007 franchise sold to Amazon including creative control

[Johnny Utah]

3.05 is Bezos to a tee.

 

[jye4ever]

New Bond Girl

 

[rayeknor]

Please don't say Rings of Power.

I read all of the books several times over a couple decades and I enjoyed both seasons so far and look forward to the third. I find it in between the two Jackson trilogies in terms of quality, somewhere around above middle ish. Held up mostly by the amount of money splashed on the screen and a few key performances.

That said I don't expect Amazon to top the best Bond movies with whatever they will do with the franchise. Imagine having writers like they did on Sopranos, The Wire, on a universe like Bond, people with a story to tell and vision. Will never happen, tbh I think it is the saving grace for the Rings of Power save the visuals, the writers clearly have read the source material and respects it a little bit, unlike 90% of the people crying about it online.

 

[Johnny Utah]

Imagine they got Tony Gilroy to oversee it. His experience from writing Bourne and Andor as well as showrunning the latter would be immensely valuable here.

 

[Mondragon]

Imagine they got Tony Gilroy to oversee it. His experience from writing Bourne and Andor as well as showrunning the latter would be immensely valuable here.

Bond and Gilroy, that'd be a great match, S2 Andor going further into the spy thriller aspect, will likely bare that out even further.
Though for most he'd need to slightly up the pace, and more gratuitous action sequences for Bond, yet the fit is pretty ideal.

 

[Rogerbee]

If you don't want to see your favourite Bond movies on Amazon Prime, buy them on DVD/BluRay now before it's too late!

 

[Khev]

 

[KitbashOfficer]

007 - please infiltrate and obtain all my packages from the US Postal Service and deliver them in 2 days because they suck.

 

[Mr.NoCredit]

It’s better than going to Disney.
(Just my 2 cents worth)

 

[crows]

It’s better than going to Disney.
(Just my 2 cents worth)

not really. it's equal

 

[HanFiredFirst]

It’s better than going to Disney.
(Just my 2 cents worth)

At this point the Bond franchise is screwed anyway - Broccoli and Wilson allowed that monstrosity of a final film, and its outcome (avoiding spoilers) on their watch, so good riddance to them. Just hoping for a 50s/60s era reboot with Bond back as he used to be. Ian Fleming would be furious with how they allowed his character to fade into mediocrity.

 

[chrisstbh]

It’s better than going to Disney.
(Just my 2 cents worth)

I don't really get this "Disney bad" mentality. They're not worse than any other studio. They've made some crap sure but they've also made some great things too.

Amazon, Netflix, Disney, WB, Paramount, etc. the list goes on - they've all got hits and they've all got misses.

 

[jye4ever]

I don't really get this "Disney bad" mentality. They're not worse than any other studio. They've made some crap sure but they've also made some great things too.

Amazon, Netflix, Disney, WB, Paramount, etc. the list goes on - they've all got hits and they've all got misses.

Mando
Rogue One
DD
Infinity Saga

 

[choombaz]

Imagine they got Tony Gilroy to oversee it. His experience from writing Bourne and Andor as well as showrunning the latter would be immensely valuable here.

That is seriously the best idea i have heard in a really long time.

I don't really get this "Disney bad" mentality. They're not worse than any other studio. They've made some crap sure but they've also made some great things too.

The Bear
Only Murders In the Building
Shogun
Dr Who
Abbott Elementary
Justified

 

[Kebron]

Setting it in its period also gets rid of the reliance on tech and gadgets - nothing is more boring than seeing more and more outrageous electronic warfare that reduces the plot to a silly game of one-upmanship.

For those who say Bond is anachronistic, yes, he is! That's the whole point. Set him in his own time, and stop trying to mould him into something he was never meant to be.

Growing up I loved when Q came on with his gadgets. But I was a Roger Moore kid. Modernized Q gadgets just aren’t as interesting to me as submarine cars, spike umbrellas, and pens with various gadgets.

 

[SwedishHeat]

My only hope for this is that they read the books. Over and over. Go back to the source material, and set Bond back where he belongs - 1953 to the mid 1960s. James Bond was shaped by WWII and is active during the Cold War, an exciting and eminently cinematic era, so set them in his era!

Making Bond relevant, or fit for modern audiences, is not doing the character - or Ian Fleming's legacy - any justice. I don't want a female head of the service, I don't want Moneypenny being more than a functionary, I don't want Q being camp and amusing - Bond was operating in a dangerous world and was a dangerous man. I pray to all the gods that whoever runs with this abandons the woeful attempts to modernise Bond that the Broccoli/Wilson films this century have foisted upon lovers of the books, character and early films. Fleming worked in Naval Intelligence - this was a man who knew the murky world of espionage and the dangers it posed, and he created Bond to reflect that.

Setting it in its period also gets rid of the reliance on tech and gadgets - nothing is more boring than seeing more and more outrageous electronic warfare that reduces the plot to a silly game of one-upmanship.

For those who say Bond is anachronistic, yes, he is! That's the whole point. Set him in his own time, and stop trying to mould him into something he was never meant to be.

Was Bond ever like what you describe in the movies?

It always seemed very camp to me. Maybe it's because most movies from 60s seems cheesy now? But even Sean Connery's Bond never came off as some dangerous spy.

 

[Mandible]

It’s better than going to Disney.
(Just my 2 cents worth)

They said in the Variety article that they want to emulate MCU and Star Wars and make a cinematic universe...

Two IP's Disney have ****** into the ground. It's definitively as bad if they're using them as benchmarks.

 

[HanFiredFirst]

Was Bond ever like what you describe in the movies?

It always seemed very camp to me. Maybe it's because most movies from 60s seems cheesy now? But even Sean Connery's Bond never came off as some dangerous spy.

Connery’s Bond wasn’t cheesy, and I don’t agree that most 60s films seem cheesy, at all. Connery portrayed Bond in the early films as a dangerous spy, Timothy Dalton was close to the hard-edged Bond from the books too. The main point is that Amazon have a chance now to make Bond into the character he was in the books, irrespective of earlier performances, moving away from the excesses of the Broccoli films.

 

[jye4ever]

Question is, can Cavill pull off a Bond set in the 50’s/60’s?

I just want a horny Bond again who isn’t afraid to flirt with girls because he will be cancelled on social media lol

 

[HanFiredFirst]

Question is, can Cavill pull off a Bond set in the 50’s/60’s?

I just want a horny Bond again who isn’t afraid to flirt with girls because he will be cancelled on social media

I don’t think Cahill is a natural fit for Bond. But, frankly, anyone would be an improvement on Craig, who looked pissed off to be there. Jack Lowden would be a great Bond.