Amazon takes over Bond franchise

[Paul Farquhar]

Fair enough: given Bezos and the current cultural moment in tge US, a regressive take wouldn't be out of the question.

Amazon is an international company, and (unlike some of his ilk) I think Bezos is intelligent enough to not want to anger a large chunk of his customers.

I think "blandly inoffensive" is the most likely path Amazon will take.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Amazon is an international company, and (unlike some of his ilk) I think Bezos is intelligent enough to not want to anger a large chunk of his customers.

I think "blandly inoffensive" is the most likely path Amazon will take.

You say that, but evidence is that Bezos is surprisingly willing to let Prime make stuff that absolutely enrages a certain chunk of his customers.

The Boyz is the easiest example. Fallout is also pretty bold. Actually kind of a lot of stuff Prime has put out has been riskier and more boundary-pushing that what Netflix or Disney+/Hulu has been doing (perhaps less artistically interesting than Apple TV+, but still).

So whilst it's possible we'll get "Bland, James Bland" (future Guardian review headline - alternatively "Neither shaken nor stirred"), I think the odds of getting a slightly more interesting Bond are better with Prime than they would be with Netflix or Disney+/Hulu or, sorry to say about our national broadcaster, the dear old BBC (who would no doubt hand it to some hoary-handed hack like Moffat).

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

So whilst it's possible we'll get "Bland, James Bland" (future Guardian review headline - alternatively "Neither shaken nor stirred"), I think the odds of getting a slightly more interesting Bond are better with Prime than they would be with Netflix or Disney+/Hulu or, sorry to say about our national broadcaster, the dear old BBC (who would no doubt hand it to some hoary-handed hack like Moffat).

The BBC would at least be tempted to have Andrew Scott play Bond, though. More Andrew Scott is never bad.

 

[Morrus]

I am 1000% sure that the first movie they make will be made to show everybody that the franchise is in 'safe hands'. They might do different stuff later, but at first I reckon we'll get a British-made and directed film with a British lead, probably at Pinewood and on-location as usual. They'll take pains to make sure of it.

I know the word 'Nolan' is being floated around, though of course he has The Odyssey to make first, and I suspect that Amazon won't want to wait too long. It's already been nearly 4 years since the last Bond film, and these things take a couple of years to make, so we'll be looking at a 6 year gap minimum. Given that they shelled out an extra $1B just to get things moving again and break the stalemate with EON (after the $8BN they spent on MGM, of which Bond is by far the biggest franchise), they want to start seeing some of that money coming back.

But they will play it safe with the first movie at least. It will be a statement as much as it is a movie. It'll say "Look, it's still British, it's still Bond, it's still prestige!"

At first.

 

[payn]

Here comes Felix a new "Bond" series about the CIA. Bond makes a cameo each season.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

the dear old BBC

The BBC has done some radio adaptations. Toby Stephens 2014.

 

[TiQuinn]

Here comes Felix a new "Bond" series about the CIA. Bond makes a cameo each season.

By the makers of Pennyworth…M.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Here comes Felix a new "Bond" series about the CIA. Bond makes a cameo each season.

There are definitely interesting stories to be told about the CIA, especially gestures at the real world, but I can't imagine this as a good vehicle for it.

On the other hand, I do think Moneypenny has some potential for a spin-off, if we're stuck getting them.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

They might do different stuff later, but at first I reckon we'll get a British-made and directed film with a British lead, probably at Pinewood and on-location as usual. They'll take pains to make sure of it.

Yeah I'd be shocked if they did otherwise there.

Also, I think Nolan would not just be a delay, but a bad choice if they want any kind of differentiation from the Craig era movies. Tenet, was despite its bizarre premise, aesthetic and vibes-wise very much in a very similar universe to Craig-Bond, and every "modern day"-set movie Nolan has done has had roughly that monochromatic "luxury" aesthetic.

Honestly maybe they could get Tony Gilroy? He's great, he's got spy movie experience, just came off a spy TV show (Andor), he can write some great stuff (c.f. Michael Clayton, Andor, Bourne movies, etc.).

Also he's got enough edge and bite that he wouldn't just make a nothing Bond, but for whatever strange reason, he's able to cinematically "phrase" it in such a way that it's agreeable even to boring middle class dads (the core Bond audience).

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Also, I think Nolan would not just be a delay, but a bad choice if they want any kind of differentiation from the Craig era movies. Tenet, was despite its bizarre premise, aesthetic and vibes-wise very much in a very similar universe to Craig-Bond, and every "modern day"-set movie Nolan has done has had roughly that monochromatic "luxury" aesthetic

One of the dreams in Inception was based on Bond.