pussy Galore!
RIP James Bond we will miss ya…
Excellent points Bondfan. The last 2 movies were not true to the series. Hopefully the next movie will bring back the gadgets, girls, and great lines. I also hope that Daniel Craig’s days as Bond are done.
The last two movies made the most money of any of the Bond films.
Bondfan says:
“MGM is going broke because they ruined the franchise…”
I completely agree. I don’t know who or what those Daniel Craig movies were but weren’t James Bond. If you want proof, consider that if they hadn’t used the name James Bond in their marketing and as the lead character’s name, you would have no way of knowing that they were Bond movies. In other words, if you didn’t already know they were Bond movies, you would never identify them as such. In all the other ones, there was no question about it. They removed everything “Bondian” about Bond.
QJB, that’s the same logic that dictates that the last few Predator movies (AvP and AvP 2) are better because they made more money than the original…
The last two films didn’t adhere to the franchise? Are you guys kidding me?
Have you ever seen the original “Casino Royale”? Before Connery got involved? It was satire.
As was Brosnan’s last chapter. They ran out of steam. The ideal thing to have done was to reboot the series, from the beginning, BEFORE Bond was the Bond we grew to love. And despite a blonde-haired, blue-eyed man playing our gentlemanly assassin, they succeeded flawlessly at starting from the beginning.
Why are there no Bond girls? Because in the original book, Bond fell in love. And got burnt. This is why he becomes the womanizer everyone grew to love.
The reboot was great. Quantum of Solace wasn’t great, sure. But it was the next logical chapter in the amelioration of our favorite protagonist. It was this third film, now sadly scrapped, where we were finally going to see our Bond start to develop into the man we know…
This is all about Wall St. interfering with Hollywood, at least when Kerkorian owned MGM/UA he never took so much cash out that the studio itself was in jeopardy.
This is very depressing, but shouldn’t just another studio be able to pick up the pieces? The last two James Bond movies were amongst the most profitable of them all – and a third one is guaranteed to make money. It doesn’t make economic sense to not develop a third one. There are hundreds of millions of dollars to be made here.
Then again, I don’t fully understand this whole system, but it just sounds stupid to me.
“They stripped bond down, tied him to a chair, beat him with a rope, and emasculated him.”
@Bondfan, this was actually in the book that the movie was based on, so you really can’t criticize it.
The last 2 Bond movies have nothing to do with MGM’s financial woes (in fact they are about the only MGM movies to turn a profit in years). As far as the last two not being James Bond movies, sorry, it was the Brosnan movies that were not like classic Bond movies. While QoS left something to be desired, Casino Royale was easily the best Bond film since 1969. If you want to check out the real Bond, watch the first couple Bond films or better yet, read Fleming’s novels. Once you watch From Russia With Love or read the books, you will realize that Daniel Craig brought James Bond BACK to the cinema, not take him away.
[...] Bond 23 Gets The Axe Scott Tunstall | Jul 06, 2010 | 15 comments Leave a Comment [...]
Read the books. They are not funny. They are gritty, depressing and all round awsome. Casino Royale and Daniel Craig brought the “novel” bond back to life and I loved it! QoS… meh.. but I agree the 3rd movie was where we were going to see Craig grow into the smart mouthed, womanizing bond we remember from Connery days.
Whoa!! Been watching bond since ‘the spy who loved me.’ Daniel Craig (IMHO) might well have been the best Bond. Well fleshed-out characters, great stories, and Mr. Craig – he is Bond; the right Bond for this time. Sadly, I can barely remember the names of the actors after Moore. And as for P.B., I could not even sit through his movies free on TV – Cardboard Bond.
I loved Casino Royale, and though Quantum of Solace wasn’t up to snuff, it was the first time they had tried doing an immediate sequel to a Bond film with a new and original plot not derived from a novel (Though the name at least came from a Bond-related short story.), and it was at the very least a respectable try.
What depresses me is how people liked the awfully overplayed cheesiness of the outdated Bond films that were marketed as Action/Thriller when the reboot was a real ESPIONAGE movie, not a “spy flick.” Granted he didn’t have the immediate edge you expected, but that’s what was great about it, he could evolve his character. The term spy has grown to mean idiots who run around with terribly hashed ideas for “gadgets” that have conveniently scripted plot points, and that, in my opinion, began to drag down the image of the world’s greatest “spy.” He’s truly an espionage agent, and the Q lab was just a convenient spot to add some rife comedy that did nothing for the film except introduce an item that had an easily scripted moment later in the movie.
I’m not saying I hate the old Bond movies, far from it. But Bond is an espionage agent, not a spy, and with the third movie he could have been allowed to finally shake off that terrible name association.
