NY Post ties Othello, Bond 25 in plan to get Craig back

Eon boss Barbara Broccoli and current 007 star Daniel Craig

Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post tabloid says Daniel Craig’s Othello play actually is part of a plan by Eon Productions boss Barbara Broccoli to get the actor back — eventually — for Bond 25. Broccoli is a producer of the play, where Craig plays Iago.

The story ran Dec. 11 in the paper’s Page Six gossip feature.

Here’s an excerpt:

(A) source told Page Six of “Othello” and Bond, “Daniel thinks of himself as a ‘serious actor,’ and he wants to stretch his artistic muscles. And Barbara really believes in his talent. For her to do this [play] for him is a gift — of course she wants him back — this is going to entice him to make another Bond movie.” The insider said Broccoli would ask Craig back for the next 007 film, “Bond 25,” sometime after the play’s run. Other insiders add that Craig is amenable to a return to Bond after a hiatus of a few years when he’ll tackle “more serious roles.” (emphasis added)

The story (originally credited to “Page Six team” but now having a byline of Ian Mohr) also quotes a source as saying, “All those people are not in the running,” when asked about “the heated speculation over actors who could take over the role. The story specifically lists Idris Elba, Tom Hiddleston, Michael Fassbender and Jack Huston. It’s not 100 percent clear whether the source was asked about others who’ve been subject of such speculation.

Normally, the blog would put Caveat Emptor in the headline but it wouldn’t fit. Even if true, the Page Six story raises the question just how long a hiatus Craig wants for Bond 25.

Diamonds’ 45th: Rodney Dangerfield of 007 films

Diamonds Are Forever poster

When Diamonds Are Forever came out 45 years ago this month, it was a huge deal. Sean Connery was back! Everything was back to normal in 007 land.

Nowadays, Diamonds is more like the Rodney Dangerfield of James Bond films, not getting any respect.

Some fans complain about too much humor, about Connery not being in shape, about Blofeld (Charles Gray) dressing in drag as a disguise and about Bond’s wardrobe (his fat, pink tie in particular).

Perhaps the biggest advocate of the movie is former United Artists executive David Picker. In his 2013 memoir, Musts, Maybes and Nevers, he says Diamonds saved the Bond series because he got the idea of paying Connery a lot of money to return as 007.

Producers Albert R. Broccoli and Harry Saltzman had cast American John Gavin in the role. But UA became more hands on with the seventh film in the series compared with previous entries. UA (via Picker) didn’t want to take a chance after George Lazenby played Bond in 1969’s On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.

Regardless, Diamonds reflected the creative team’s desire to get back to the style of Goldfinger. As a result, director Guy Hamilton returned. So did production designer Ken Adam after a one-picture absence. John Barry was on board and this time Shirley Bassey would return to perform the title song.

There was new blood, however, in the form of screenwriter Tom Mankiewicz, brought in to rewrite Richard Maibaum’s early drafts. Mankiewicz would work on the next four films of the series, although without credit on The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker.

Q was aghast at Bond’s tie.

Mankiewicz (1942-2010), part of a family prominent in both show business and politics, still generates sharp divisions among Bond fans. Supporters say his witty one liners enlivened the proceedings. (“At present, the satellite is over Kansas,” Blofeld muses at one point. “Well, if we destroy Kansas, the world may not hear about it for years.”) Detractors say he simply didn’t understand Bond and made things too goofy.

The writer’s initial draft actually contained more bits from Ian Fleming’s 1956 novel than would be in the final film. (This 2011 ARTICLE has more details, just scroll down to the section about the Mankiewicz draft.) Still, with Diamonds, it was now standard practice that the films need have little in common with Fleming’s novels.

The legacy of the movie is mixed. Diamonds got 007 into the 1970s. But as late as 1972, people still questioned whether the series could survive without Sean Connery. That wouldn’t be evident until after Diamonds. And the movie clearly began a lighter era for the series.

Still, Bond was Bond. The movie was a success with moviegoers. It had a worldwide box office of $116 million, an improvement from On Her Majesty’s Secret Service’s $82 million and You Only Live Twice’s $111.6 million.

Diamonds fell short of Goldfinger and Thunderball ($124.9 million and $141.2 million respectively). But it did well enough that Eon Productions would again try to find a successor to Connery.