Thor loses hammer, fights Hulk in new trailer

It has been more than three years since the last Thor solo movie and almost two years since the Thunder God was seen in Avengers: Age of Ultron.

With that in mind, the teaser trailer for Thor: Ragnarok is out today, marking the return of Chris Hemworth’s Thor. While technically a Thor solo movie, the Hulk (also last seen in Avengers: Age of Ultron) is around. Tom Hiddleston’s Loki, naturally, is lurking.

Thor’s enchanted hammer appears to be destroyed, so you know the son of Odin is going to be tested. Later, Thor and the Hulk fight in a gladiator-style setting. Take a look if you’re so inclined. The movie is out in November.

‘Little things’ that are bothersome about NY Post 007 story

Tom Hiddleston in Marvel’s The Avengers (2012)

Lt. Columbo used to remark that “little things” bothered him. So it is with this week’s New York Post story proclaiming that Daniel Craig is very close to coming back for another turn as James Bond.

It’s not so much that Craig might actually be close. It’s no secret Eon Productions boss Barbara Broccoli just loves the guy as 007. Rather, it’s the glee that the Post’s unidentified sources exhibit in criticizing would-be Bond Tom Hiddleston.

Over the years, Eon has tested many actors as 007 who didn’t get the role. The roster includes Sam Neill, James Brolin, Michael Billington and John Richardson among others.

In various histories about the film series, you don’t see much evidence of Eon criticizing such actors.

Yet, if the New York Post series is to believed, sources supposedly in the know are yakking their heads off about how bad a choice Hiddleston was.

The source added, “Plus, Barbara Broccoli doesn’t like Tom Hiddleston, he’s a bit too smug and not tough enough to play James Bond.”

British actor Hiddleston’s cringe-making romance with Taylor Swift sealed his fate with Bond producers, we’re told, followed by his self-righteous Golden Globes speech, pontificating about his trip to South Sudan, and how Doctors Without Borders “binge-watched” his series.

The Post story, in turned, outlets spurred such as The Ringer (How Tom Hiddleston Lost the James Bond Franchise in Three Easy Steps), The Birmingham Mail (Daniel Craig’s James Bond Future has FINALLY Been Revealed) and Cinema Blend (Why Tom Hiddleston Was Allegedly Ruled Out as James Bond) weighing in on Hiddleston’s supposed short comings.

The Post doesn’t specify just how many sources it supposedly had for its story. It doesn’t specify how the sources came to know all this. (Sometimes, when relying on unidentified sources, reporters use phrases such as “with direct knowledge of the situation” to indicate the sources do know what’s going on.)

But if the Post’s sources are really in the know, they would need some kind of access to Barbara Broccoli. If not talking to her directly, they’d have to see memos, emails, whatever. If they don’t have that kind of access, how much knowledge to they actually have?

Consider this: You’re an actor. You go in to test for Bond. Later, people who claim to have inside knowledge are talking to the New York Post’s Page Six gossip column quoting the Bond boss how inadequate you are.

That’s the kind of thing, over time, might make one think twice about auditioning for such a role. It wasn’t just tabloids that said Hiddleston was in the running to play Bond last year. The Bond fan publication 007 Magazine said on its Facebook page in June 2016 that Hiddleston had been tested.

Even if Craig, 49, comes back for Bond 25, Eon is going to have to have auditions eventually if it wants to continue the Bond film series.

Again, the Post’s story is unconfirmed. Still, that hasn’t stopped fans and some entertainment websites as taking it as gospel. If the Post story is true, that might indicate there’s risk (to an actor’s reputation) as well as potential reward with the Bond role. If it’s not true, well, there’s been some wasted time.

“It was a lot of little things,” Lt. Columbo used to say. “Little things.”

UPDATE: A reader flagged to our attention that Justin Kroll, a Variety film reporter, commented about this on Twitter on April 5, a day before this post was published.

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

2016: 007’s lost year?

Image for the official James Bond feed on Twitter

Image for the official James Bond feed on Twitter

While there’s a little more than month yet to go, 2016 is shaping up as a kind of lost year for the cinematic James Bond — when pretty much nothing substantial happened.

Decision made about a studio to actually release Bond 25? No.

Release date, if only the year? No. Can’t set a release date without somebody to distribute it.

Script? Not that anyone knows about.

Director? No.

Bond actor cast for sure? Not really. Incumbent Daniel Craig said in October of Bond, ” Were I to stop doing it, I’d miss it terribly.” But that’s not the same thing as saying, “I’ll be back.”

Something else of note that Craig said was, “There’s no conversation going on because genuinely everybody’s just a bit tired,”

That evokes the 2002-2006 period when Eon Productions co-bosses Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson were going through a creative mid-life crisis.

