About that whole Bond 26 thing

Image for the official James Bond feed on Twitter

This week, a website I am totally unfamiliar with stated that Tom Hardy is definitely the next film James Bond.

Naturally, Bond fans jumped in to debate, argue and discuss whether this was so. I’m not going to link to it because there has been enough heat and no light.

Perhaps a better subject would be under what circumstances a Bond 26 movie would occur.

Specifically, with the advent of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19), is making a $200 million to $250 million movie practical anymore?

The Christopher Nolan-directed Tenet was supposed to save cinema. It’s not happening in the United States (still a major movie market). Warner Bros., Tenet’s studio, has responded by delaying (again) Wonder Woman 1984 to Christmas.

But, Bond fans say, James Bond is different. It’s an established intellectual property (known as IP).

Sure. But a second COVID-19 wave is occurring internationally. And the U.S. as a whole, still has yet to get the pandemic under control. Major states such as Florida, Texas and Georgia are a big mess. Theaters in New York and California are still closed.

The traditional business model was movies came out in theaters, followed by video on demand, followed by home video. All of those sources were vital.

Movie studios (including Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Bond’s home studio) were grappling with the future before COVID-19. Netflix was the main source of pressure and the studios were coming out with their own streaming competitors.

The pandemic puts more pressure than ever on studios. What’s the future for movies in theaters?

Tom Hardy is guaranteed to be the next James Bond? The question is whether James Bond movies are guaranteed in the future.

No Time to Die is a pre-COVID-19 film trying to come out amid COVID-19. The future for Bond is uncertain — as uncertain as it is for movies generally.

Nolan 007 mania continues

Christopher Nolan

Christopher Nolan is busy promoting his World War II drama Dunkirk but that hasn’t stopped people from wondering if 007 might be in the director’s future.

Nolan was a guest on a podcast by MTV. It lasts 39 minutes and the Bond portion comes in about 24 minutes into it. However, if you’re busy, @Bond25Film on Twitter posted a transcript about the James Bond part of the discussion.

Among other things, in response to a question, Nolan said actor Tom Hardy would “be amazing. I mean, he really would” playing Bond.

Essentially, it’s the reverse of a Daily Beast interview early this year where Hardy said “it would be so cool” to play Bond while being directed by Nolan.

Hardy has been in a number of Nolan films, including Dunkirk and The Dark Knight Rises. Clearly, the actor and director comprise a mutual admiration society.

In the MTV podcast, Nolan provided a caveat. He said Barbara Brocccoli and Michael G. Wilson of Eon Productions are “such incredible producers, they do greatly on their own.” Also, Nolan says, “I’m not saying anything” about how he’d do a Bond film.

About that Christopher Nolan directing 007 film thing

Christopher Nolan

There’s been another breakout of “Christopher Nolan directing James Bond fever.”

The subject comes up every so often. It’s well known the London-born Nolan likes James Bond movies. His Batman trilogy (2005-2012) contains references to Bond films. So does 2010’s Inception.

In May 2013, Nolan’s name was briefly mentioned as a possibility for directing Bond 24 (eventually titled SPECTRE) by Baz Bamigboye of the Daily Mail. Nolan’s representatives were supposed to have been approached. But, two months later, the return of Sam Mendes, the director of Skyfall, was announced.

The newest outbreak of Nolan fever occurred Jan. 15 after actor Tom Hardy told the Daily Beast website that it “would be so cool” to play Bond with Nolan directing. Hardy has been in several Nolan-directed movies, including the upcoming Dunkirk.

With all that in mind, here are some observations and a question.

Skyfall was Nolan-lite:  Mendes, during Skyfall’s production, acknowledged The Dark Knight (the second of Nolan’s trilogy) was an inspiration for Skyfall. As a result, there are a number of similarities.

There are two ways to look at this. One, you already have an idea what a Nolan-directed Bond film would be like. Or two, why not have the real thing?

Nolan would work with some familiar faces: For SPECTRE, Eon Productions hired a Nolan director of photography (Hoyte Van Hoytema) and film editor (Lee Smith). Both worked with the director on Dunkirk.

What’s more, veteran Eon special effects man Chris Courbould also was a crew member on Nolan’s Batman films and Inception.

Nolan still would make changes: The director likes to write his own movies. No Bond director has also had a writing credit on the 007 film he helmed. It also seems likely Nolan would want to bring Hans Zimmer aboard as composer. They’ve worked together a number of times, also including Dunkirk.

Logo of Syncopy, Christopher Nolan’s production company

Does Eon bring Syncopy into the Bond mix? With Nolan, you typically also get the involvement of his production company, Syncopy. Nolan gets a producer’s credit. So does his wife, Emma Thomas.

