Support NeoGAF

[LordOfLore]

Link.

A five-studio tug of war has broken out over James Bond.

For more than a decade, starting with “Casino Royale” in 2006, the superspy series has been based at Sony Pictures Entertainment. It has been a period of stability and prosperity for 007, as global ticket sales reached new heights. The four Bond films that Sony has released collected $3.5 billion at the worldwide box office, after adjusting for inflation.

But Sony’s contract to market and distribute the films expired in 2015 with “Spectre.” So the two companies that control the franchise but do not distribute their own films — Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer and the family-run Eon Productions — have started attending dog and pony shows put on by studios that want the rights, according to five people briefed on the sessions, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.

On Tuesday, for instance, leaders at Sony spent an hour making their case. Kazuo Hirai, the chief executive, helped give the pitch, which emphasized the studio’s deep knowledge of Bond and its ideas for expanding the franchise’s reach. In true Hollywood fashion, Sony gave its presentation inside a sound stage on a recreated set from “Dr. No,” which was released in the United States in 1963 by United Artists and laid the foundation for the entire series.

Also vying for the Bond deal — even though it pays surprisingly little — are Warner Bros., Universal Pictures, 20th Century Fox and Annapurna, an ambitious upstart financed and led by the Oracle heiress Megan Ellison. (Not competing for the business are Paramount, which has been struggling and recently hired a new chairman, and Walt Disney Studios, which has been on a box office hot streak by focusing on its own family film labels.)


MGM and Eon, which stands for Everything or Nothing, are only offering a one-film contract. The expired Sony deal was for four movies. MGM, which is owned by private equity firms, including Anchorage Capital Partners, probably wants to keep its options open as it considers a sale or public offering.

Casting for the franchise has not been discussed in the meetings, according to the people briefed on them, although producers hope Daniel Craig will play the lead for at least one more chapter. He has a gap on his docket, according to movie industry databases, that would allow for filming.

Representatives for MGM, Eon and the studios pursuing the rights either had no comment or did not return calls.

The eagerness to land Bond underscores the continuing strength of the series but also the realities of the modern movie business. As competition for leisure time increases, studios have focused more intently on global blockbusters, and those are in short supply. In some ways, the Bond series was the first to go after a worldwide audience.

Yet the deal that studios are hotly chasing is not very profitable.

Under its previous agreement, Sony paid 50 percent of the production costs for “Spectre” — which totaled some $250 million after accounting for government incentives — but only received 25 percent of certain profits, once costs were recouped. Sony also shouldered tens of millions of dollars in marketing and had to give MGM a piece of the profit from non-Bond films Sony had in its own pipeline, including “22 Jump Street.”

In a 2014 email stolen by hackers and widely published online, Andrew Gumpert, who then oversaw business affairs for Sony, figured that the studio would realize about $38 million in profit if “Spectre” performed as “Skyfall” did. And “Spectre” did not, taking in $881 million, about 20 percent less than “Skyfall,” which was released in 2012.


Why, then, do studios want to distribute Bond so badly? Bragging rights, mostly. Having a Bond movie on the schedule guarantees at least one hit in a business where there is almost no sure thing.

Bond is gargantuan: The 25 movies have taken in nearly $6 billion at the North American box office, after adjusting for inflation, according to Box Office Mojo. The series has generated billions more in overseas ticket sales, home entertainment revenue, television reruns, marketing partnerships (Omega watches, Aston Martin cars, Gillette razors) and video games.

For at least one suitor, Annapurna, landing Bond would be transformative. Ms. Ellison started by focusing on prestige films like “Her” and “American Hustle.” But she has been diversifying toward more commercial movies like the animated hit “Sausage Party” and recently hired a senior 20th Century Fox executive to oversee production. Last month, Annapurna signed an unrelated distribution deal with MGM.

The person Ms. Ellison and the other bidders need to impress the most is Barbara Broccoli, who runs Eon Productions. Moviemaking is a collaborative process, but Ms. Broccoli and her older half brother, Michael G. Wilson, have final say over every line of dialogue, casting decision, stunt sequence, marketing tie-in, TV ad, poster and billboard.

Lock if old.

 

[Ridley327]

Annapurna is such a left field choice for a suitor that I almost want it to happen just because it's so out there compared to the others. It's still commonly believed that it's mainly between Sony and WB, right?

 

[Sulik2]

I just want this to end in a way that we get either a Bond/Bourne or Bond/Mission Impossible film.

 

[border]

An intense bidding war to see who can make the worst, most senseless deal.

Sounds like Hollywood.

The most unbelievable part is that whoever wins only gets to make 1 Bond movie. All the bidding war bullshit then starts all over again. It almost makes me want to see the franchise tank, just out of spite for how poorly MGM wants to handle it.

 

[Solo]

It'll be WB or Sony.

 

[BlackNMild2k1]

I hope anyone but Sony gets the deal, and the next deal after that too.

But only because I want Sony in a position to need sell its movie business, as I think only Spider-man and James Bond movies were propping them up. Remove one, and maybe Disney can pry the other away too.

 

[Sarcastic Poster]

CEO Kaz Hirai will come through.