Or, as Wilson told The New York Times in 2005, describing that period: “We are running out of energy, mental energy. We need to generate something new, for ourselves.”

That creative mid-life crisis followed the release of Die Another Day, a big, sprawling and expensive (for the time) movie. The current exhaustion followed the release of SPECTRE, a big, sprawling and expensive movie.

On top of the usual pressures, much of the behind-the-scenes issues on SPECTRE became public knowledge because of the Sony computer hacks in 2014.

Thus, e-mails about the film’s budget, script problems and negotiations for tax incentives in Mexico became public knowledge. The Gawker website described the plot in detail based on a draft of the script made available by the leaks. So, to be fair, you could argue SPECTRE was more stressful than the usual big-budget movie.

Still, nobody — especially this blog — expected that things would seemingly shut down in 2016.

Michael G. Wilson said late last year he thought Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer would select a new distributor by January or February. Wilson also said MGM had talked with executives at three studios, although he didn’t identify them. Sony Pictures has distributed the past four 007 films but its contract expired with SPECTRE.

By March, MGM said no deal was struck and it wasn’t hurrying to reach one. Studio boss Gary Barber said he expected Bond movies to come out on a “three-to-four year cycle.” Eight months later, that’s still the status quo.

As a result, right now there appears to be no momentum on the 007 film front.

By contrast, in November 2012 (the same month Skyfall was released in the U.S.), a writer (John Logan) had been hired and publicly announced by MGM. In July 2013, a fall 2015 release date for the then-untitled Bond 24 was disclosed, along with an announcement that Skyfall director Sam Mendes would return for an encore.

Much of the year has been taken up by reports of supposed contenders for the Bond role or, conversely, supposed major offers for Craig to come back.

Remember how Tom Hiddleston, among others, was a cinch to be the next 007? Remember how Sony supposedly “should be announcing any day” it had a new deal to release Bond 25 and was offering Craig $150 million for two more movies?

Months and months later, neither has become reality.

Maybe there will be a flurry of news in December, such as MGM finally selecting its studio partner. Still, Bond 25 development is behind the pace of SPECTRE at a similar point three years ago. Maybe 2017 will be more eventful.

…and the (007) world goes round and round…

Image for the official James Bond feed on Twitter

Image for the official James Bond feed on Twitter

There’s a scene in The Dark Knight where the Joker performs his “magic pencil trick” and kills a thug by ramming a pencil into his eye. For many James Bond fans, it feels that way over the past week.

Radar Online, an entertainment and gossip site, kicked off the festivities on Sept. 3 with a story saying 1) Daniel Craig had been offered $150 million to do two more James Bond movies by Sony Pictures and 2) that Sony “should be announcing any day that the studio is re-upping the distribution rights for the Bond series.”

The immediate response among some Bond fans on social media was this was GREAT NEWS and Sony would be foolish not to offer the actor such a princely sum. Such fans didn’t want to hear why such an offer wouldn’t make economic sense.

It took a few days, but a number of sites moved to debunk the $150 million offer part of the Radar story, including FORBES.COM, HITFIX.COM and VANITY FAIRWhile those sites went over the $150 million portion, they didn’t reference the second part. Each cited how Sony’s contract to distribute 007 movies ended with SPECTRE, without directly saying how Radar reported Sony (supposedly) had a new deal.

From HitFix: “Will they re-sign with Sony? Unlikely, but possible.” From Forbes.com: “The short (Radar) post makes four references to Sony, a studio that no longer has distribution rights to the 007 films.” From Vanity Fair: “(T)he decision to pay Craig such an astronomical fee would not unilaterally fall to Sony—which spearheaded the wide-release roll-out of the last four Double-0 films—even if the studio re-ups its distribution rights for the franchise, which expired with the release of Spectre.”

Admittedly, Radar waited until the seventh of eight paragraphs to reference how Sony (supposedly) has a new deal. Still, it was part of the story.

Is this post an endorsement of Radar’s story? No way. In our very first post, on the subject, also on Sept. 3, we slapped on the Caveat Emptor tag. That’s even more true now. Radar said Sony “should be announcing any day” it has a new 007 movie distribution deal.

The clock is ticking. If an announcement doesn’t materialize, say, in another week, Radar’s story may officially be dead.

Anyway, on Sept. 10, Radar Online was at it again. Its newest story proclaims actor Tom Hiddleston “could be canned from the James Bond movie he has been gunning for” because of his “split” from Taylor Swift.