Bond films traditionally were a producer-driven operation. Since the late 2000s. Eon boss Barbara Broccoli has been more enthused by “auteur” directors (Mendes and Quantum of Solace’s Marc Forster). But would Eon accommodate Nolan’s production company in a Bond film?

Many 007 fans reply something like, “Nolan loves James Bond so of course he will!”

This blog is a little more skeptical of that. At this point, though, there’s not much point in speculation. Bond 25 doesn’t have a director or a confirmed leading man. So we’ll see.

Hardy says being 007 with Nolan directing would be cool

Image for the official James Bond feed on Twitter

Actor Tom Hardy gave an interview to The Daily Beast website where, in effect, he says playing 007 with Christopher Nolan would be cool.

Before anyone’s blood pressure rises, here’s the key excerpt:

You know, when I interviewed Christopher Nolan he discussed his life-long desire to direct a Bond film. What about Chris directing you in a Bond film—maybe with your old drama school pal Michael Fassbender as the villain?

Oh, wow, Chris would be amazing! Wow, that would be cool. That would be so cool.

Do you want to play Bond? I tend to see your name on a lot of these wish lists, although I’m sure they’re just sort of dreaming up any and all talented Brit actors who look the part.

You know, there’s a saying amongst us in the fraternity of acting, and in the fellowship of my peer group, that if you talk about it you’re automatically out of the race. So I can’t possibly comment on that one! If I mention it, it’s gone. But Chris Nolan, what a fantastic director for a Bond movie. Because Daniel [Craig] is so good, and what [Sam] Mendes and Barbara [Broccoli] have done has been so impressive, that it would be a very hard reimagination to follow after. I wonder what the next installment of that franchise would become, and I think when you mention someone like Christopher Nolan, that’s a very powerful figure to bring into that world who could bring something new and create something profound—again.

That’s it. It’s not actual news. It’s all hypothetical, as far as anyone knows.

In recent years, some fans have protested that Hardy, 39, is too short to play James Bond. At five-foot-nine, he is about (give or take) an inch shorter than incumbent Daniel Craig, who turns 49 in March.

UPDATE (Jan. 16). Gerry Conway, a veteran writer who has scripted comics for Marvel and DC as well as writing for television series, weighed in approvingly on Twitter. His credits include co-creating the Punisher for Marvel during a run of scripting Spider-Man in the 1970s.

I’d kill to see Tom Hardy play James Bond in a Christopher Nolan 007 film. Shot in Imax. In Chicago. https://t.co/9ghuK8UhQe

— Gerry Conway (@gerryconway) January 16, 2017

 

Limbo for the serious 007 fan awaiting real news

Image for the official James Bond feed on Twitter

It’s a weird time to be a James Bond fan.

A typical social media day for a 007 fan consists of the following:

–The latest speculation who will be the next James Bond, whether it be (in alphabetical order) Henry Cavill, Idris Elba, Michael Fassbender, Tom Hardy, Tom Hiddleston, Aidan Turner and who knows who else.

This gets repackaged in various ways. When the various actors are out promoting their latest movie or television shows, they get asked about Bond and that becomes the story instead. Or, to attract clicks, an outlet will write about why some possible Bonds shouldn’t get the role. Or, British bookies adjust their odds for the next 007 and stories get generated.

Whatever. It’s not real news.

–A notification that today is either the anniversary of a birth date of a Bond actor or crew member or the annivesary of the death of a Bond actor or crew member.

–An obituary of a Bond actor or crew member, such as the passing of four-time 007 director Guy Hamilton.

There’s an odd effect to all this. For the serious fan, one can’t excited about the future Bond actor speculation. At this point, we don’t even know there’s a vacancy. Yeah, Daniel Craig talked in some interviews like he was ready to go but nobody *really knows*. And none of the speculative stories has any *actual information.*

Meanwhile, the barrage of the latter two social media postings (anniversaries and obituaries) keep pushing fans to look backward, rather than forward. It’s like “Throwback Thursday” every day.

The obituaries are important, because they recognize the accomplishments of those who can no longer speak for themselves. The anniversaries have their place but in the absence of actual news, they get more attention than they should.

In terms of Bond 25, we probably won’t get any real news until Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer either signs a new contract with Sony Pictures or selects a new studio to release the next 007 film. Afterall, you can’t have a release date until there’s a studio to release it. And MGM doesn’t have the resources to do so by itself.

So, for now, Bond fans are in for a form of limbo. The future is foggy while what little hard information is out there pulls attention backward instead of forward.