This is just like comparing Nolan’s Batman franchise with the Burton franchise. The last two of those movies weren’t directed by Burton and subsequently went down the drain for their terrible story telling and use of gadgets and puns. Batman Begins gave Batman a gritty punch of realism that allowed us to watch the character develop in a new way, a much darker way. Same with Bond. He’s supposed to be cynical and dark, with a womanizing side. Not some tongue-in-cheek “spy.” Read the novels for further proof.
good, daniel craig sucked
No more Bond movies with bad plots peppered with nauseatingly silly puns? Oh, no!
I really don’t understand how anyone who saw other actors play Bond can possibly like Daniel Craig. He’s as much Bond as he’s Lsdy Gaga. The last two movies sucked big time to the point I no longer want to see Bond movies. Bond was killed when Craig took over. Tom Cruise would have been a better Bond than this clown! IMHO Pierce Brosnan was the best Bond ever. I hope if MGM ever decides to give it another try, they’ll find a new actor who actually looks appropriate for the role.
James Bond Will Return!
Mark, Pierce Brosnan was the best bond… if you only watched Goldeneye.
I think we can all agree… Connery was the quintessential Bond. But after that… Craig really does a great job at revisualizing the character…
[...] Did Bond 23 officially get the axe? Yes, considerably. (FS) [...]
I read every JB novel and saw every movie as it came out. Daniel Craig’s James Bond is exactly as Ian Fleming wrote it,. a “blunt instrument”. Making “CR” the prequel was a stroke of genius. Those of you that think that JB movies are about gadgets (inserted for the movies to out do the prior movie) miss the real intent of Fleming. JB was to be a “hands on” type of agent, guns and gadgets as a last resort. Get real and read the novels…you’ll see that “CR” and “QOS” were closer to Fleming’s intent than anything else, with the exception of Sean Connery’s portrayal, which is classic.
That’s a bummer. i hope they do fix up their financial situation. No more Bond would be the death of an era.
Say it isn’t so!
Feel the need to comment here, cause your pissing me off with ‘the last 2 bond films were not bond & killed the franchise’.
The only good Brosnan bond film was Goldeneye. Everything else after that was shocking (madonna? really??)
And for those who say “the new films were not bond” do me a favour and read the books if your such huge fans – then tell me they’re not.
Also, the reason they didn’t show his name in the casino royale trailers is because it was a reboot & a lot of fuss was made over craig saying “bond, james bond” and only an idiot wouldn’t realise that it was a bond film given the hype.
Sure Quantum of Solace was poor, but bond has veered from awesome (goldeneye) to fucking awful (moonraker???) for years.
Political Correctness has killed off the’great’ films coming out of the USA
I FIND IT IRRITATING BEING TOLD HOW I SHOULD THINK WHEN WATCHING A FILM, SO I’VE BECOME AMBIVALENT ABOUT GOING TO SEE A FILM. YOU CAN ALWAYS DETECT THE ‘POLITICALLY CORRECT’ UNDERCURRENT RUNNING THROUGH A FILM. I USED TO LOVE FILMS, BUT AS I’VE GOT OLDER, I DON’T WANT TO BE LECTURED TO AS TO HOW I SHOULD THINK, OR THAT MY THOUGHTS SHOULD BE RESTRUCTURED, ESPECIALLY WHEN I DISAGREE WITH THE POLITICALLY CORRECT CONSTRUCT PUT INTO THE FILM, SO I END UP NOT GOING TO SEE THEM. I’VE COME TO REALISE I’M NOT ALONE IN THIS, AS I’VE TALKED ABOUT IT WITH ‘PEOPLE’ BYE THE BYE.
[...] MGM kills James Bond [...]
Seriously guys, Casino Royale was the best bond since golden eye easily, I love how everyone complained about the movie missing the tedious details that weren’t really necessary in the first place(not saying they didn’t make for solid entertainment) but really the movie doesn’t suffer from having a few less gadgets if you ask me. It maybe even leaves more room for character development and creativity, i dunno i just think Casino Royale was bang on and no one should really be bashing it.
Yeah Quantum of Solace was lacking but there were much worse bond movies in the past! It’s not fair to say they ruined the franchise when Casino Royale was so great. you can’t say Daniel was a bad actor either, i’m a real movie goer and as far as i’m concerned he did an excellent job and was very convincing.
P.s. Whoever said Tom Cruise could do a better job can go die in a hole.
