I don't think Craig would turn down that contract... Assuming he takes it he will likely ask for the best directors on the market in addition to getting a good supporting cast for the final two films...
He should close out with two more movies that have strong plots and acting...
First, I don't think you meant to say that 2.8 million units sold in the UK translated into 300 million pounds.
Whoops I put an extra naught!
$200 million Skyfall DVD worldwide (if online figures are correct) of course has to be broken down with all involved (like the box office takings no doubt) but its still significant revenue for the machine which makes Bond regardless which party (Sony / MGM / EON / Retailer)
Kind of like a nice bonus
There is an article online that values the whole franchise, could of course be crap but it values something like the home video catalogue at 2 billion, merchandising another 2 billion and actual film franchise over 9 billion. Will see if I can find it
EDIT: Specialists at the London School Of Marketing have estimated the Bond brand has generated £9bn from box office sales with £2bn from DVD sales and £2bn from merchandising and co-marketing.
This bit is interesting if true (I guess so since Conenry took percentage for DAF)
James Bond in numbers:
£13bn: Estimated worth of entire James Bond brand
£25m: Daniel Craig's reported salary for Spectre
£750m: Amount 2012's Spectre grossed at box office
£47m: Salary Sean Connery is said to have received from Diamonds Are Forever (adjusted for inflation)
Your inflation calculator is off. Connery's salary for DAF was said to be 1.25 million USD. That translates today as 7.4 million USD, or £5.5 million. That was a record for 1971. What Craig got for Spectre is outrageous.
And Connery donated his DAF salary to charity. There were other benefits from his doing the film,too, of course.
Silhouette ManThe last refuge of a scoundrelPosts: 8,693MI6 Agent
An email newsletter update for September 2016 from David Leigh of The James Bond Dossier website is useful at this time of rumours:
Regarding Bond 25, there is still no news. You may have seen a story claiming that Sony has offered Daniel Craig $150 million to do two more Bond films.
Forget it.
Sony currently has nothing to do with James Bond, their distribution deal with MGM, the actual studio that part owns the rights to 007 having expired with the release of SPECTRE. The other party that owns the 007 movies rights is Eon Productions through Danjaq.
MGM is looking for a new partner and ultimately may renew with Sony, but at the moment Sony is out of the frame.
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
An email newsletter update for September 2016 from David Leigh of The James Bond Dossier website is useful at this time of rumours:
Regarding Bond 25, there is still no news. You may have seen a story claiming that Sony has offered Daniel Craig $150 million to do two more Bond films.
Forget it.
Sony currently has nothing to do with James Bond, their distribution deal with MGM, the actual studio that part owns the rights to 007 having expired with the release of SPECTRE. The other party that owns the 007 movies rights is Eon Productions through Danjaq.
MGM is looking for a new partner and ultimately may renew with Sony, but at the moment Sony is out of the frame.
That certainly is the resonable take on things and most likely correct. But...is it totally out of the realm of possibility that Sony has offered to pick up Craig's salary as part of their negotiations with MGM? I guess the madnes will not stop until there is an official announcement one way or another. -{
The argument that producers should be happy to take a risk on a new Bond actor because Craig worked out well is flawed.
CR cost $100 million to make. Its advertising budget was less than half that. The break even point at the box office was about $275 million in 2006 dollars. When adjusted for inflation, all Bond films had made that, so there was little risk.
Bond 25 with a relatively unknown actor will still cost at least $275 million in P&M costs and will need $600 million at the box office to break even (since Chinese theaters only pay 25% back to the producers). Bond 25 could make $500 million at the box office ($150 million more than the latest Bourne picture, which featured a big name actor) and still be a huge financial flop.
Fewer people are buying movie tickets, audiences seem to be getting tired of sequels, box office generally is down. This is a tricky time for EON/MGM with no director/no distributor/and no Bond and I'm not sure they're up to it.
If Tom Hiddleston is indeed the next Bond, at least they won't have to worry about a relative unknown in the role. If Craig would indeed going to get $150 million for two films, that's a huge financial risk considering a new actor would be paid only a fraction of that. With that salary for Craig, the next two films would have to do better than Spectre to make money. People are already excited for a new Bond actor, and that could possibly help the films more than Craig with a bloated salary could. This isn't the same situation as bringing Connery back for DAF. Nobody then was ready for someone else as Bond, whereas people now are more than ready for a replacement. A number of people told me they were disappointed that Craig came back for Spectre instead of Idris Elba!
From what I've gathered from the non-Bond fan community it seems that the momentum isn't really with Craig anymore as everyone already assumes Hiddleston or someone has the role. Most of the public obviously loves Craig as Bond but after the lackluster Spectre they seem more eager for someone new.