 

[Busty]

Given how closely WB and MGM have worked together over the years (the Rocky/Creed and Stargate franchises are with Warners) it doesn't really make sense to have their biggest asset somewhere else.

Given how Warners (soon to be part of AT&T) own over half of the MGM back catalogue of classic films and almost all their characters bar Pink Panther (Tom & Jerry by way of Hanna Barbera via Turner) it has seemed inevitable that Time Warner and MGM will be unified at some point in the future. To do otherwise wouldn't make sense.

But things rarely go according to logic in Hollywood.

MGM and Eon, which stands for Everything or Nothing, are only offering a one-film contract. The expired Sony deal was for four movies. MGM, which is owned by private equity firms, including Anchorage Capital Partners, probably wants to keep its options open as it considers a sale or public offering.

wot

All this dog and pony show for a single, albeit Daniel Craig's last, Bond film?! I know it's all about building a relationship but even still.

Annapurna is such a left field choice for a suitor that I almost want it to happen just because it's so out there compared to the others. It's still commonly believed that it's mainly between Sony and WB, right?

Sony have fallen away so much in the last few months there are many who are predicting that the studio is getting itself in shape to be sold. I suppose paying though the nose for a single Bond might help strengthen that belief given how it would potentially help in the short term given how thin their slate is.

I'd still say the good money is on Warners though with Fox running a close second.

 

[HamPster PamPster]

Forget the movies, I want a new Bond game. Which studio would work to make that happen?

 

[BronsonLee]

If Sony loses it, they're dead.

Watch WB get it.

 

[Easy_D]

I just want this to end in a way that we get either a Bond/Bourne or Bond/Mission Impossible film.

I personally want the Tom & Jerry: James Bond movie

 

[Ridley327]

Sony have fallen away so much in the last few months there are many who are predicting that the studio is getting itself in shape to be sold. I suppose paying though the nose for a single Bond might help strengthen that belief given how it would potentially help in the short term given how thin their slate is.

I'd still say the good money is on Warners though with Fox running a close second.

I did think about Fox, especially since they handle the bulk of MGM's home video distribution, but one would think that Fox would have made more moves earlier. Who knows, though.

 

[Ridley327]

Forget the movies, I want a new Bond game. Which studio would work to make that happen?

It would be whoever decides to license it out. Activsion's deal lapsed years ago, and they didn't seem too eager to renew.

 

[shintoki]

Sony would only make 83mil if Spectre performed like Skyfall? And it was 300million short.

So basically have a complete shit deal? A one picture contract?

To say you published Bond? No wonder Disney doesn't give a fuck

 

[Prince of Space]

I personally want the Tom & Jerry: James Bond movie

Tom & Jerry: Octopussy is too good to pass up.

 

[PyroPaperPlanes]

Forget the movies, I want a new Bond game. Which studio would work to make that happen?

None of them are jumping on the license. They're probably waiting for the films to take off again / once Daniel Craig is gone.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

If Sony loses it, they're dead.

Watch WB get it.

WB realllly, realllly wants it, from what I've heard.

Like, real bad.

Although I've also heard they're super-keen on pushing Tsujihara out, so I don't know if that would help or hinder this. It'd be weird to land Bond and then basically put it under the control of the guy who rode herd over the DCEU & Hobbit movies being general disappointments.

 

[Ashhong]

I hope anyone but Sony gets the deal, and the next deal after that too.

But only because I want Sony in a position to need sell its movie business, as I think only Spider-man and James Bond movies were propping them up. Remove one, and maybe Disney can pry the other away too.

What the fuck?

 

[Falchion]

Sony's film group has so little at this point.

 

[tomtom94]

The "giving MGM part of the non-Bond profits" bit is hilariously one-sided.

 

[Ridley327]

Sony would only make 83mil if Spectre performed like Skyfall? And it was 300million short.

So basically have a complete shit deal? A one picture contract?

To say you published Bond? No wonder Disney doesn't give a fuck

Bond also doesn't really fit in with the kind of blockbusters that they make, either. I dare not use the term "more sophisticated" after Spectre, but they've got a more limited audience than what the Mouse is looking for.

 

[HeartlessNobody213]

Sony desperately needs it because there is only so much Spidey can do.

WB wants it to have that 3rd huge franchise to go along with DC and Fantastic Beast.

Edit: didn't realize it was a one film deal.

 

[Saucycarpdog]

Low profit potential.

One film contract

And an authoritarian duo of producers with ridiculous say in every aspect of the film.

Why is anyone even trying to bid?

 

[GabeTheGrouch76]

The deal is only for co-producing/distributing one Bond film? That's a pretty lame bargain, especially if the minority profit margins and EON's autuer license (which worked out so well for Spectre /s) from Sony's previous four-picture deal carry over to this plan as well. No wonder Disney didn't even bother to show up, only a truly desperate studio would actually agree to it.

In other words, I guess it will be a showdown of thirst between Sony and WB. Sony because the film studio is a burning trashheap that's at the risk of being sold off, and WB to have another cash cow IP they can rely on while they try to figure out what to do with the DCEU, and building another bridge that brings TimeWarner closer to housing MGM back under their umbrella again (MGM was initially sold to TimeWarner in the 80s only to be sold off again, but not without WB acquiring the rights to MGM's almost-complete film catalogue up to that point.)