Of course, a lot of people were skeptical the two were a legitimate couple in the first place. Regardless, despite being criticized by other news sites, Radar is still at it. The gossip site acts as if it was totally unaware prominent outlets were saying its original 007 story was crap.

Magic pencil trick, indeed.

 

Some (not really) wild guesses about 007’s film future

Image for the official James Bond feed on Twitter

Image for the official James Bond feed on Twitter

We know a bit more about Daniel Craig’s acting future. With that in mind, here are some wild guesses about the cinema future of James Bond.

If Craig returns for Bond 25, expect to hear about the agony of playing James Bond.

Why’s that, you ask? Because Craig, 48, has always talked as if the role is a burden and he can’t wait to rid himself of it. CLICK HERE for a sample. (“I’ve been trying to get out of this from the very moment I got into it, but they won’t let me go, “)

If a new new actor is cast as Bond, expect Eon Productions to say it is “going back to (Ian) Fleming.” Why? It’s standard operating procedure. Why change now? As far back as 1972 and 1973, Harry Saltzman claimed in interviews promoting Live And Let Die that Roger Moore was really, really the first choice to play James Bond (but was unavailable) and perfectly embodied Ian Fleming’s depiction of 007.

If a new actor is cast, expect somebody in charge to say that actor was the first choice all along. In 1986, Timothy Dalton was the first choice all along (according to the publicity machine) even though Pierce Brosnan had been approached and signed. Dalton only got the job because NBC exercised its rights for more Remington Steele episodes.

In the 21st century, it doesn’t matter whether Tom Hiddleston, Adian Turner, Henry Cavill or whoever gets the job. They’ll always be described as the “first choice” all along.

Expect somebody in charge to say, “all the money’s up on the screen.” Admittedly, that well-worn trope didn’t come up during the buildup to 2015’s SPECTRE. But we have faith.

 

The summer of one 007 fan’s discontent

Tom Hiddleston's expression here is close to our reaction to the NYT story

Tom Hiddleston is shocked to find out the Spy Commander doesn’t care. 

Warning: a rant follows

For at least one 007 fan — this one — this is the summer of our Bond discontent.

Tom Hiddleston? Unless he’s cast as James Bond, I don’t care.

Tom Hiddleston’s romance with Taylor Swift? Don’t care.

Tom Hiddleston may be faking his romance with Taylor Swift to try to get the Bond role? Don’t care.

Tom Hiddleston may have doomed his chances at the Bond role because of his romance with Taylor Swift? Don’t care.

U.K. bookies have set a new favorite for the Bond role as Hiddleston’s chances fade? Don’t care. The bookies don’t know what’s going on. The people making the bets don’t know. In this case, “follow the money” equals “follow the ignorant.”

Aidan Turner is doing another season of his television series, so he may no longer be in the running to be 007? Don’t care.

Taylor Swift may be the next James Bond? OK, that’s a trick question and a joke. But given how this summer is going, a story on that subject may be sooner rather than later.

And if that story should get written? Don’t care.

 

007 Magazine says Craig out, Hiddleston has offer

Daniel Craig in SPECTRE's main titles

Daniel Craig in SPECTRE’s main titles

Graham Rye’s 007 Magazine in a POST ON FACEBOOK said Daniel Craig “has walked away from the Bond role” and that Tom Hiddleston has received an offer from Eon Productions co-boss Barbara Broccoli.

007 Magazine initially didn’t specify in the June 17 post how it obtained the information. In a June 18 response in another thread on its Facebook page, it said it had a source that provided the information.

We tried to imbed the post but our software wouldn’t cooperate. So here’s an image via the message board of the MI6 James Bond website.

Graham Rye Craig

In a separate thread on the Facebook page, in response to skeptics, 007 Magazine said, “As it stands at present, what 007 MAGAZINE has reported is FACT!” Also, “Like any good journalist, we never reveal our sources.” Finally there was this comment:

“If 007 MAGAZINE didn’t have total confidence in our source we wouldn’t have published our comment…(snip) Eon Productions denied claims? Is that the same Eon Productions that denied that Pierce Brosnan had been signed to play James Bond in 1986? ;O)

 

Last month, 007 Magazine went to Twitter to criticize media reports that Craig had left the role. Here’s that tweet:

Craig’s future (or lackthereof) as Bond flared up on May 18 when the U.K. Daily Mail tabloid reported the actor turned down a 68 million pound ($99 million) offer to return for two more 007 films. The BBC, in a small post on May 19, said it had been told by “authoritative Bond sources” that Craig hadn’t made a decision.

Hiddleston earlier this month talked down the chances he’d get the Bond role in stories IN THE DAILY MAIL and THE GUARDIAN.

Eon hasn’t put out a press release yet about any of this.