Whoever keeps writing these money stories can't be from the producers side. The stories always come across like Daniel Craig is stupid for refusing such a sum of money.
The only time I recall a Bond actor coming back for money was Connery and Diamonds Are Forever. At least that was the story I read as it was before my time. If I was around then seeing Diamonds Are Forever after You Only Live Twice and On Her Majesty's Secret Service I would have been shocked.
If Daniel Craig manages to make two more I'm not expecting anything better than Casino Royale or Spectre. My favorite of the Daniel Craig movies.
Just because the "Daniel Craig has been offered $150" story is being widely reported, it is no more likely to be true than the "Idris Elba is the new Bond" stories. The best information we have is still a cryptic message from someone who might have inside knowledge saying that Hiddleston is Bond. So I'm still going with that.
My guess is we're a year away from an actual announcement. And that's probably an optimistic timeline.
Thunderbird 2East of Cardiff, Wales.Posts: 2,777MI6 Agent
edited September 2016
I am not going to get in the on the money / budgeting / marketing speculation or the drivel-dribbling journalistic sensationalism that the media always seems to vomit out whenever they talk about Bond between films.
To me it comes down to the artistic dexterity and integrity of the films themselves, and the life cycle of the actors in the role.
For example...
- Sir Sean made the right choice stopping with DAF. (NSNA is an awkward also ran.)
- Sir Roger did admittedly, do one too many. Considering who Bond is, and what he does, Sir Roger was too old for AVTAK.
- Mr Brosnan easily could have done one more film beyond DAD. It was the writing on his take that let things down there.
Mr Lazenby and Mr Dalton are exempt due to not being in the role long enough for this analysis.
CR-06 is my favorite Bond film. It noses just in front of the others for me. Story, casting, locations, music, all the values I love are there in this one. Mr Craig is fantastic, he has the physical menace of Sir Sean's 007, some of the wit of Sir Roger's, and a turbo boosted brutality that builds on the moodiness of Mr Dalton, and its post 2000 timeframe touches on the euphoric start of the digital age of the end of the Brosnan 007 era. (Everyone has a primitive Smartphone, tracker devices etc, the film oozes wealth and good living.)
However, QoS, Skyfall and Spectre have all suffered from an obsession with Bond's rebelliousness / recklessness, age, childhood issues, etc. It has made each of them more theatrical and somewhat gloomy. Le Chiffre tortured Bond old school Fleming style - excellent, as it should be! Greene treated him as a simple Gatecrasher with commitment issues "sounds like you lost another one!", and Silva and Blofeld both acted like twisted shrinks, banging on about bad psychology. "Mommy was very bad!" and Sibling Rivalry. "Cuckoo!"
Spectre also tried to tie a barbed wire narrative fence around all the previous Craig films. Something that was neither wanted or needed. Its all a far cry for the good old days of a classic Bond adventure. Gadgets, snogging, socking, vehicles, the big budget BOOM!!
All of these things on top of the bumpy road reboot-reboot (CR-06 and then Skyfall) make me think - as much as I love Daniel Craig as Bond, we won't get another CR-06. We can't. Better for him to walk away and do something new, and different for the audience, leaving behind his Bond on a positive note with Dr Swann with the ending of SP. Its time to start again, and get back to basics.
This is Thunderbird 2, how can I be of assistance?
I am not going to get in the on the money / budgeting / marketing speculation or the drivel-dribbling journalistic sensationalism that the media always seems to vomit out whenever they talk about Bond between films.
To me it comes down to the artistic dexterity and integrity of the films themselves, and the life cycle of the actors in the role.
For example...
- Sir Sean made the right choice stopping with DAF. (NSNA is an awkward also ran.)
- Sir Roger did admittedly, do one too many. Considering who Bond is, and what he does, Sir Roger was too old for AVTAK.
- Mr Brosnan easily could have done one more film beyond DAD. It was the writing on his take that let things down there.
Mr Lazenby and Mr Dalton are exempt due to not being in the role long enough for this analysis.
CR-06 is my favorite Bond film. It noses just in front of the others for me. Story, casting, locations, music, all the values I love are there in this one. Mr Craig is fantastic, he has the physical menace of Sir Sean's 007, some of the wit of Sir Roger's, and a turbo boosted brutality that builds on the moodiness of Mr Dalton, and its post 2000 timeframe touches on the euphoric start of the digital age of the end of the Brosnan 007 era. (Everyone has a primitive Smartphone, tracker devices etc, the film oozes wealth and good living.)
