MI6: Daniel Craig signs through Bond 25

http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/craig_five_bond_movies_deal.php3?t=&s=&id=03269

MI6 reporting a rogue apostrophe in a headline. Also reporting that Daniel Craig is signed on for two more films after Skyfall, keeping him on board through Bond 25. That will bring him up to a total of five Bond films overall.

Assuming they keep up with the every other year method, that means Craig's fifth Bond film will be released in 2016 at the earliest, ending his tenure on the 10th anniversary of CASINO ROYALE. Assuming EON signs up a new actor after his fifth and final film, that means Bond #7 will debut in either 2018 or 2019.

But I guess we'll see how this all plays out post-SKYFALL, at least EON seems to be preparing for that if the script contracting deals are anything to go by.

SF's merits/demerits notwithstanding, I'm relieved DC is on for two more.

Have other sources confirmed this?

Mi6 is like the InfoWars of film news sources.

Who knows? They've been right for the most part, the last big thing they broke news about was Thomas Newman scoring. Many were skeptical because of the lack of source but alas it was actually true. Given Craig's enthusiasm of continuing with Bond after SF, two more films seems just about right as he'll be 48 when a fifth film is released, probably the right time to step down.

Craig will do 007 movies. He is the new Roger Moore.

Unfortunately, he may well look like A View To A Kill Roger Moore by the time his fifth film comes out. He's already looking a bit rough in Skyfall. That aside, it's good news if it's true.

Craig looks older than Romney. If Mitt loses the election, give him the gig.

2 years isn't enough to make a good script. There should be a Bond movie every four years.

Walecs wrote:

2 years isn't enough to make a good script. There should be a Bond movie every four years.

This is my concern, the original films had novels and stories that provided the foundation and stepping off point for the film so a rapid development was possible knowing the basic ideas and concepts the film would be exploring. In the absence of the novels the schedule needs to accommodate the development of a valid story and outline and isn't something that can just happen to a regular beat.

lachesis wrote:

Walecs wrote:

2 years isn't enough to make a good script. There should be a Bond movie every four years.

This is my concern, the original films had novels and stories that provided the foundation and stepping off point for the film so a rapid development was possible knowing the basic ideas and concepts the film would be exploring. In the absence of the novels the schedule needs to accommodate the development of a valid story and outline and isn't something that can just happen to a regular beat.

Yeah, I think Brosnan and Craig's era are a perfect sample of this:

Goldeneye: six years, awesome
Casino Royale, Skyfall: four years, good (well, Skyfall seems to be so)
TND, TWINE, DAD, QOS: two years, awful

Two years is more than ample time to come up with a good script if you've got fresh ideas. Problem is, P&W have already drained their Bond well dry--to use a suitably Bondian metaphor. To ensure quality scripts in such rapid succession, Micolli will need to bite the bullet and bring on new writers.

Confirmed.

http://www.deadline.com/2012/09/daniel-craig-confirmed-for-2-more-bond-films-which-sony-pictures-co-financing-with-mgm/

Aw, shit.

I bet there is much wailing and gnashing of teeth at that site that bjmdds lives on :face:

Mrs Aural Sects wrote:

I bet there is much wailing and gnashing of teeth at that site that bjmdds lives on :face:

Bless his heart!

I'm satisfied about the fact that Craig is coming back for the upcoming two films. And what do we know, maybe he returns for a sixth film too. It all depends on how he feels for the moment. He is the sort of actor who don't over stay his welcome, when he feels that he can't keep up with the physical then he leaves.