Agree with many of the commnents about how movies are made today – one joke, rubbish plot, stiff actors and CGI – but not about the criticism of Daniel Craig and the last 2 films. Few months back four of us decided to do a marathon Bond weekend and watch every single film in order ( including the ludicrous Casino Royale with Woody Allen/David Niven). We had all read every book as teenagers, and had seen each film at a cinema and at least once subsequently. Surprisingly we are still fans and are still speaking to each other, and what’s more we all agreed. Connery was done by Thunderball, Lazenby was a stiff, Moore was just being The Saint – who was already annoying on TV – and Brosnan was a glorified mannequin who spent most of his time out-running bullets. The really surprising thing was that Dalton’s Bond stands the test of time quite well. Top marks go to Craig though, who has been a breath of fresh air. As for those who slag him as a blue eyed blond and thereby not in the true spirit of Ian Flemming’s original character, this is probably based on the image of Connery rather than their knowledge of the text. I would simply suggest that they read the books. Craig has nailed the true spirit of Flemming’s Bond perfectly. And as for Cruise as Bond? Let me guess the plot. Bond is a spy. A very good spy. Then he has a crisis of confidence. Then he meets a girl. She helps him become a really good spy again ( see Top Gun, Days of Thunder, etc etc) Yawn.
Not surprising; the first two he did were uninspiring.
But then I watch Bond movies for over-the-top-villains, Q’s Gadgets, Buxom beauties with silly names and Bond’s irrepressible sense of humor, none of which the Craig=Bond movies did very well.
I’m not shocked at all considering Quantum of Solace was one of the biggest letdowns of all time.
They should take a few years off and then make a direct sequel to Royale and pretend QOS never happened.
The only reason they killed the movie is because the news is coming out that he is gay. They don’t want a gay actor to be James Bond, since we as the audience would never buy it. Such a crock of shi+, just admit it and move on MGM, don’t feed us horseshit about financial woes when you already gave the greenlight.
poor show, surely some rich fanatic will pay a percentage of the cost. he could be a hero
[...] Bond may not be as dead as we first thought, but he’s still very much on life support. The good news is director Sam Mendes and star [...]
Anyone and I mean ANYONE who thinks Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace is not true to the series needs to rewatch Dr. No or From Russia With Love. Sure from Russia With Love started to feature the gadgets but then Bond was using gadgets in Quantum of Solace as well. You see, the point here is that Craig’s Bond goes back to where the series was at in the 60s. It was about plot, not about gadgets.
I agree that the said George, this is a sad story I would like to see a continue of Casino Royale!
[...] quantum of solace here: News that James Bond could die is just “depressing,” says Scott Tunstall in Flick Sided. While Quantum of Solacemay have fallen “a bit flat,” Casino Royale was [...]
Bye Bye Bond Miss u
Has anyone taken the time to look at any of the cases the movies come in now? FOX and Sony have been putting moey into these movies to be distributed so the next question is which one will buy the rights to do the next movie MGM is there for distribution and some backing thats why EON is the production company to produce the film another company can distribute the films and pay royalties to MGM so they can bank some money. Not only that but in the past they have rereleased older movies so to ramp up interest especially to pull in new fans that didnt see it in the cinema originally. For them to axe Bond is just a poor excuse.
I agree with Goldfinger’s comments. It would be a great shame not to see a third Daniel Craig Bond movie, where we get to see him become the man – and the agent – that CR and QoS have been leading up to.
As for the financial woes… anyone with a fat wallet and half a brain should back the making of the next Bond movie since it will make it all back plus more. Or get the Hobbit trilogy made since they’ll make tons of money, easy.
QOS is bad,a J.bond with no sense of humour,less interest in women,etc,cannot tell whether it has to do with Daniel Craig himself or the character he had to play.
Barbara Broccoli has made something like three billion dollars from James Bond, she could fully fund the next 10 movies and not even notice the money was gone from her account!
How about a little payback for over 20 years of loyal patrons?
After Sean Connery left it got progressively worse until the final unBond guy , Daniel Craig ended it all. Connery will always be the one and only real Bond.
If Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace were “prequels,” then M should have been played by a younger man- not Judi Dench. If you wanted to remain true to the Ian Fleming Bond characters.
It’s a good thing Bond 23 and Daniel Craig have been benched. The whole Bond thing was becoming a confused mess. One couldn’t tell if the movie was a prequel or a sequel.
The Cubby Broccoli movies were a mirror to the times, the 1960’s, 70’s, 80’s and even Pierce Brosnan and the Brioni tuxed 1990’s.
After Brosnan- undoubtebly the best Bond since Sean Connery- Bond movies took a left turn into irrelevancy. Bond producers could not figure out a way to make the character Bond, his mission relevant to the 2000’s and the war on terrorism, the rebirth of the Cold War, Industrial Espionage by the Chinese and environmental disasters.
Craig was too brutish a Bond- lacking panache, savois fair.
Should James Bond return- I hope that the writers, director, producers will find a way to make 007 relevant again to the times. Here’s a clue. Today’s Bond would be reading Maxim, drinking Red Bull, talking on an encrypted Blackberry which the Saudi’s detest, the music will be songs like Can’t Speak French by Girls Aloud.
Until then …..Orbis non sufficit.
Kilburn Hall
Author of James Bond novel Red Indians.
Y’all bitches better recognize