James Bond Canceled / MGM in Financial Mess
- Thread starter TymerDC
- Start date
thegreatgalling
Master Member
Umm, can anyone explain to me why SONY doesn't OWN Bond if THEY own MGM?
thegreatgalling
Master Member
Ah, looks like I have my facts wrong. SONY was just the distributor, they do not own MGM, BUT Turner Corp. DID buy MGM's film library of past movies.
Sony only owns 20% of MGM.
And MGM doesn't own Bond outright, it just owns distribution rights or something like that. Bond is still owned by EON.
Solo4114
Master Member
I agree that the "Bourne" style of quick-cuts, etc. sucked. But I thought Casino Royale did a fantastic job of showing the literary version of Bond. Read the book if you don't believe me.
It could be FAR more complicated than that, and it would really depend on how the contracts are worded. If there's no language that allows EON to shop the franchise elsewhere in the event of circumstances like these, they may be stuck UNTIL MGM actually declares bankruptcy or somesuch. Which MGM might not do. Or something like that. Like I said, it depends on the wording of the documents.
darthgordon
Sr Member
I highly doubt that just because MGM might be out, that Craig is out. Due to the success they had with him, and his willingness to do it, I'm sure that depending on how long it is before another movie, they'll use him for the next one.
I would also hope that after the criticisms of the last movie, that they'll make some changes to avoid those mistakes again.
The real question is whether MGM will improve financially enough to make another soon, sell the rights or sit on the movie rights for years to come. If the latter becomes the case, then I'd worry.
I would also hope that after the criticisms of the last movie, that they'll make some changes to avoid those mistakes again.
The real question is whether MGM will improve financially enough to make another soon, sell the rights or sit on the movie rights for years to come. If the latter becomes the case, then I'd worry.
It could still be improved. There was, for example, no 1920's 4.5 litre blower Bentley in sight. :lol
I'm bummed both as a wannabe movie-goer and because of that factor. Sincerely hoping that this isn't going to mess up the NZ biz too badly. It has been more fan-oriented than anything we've seen out of Hollywood in a long time. Would suck if it went under.
cayman shen
Master Member
I'm surprised at the anti-Bourne style and anti-Craig. I felt like that's just what the series needed to bring the character out of dated cheesiness. And I really enjoyed Quantum, though I was a bit lost, I felt Craig was compelling enough to allow me to overlook some sloppy writing.
However, I've not been a Bond fan since I was a youth, having felt like I "outgrew" it, so I'm looking at these last two as kind of an outsider, not a longtime diehard.
However, I've not been a Bond fan since I was a youth, having felt like I "outgrew" it, so I'm looking at these last two as kind of an outsider, not a longtime diehard.
Darth Fetty
Sr Member
James Bond will return.
Solo4114
Master Member
The Bourne stuff wasn't a problem in terms of having grittier fight sequences. The problem was with the editing. The Bourne style is to stick you in the middle of an incomprehensible fight sequence. This makes choreographing it as well as filming it a lot easier, but it can also make the fight a LOT more chaotic due to the number of cuts. Casino Royale did fine with it, but Quantum of Solace was edited so poorly that I often couldn't tell which action related to what. And that as throughout the entire movie.
I thought Quantum had a kernel of a decent story but it was broken up by too many gibberish fight sequences. The seriousness of the character, his ruthlessness, etc. that stuff I liked. But that's not Bourne -- it's ORIGINAL Bond, as in, from the books. And yes, that stuff definitely needed to be in there. No more "quips," thanks.
I thought Quantum had a kernel of a decent story but it was broken up by too many gibberish fight sequences. The seriousness of the character, his ruthlessness, etc. that stuff I liked. But that's not Bourne -- it's ORIGINAL Bond, as in, from the books. And yes, that stuff definitely needed to be in there. No more "quips," thanks.
CTF
Sr Member
Not necessarily New Zealand's industry, but definitely Miramar (which is kind of the hub).
takevin
Sr Member
Both of the movies did, no real substance. Damn shame they yanked Pierce Bronson from the bond movies....
CTF
Sr Member
No substance?
There was more emotion in Casino Royale than all the Bond flicks put together from the last thirty years.