 

[BronsonLee]

WB realllly, realllly wants it, from what I've heard.

Like, real bad.

Although I've also heard they're super-keen on pushing Tsujihara out, so I don't know if that would help or hinder this. It'd be weird to land Bond and then basically put it under the control of the guy who rode herd over the DCEU & Hobbit movies being general disappointments.

It'd make sense tbh, though if he's still there that might not work right

Low profit potential.

One film contract

And an authoritarian duo of producers with ridiculous say in every aspect of the film.

Why is anyone even trying to bid?

To build a relationship & get first dibs on the next big contract which will likely be 5+ films

 

[Saucycarpdog]

To build a relationship & get first dibs on the next big contract which will likely be 5+ films

So they can what? Make a less than $38 million profit on a film with a $250 million budget?

 

[kswiston]

Low profit potential.

One film contract

And an authoritarian duo of producers with ridiculous say in every aspect of the film.

Why is anyone even trying to bid?

I'm not sure it actually is low profit, since they can product place Bond films to hell and back.

 

[BronsonLee]

So they can what? Make a less than $38 million profit on a film with a $250 million budget?

There are many reasons why Spectre went to shit budget wise and also what swiss said

Also if they'd be starting over that would mean Craig's 40+ mil a film would be reset to someone else at least for the first couple

 

[border]

Why do people seem to think that Sony needs Bond so badly?

As far as I can tell, they are on the losing end of the deal. The ROI on those projects is terrible, and their time and money would be better spent on films where they don't have to hand over 75% of the profits to an IP holder. Maybe it would be a good deal if they could get the budget of these movies under control, but it sounds like MGM has so much creative control that they can force the distributor to spend ridiculous amounts.

 

[PsihoPerihelion]

Give Annapurna Pictures the film rights and Annapurna Interactive the videogame rights. Everybody wins!

 

[Patriots7]

I hope anyone but Sony gets the deal, and the next deal after that too.

But only because I want Sony in a position to need sell its movie business, as I think only Spider-man and James Bond movies were propping them up. Remove one, and maybe Disney can pry the other away too.

Why would Sony Pictures be in a position to sell their movie unit when they are bidding for a project that may not even break even? This is merely symbolic.

If Sony loses it, they're dead.

Watch WB get it.

No they're not.

Sony's film group has so little at this point.

What?

This is a dumb deal. All of the Studios should walk away from it.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

Annapurna cranking out period-piece 75mil Cold War spy flicks accurately(ish) adapting the original works of Fleming is the dream here.

Which is why it'll never fucking happen.

 

[AgentChris]

After reading the deal I think it would extremely smart for Sony Pictures to not win the bid.

 

[Ridley327]

Annapurna cranking out period-piece 75mil Cold War spy flicks accurately(ish) adapting the original works of Fleming is the dream here.

Which is why it'll never fucking happen.

You hurt people on purpose, don't you.

 

[BronsonLee]

No they're not.

What else do they have?

Annapurna cranking out period-piece 75mil Cold War spy flicks accurately(ish) adapting the original works of Fleming is the dream here.

Which is why it'll never fucking happen.

You bastard.

 

[border]

Is Daniel Craig definitely going to do another film? Or is he still hemming and hawing?

 

[Slythe]

Please WB so we can get the Nolan bond film we don't deserve

 

[kswiston]

Please WB so we can get the Nolan bond film we don't deserve

I doubt Nolan has any interest in Bond with all the strings attached.

 

[Solo]

Is Daniel Craig definitely going to do another film? Or is he still hemming and hawing?

It's not official, no, but it's pretty much all but guaranteed he's doing one more. Otherwise casting would have been underway months ago for the next Bond. Also EON had involvement in getting his play off the ground, in what was a shrewd move. Craig has loved being on stage again and EON comes up smellig like roses to get him on for one last go.

 

[GabeTheGrouch76]

What else do they have?

They have an upcoming film which they hope will become franchise material if they play their cards right.

 

[Patriots7]

What else do they have?



You bastard.

1. Sony Pictures is the fourth largest major.
2. They are profitable
3. The crown jewel of a Sony Pictures Entertainment acquisition is their TV arm, which is very profitable

So they're not 'dead' if they don't win rights to a really bad deal.

Like Paramount, Sony's movie division is in the midst of management changes and a refocusing. Hoping they get Staggs to lead SPE.

 

[Blader]

It's not official, no, but it's pretty much all but guaranteed he's doing one more. Otherwise casting would have been underway months ago for the next Bond. Also EON had involvement in getting his play off the ground, in what was a shrewd move. Craig has loved being on stage again and EON comes up smellig like roses to get him on for one last go.

They must feel confident enough he'll return, since his schedule is also being factored into the bidding. If he were on the fence and likely not to come back, that'd probably be a huge blow to trying to line up distributors (if this deal is only for a single movie, then anyone who signs up for it is going to want to the billion-dollar Bond and not an unproven new man in the role).