However, QoS, Skyfall and Spectre have all suffered from an obsession with Bond's rebelliousness / recklessness, age, childhood issues, etc. It has made each of them more theatrical and somewhat gloomy. Le Chiffre tortured Bond old school Fleming style - excellent, as it should be! Greene treated him as a simple Gatecrasher with commitment issues "sounds like you lost another one!", and Silva and Blofeld both acted like twisted shrinks, banging on about bad psychology. "Mommy was very bad!" and Sibling Rivalry. "Cuckoo!"
Spectre also tried to tie a barbed wire narrative fence around all the previous Craig films. Something that was neither wanted or needed. Its all a far cry for the good old days of a classic Bond adventure. Gadgets, snogging, socking, vehicles, the big budget BOOM!!
All of these things on top of the bumpy road reboot-reboot (CR-06 and then Skyfall) make me think - as much as I love Daniel Craig as Bond, we won't get another CR-06. We can't. Better for him to walk away and do something new, and different for the audience, leaving behind his Bond on a positive note with Dr Swann with the ending of SP. Its time to start again, and get back to basics.
Excellent post. I would like DC to come back for one more but I have to agree it's unlikely to top Casino Royale so maybe it is time for a new 007.
I wouldn't go as far as that, but agree it is a daft idea.
I'm sure the Bond producers would never have gone for him, but most of the American women who talk to me about Bond still think he needs to be Bond. It just happened again today.
From what I've gathered from the non-Bond fan community it seems that the momentum isn't really with Craig anymore as everyone already assumes Hiddleston or someone has the role. Most of the public obviously loves Craig as Bond but after the lackluster Spectre they seem more eager for someone new.
I don't know if I would describe SPECTRE as "lackluster"...at least in more objective terms. Lackluster certainly in the reception it received from "film critics" in the US but not lackluster at the box office. Sure it wasn't the success that SF was, but in no way did it send out signals that maybe it was time for a new Bond. Craig was not the issue in SPECTRE; the issue was overreaching by the writers, producers and director attempting to make the film all things Bond to all people. Many great moments but a bit too many that fell flat. Even if Craig returns or a new Bond is cast, EON needs to tighten things back up. Sometimes, less is more. The change I actually think will benefit Bond best is Mendes moving on. Don't get me wrong, he did a terrific job with SF and SPECTRE was decent but a good new director (or an old one if it's Martin Campbell) would work.
Idris Elba would likely be a fairly good Bond, but he is too old (44 now, a little older than Moore when he started) and would be even older by the time Bond 25 kicked into production (assuming he isn't in Bond 26, a more likely scenario).
Think Idris Elba would make a great Bond villain, a modern Mr Big to TH Bond. With Bond 25 no Spectre and no personnel/family issues unless DC does return.
With HiddleSwift reportedly over, one wonders whether a) he was told to kick her into touch or lose the part, or b) he wanted to have clear space to concentrate on his new role?
With HiddleSwift reportedly over, one wonders whether a) he was told to kick her into touch or lose the part, or b) he wanted to have clear space to concentrate on his new role?
I would highly doubt that Hiddleston's relationship with Taylor Swift would have anything remotely to do with getting or keeping the Bond role or interfering with his prep for the role. There was nothing scadalous about the relationship and I'm sure that Hiddleston is enough of a professional that he could maintain a relationship and still hit the gym and do whatever else he would need to get ready to play Bond. It's not like he's preparing to be the first man on Mars.
With HiddleSwift reportedly over, one wonders whether a) he was told to kick her into touch or lose the part, or b) he wanted to have clear space to concentrate on his new role?
My Mrs informs me she dumped him if the Dailyfail is to be believed!!
They prob have not even separated lol
Instagram - bondclothes007
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 26,600Chief of Staff
Comments
He should close out with two more movies that have strong plots and acting...
Your inflation calculator is off. Connery's salary for DAF was said to be 1.25 million USD. That translates today as 7.4 million USD, or £5.5 million. That was a record for 1971. What Craig got for Spectre is outrageous.
Regarding Bond 25, there is still no news. You may have seen a story claiming that Sony has offered Daniel Craig $150 million to do two more Bond films.
Forget it.
Sony currently has nothing to do with James Bond, their distribution deal with MGM, the actual studio that part owns the rights to 007 having expired with the release of SPECTRE. The other party that owns the 007 movies rights is Eon Productions through Danjaq.
MGM is looking for a new partner and ultimately may renew with Sony, but at the moment Sony is out of the frame.
It was the articles which I guess is highly inaccurate!!
Sorry, I didn't even look at the article. Even including Connery's profit shares, it's unlikely he would have made anywhere close to that.
That certainly is the resonable take on things and most likely correct. But...is it totally out of the realm of possibility that Sony has offered to pick up Craig's salary as part of their negotiations with MGM? I guess the madnes will not stop until there is an official announcement one way or another.
The only time I recall a Bond actor coming back for money was Connery and Diamonds Are Forever. At least that was the story I read as it was before my time. If I was around then seeing Diamonds Are Forever after You Only Live Twice and On Her Majesty's Secret Service I would have been shocked.
If Daniel Craig manages to make two more I'm not expecting anything better than Casino Royale or Spectre. My favorite of the Daniel Craig movies.
My guess is we're a year away from an actual announcement. And that's probably an optimistic timeline.
To me it comes down to the artistic dexterity and integrity of the films themselves, and the life cycle of the actors in the role.
For example...
- Sir Sean made the right choice stopping with DAF. (NSNA is an awkward also ran.)
- Sir Roger did admittedly, do one too many. Considering who Bond is, and what he does, Sir Roger was too old for AVTAK.
- Mr Brosnan easily could have done one more film beyond DAD. It was the writing on his take that let things down there.
Mr Lazenby and Mr Dalton are exempt due to not being in the role long enough for this analysis.
CR-06 is my favorite Bond film. It noses just in front of the others for me. Story, casting, locations, music, all the values I love are there in this one. Mr Craig is fantastic, he has the physical menace of Sir Sean's 007, some of the wit of Sir Roger's, and a turbo boosted brutality that builds on the moodiness of Mr Dalton, and its post 2000 timeframe touches on the euphoric start of the digital age of the end of the Brosnan 007 era. (Everyone has a primitive Smartphone, tracker devices etc, the film oozes wealth and good living.)
However, QoS, Skyfall and Spectre have all suffered from an obsession with Bond's rebelliousness / recklessness, age, childhood issues, etc. It has made each of them more theatrical and somewhat gloomy. Le Chiffre tortured Bond old school Fleming style - excellent, as it should be! Greene treated him as a simple Gatecrasher with commitment issues "sounds like you lost another one!", and Silva and Blofeld both acted like twisted shrinks, banging on about bad psychology. "Mommy was very bad!" and Sibling Rivalry. "Cuckoo!"
Spectre also tried to tie a barbed wire narrative fence around all the previous Craig films. Something that was neither wanted or needed. Its all a far cry for the good old days of a classic Bond adventure. Gadgets, snogging, socking, vehicles, the big budget BOOM!!
All of these things on top of the bumpy road reboot-reboot (CR-06 and then Skyfall) make me think - as much as I love Daniel Craig as Bond, we won't get another CR-06. We can't. Better for him to walk away and do something new, and different for the audience, leaving behind his Bond on a positive note with Dr Swann with the ending of SP. Its time to start again, and get back to basics.
Excellent post. I would like DC to come back for one more but I have to agree it's unlikely to top Casino Royale so maybe it is time for a new 007.
I think he would be offered just a little more than $150....
(and yes, I do know what you meant!)
I'm sure the Bond producers would never have gone for him, but most of the American women who talk to me about Bond still think he needs to be Bond. It just happened again today.
I don't know if I would describe SPECTRE as "lackluster"...at least in more objective terms. Lackluster certainly in the reception it received from "film critics" in the US but not lackluster at the box office. Sure it wasn't the success that SF was, but in no way did it send out signals that maybe it was time for a new Bond. Craig was not the issue in SPECTRE; the issue was overreaching by the writers, producers and director attempting to make the film all things Bond to all people. Many great moments but a bit too many that fell flat. Even if Craig returns or a new Bond is cast, EON needs to tighten things back up. Sometimes, less is more. The change I actually think will benefit Bond best is Mendes moving on. Don't get me wrong, he did a terrific job with SF and SPECTRE was decent but a good new director (or an old one if it's Martin Campbell) would work.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.hitfix.com/motion-captured/no-daniel-craig-is-not-set-for-a-150-million-james-bond-payday-and-heres-why/amp?client=safari
Not sure what you are after with this link...?...is it because some guy in the comments section said he'd do it for $150 ?
I posted the link for general information, but also as a joking reference to my typo on the previous page, which Barbel pointed out.
I would highly doubt that Hiddleston's relationship with Taylor Swift would have anything remotely to do with getting or keeping the Bond role or interfering with his prep for the role. There was nothing scadalous about the relationship and I'm sure that Hiddleston is enough of a professional that he could maintain a relationship and still hit the gym and do whatever else he would need to get ready to play Bond. It's not like he's preparing to be the first man on Mars.
My Mrs informs me she dumped him if the Dailyfail is to be believed!!
They prob have not even separated lol
Ah, ok -{