Spyglass near to closing a deal with MGM

[Blowfeld]

With MGM's future still murky, Mary Parent has departed as head of its mothballed film production arm.

Parent, who had been chair of the motion picture group and co-CEO, cleared out of her office Friday after 2 1/2 years at the beleaguered studio.

Her departure came as the studio disclosed that MGM's debtholders will have an additional week to consider a bankruptcy plan that would leave Spyglass Entertainment toppers in charge -- a sign that a recent rival merger proposal from Lionsgate may have gained traction among the MGM lenders.

The Spyglass plan would take MGM into a pre-packaged bankruptcy that would wipe out the MGM equity and leave Spyglass toppers Gary Barber and Roger Birnbaum in charge with a 5% stake. MGM's more than 100 lenders have

until Oct. 29 to endorse the Spyglass plan.

MGM said in Friday's announcement that the extra week was needed due to supplemental information to the Spyglass solicitation package. The studio made no mention of the Lionsgate proposal, which emerged a week ago after the Spyglass plan had been sent to debtholders.

Carl Icahn, a major Lionsgate shareholder who's battled management on several fronts in recent years and holds a significant amount of MGM debt, has been pushing for the Lionsgate merger. Also, the Los Angeles Times reported that MGM debtholder Franklin Templeton Investments had sent a letter to the studio's board on behalf of other creditors asking for a three-week delay in the Spyglass vote so they would have time to consider the rival bid.

Lionsgate's proposed merger would leave the debtholders with a 55% stake -- and create an MGM-Lionsgate with Lionsgate's existing film and TV production arms and a massive combined library.

MGM had no comment about Parent's exit, which came following a year in which MGM released only one movie -- "Hot Tub Time Machine" -- and completed three other films awaiting release ("Red Dawn," "Cabin in the Woods" and "The Zookeeper"). But Parent's departure wasn't a surprise given that film production is in limbo while MGM in the midst of sorting out its fate with debtholders.

Parent, who had spent more than a decade as a Universal exec and producer, began her MGM tenure in early 2008 at the behest of then-chairman Harry Sloan, with marching orders to ramp up production. She moved quickly to start developing projects such as "The Three Stooges," Robert Ludlum's "Matarese Circle" and reboots of MGM titles such as "RoboCop," "Red Dawn" and "Pink Panther" -- and also inherited a reinvention of "Fame."

Parent also tapped studio vets Cale Boyter on the production side and Mike Vollman on marketing to help handle the revived slate. But MGM's financial difficulties -- a combination of debt payments from the $4.8 billion 2005 buyout and the decline of the DVD market -- made it difficult for Parent's team to move forward on all but a few projects.

MGM brought in turnaround specialist Steve Cooper in August 2009, saw "Fame" perform meekly in September and put itself up for sale in November. By the end of last year, Parent had retained influential attorney David Boies. Sources said Friday that she has another 18-20 months on her contract.

MGM's "Zookeeper," starring Kevin James, was co-financed by Sony and won't be out until July. Neither the studio's remake of "Red Dawn" nor horror movie "Cabin in the Woods" has a release date.

Early speculation among insiders was that Parent -- who remains well regarded within the industry -- has already been offered a producing deal at one of the majors.

As for MGM's immediate future, it's mum as to how the new bid from Lionsgate would be handled. Lionsgate has had no comment on MGM's one-week extension of the deadline.

Lionsgate's three largest shareholders -- Icahn, Mark Rachesky's MHR Fund Management and Gordon Crawford's Capital Research Global Investors -- support Lionsgate's merger proposal, which offers about $1.8 billion in stock and debt.

Wall Street appeared to endorse the Lionsgate-MGM deal Friday, with Lionsgate shares rising 21¢ to $7.65 in trading on the New York Stock Exchange. It was a two-year high for the stock and 15¢ higher than Icahn's tender offer for all the shares.

Also on Friday, Standard & Poor's Ratings Services issued an improvement in its outlook for Lionsgate (current credit rating: B-) in the wake of the merger proposal. S&P had placed the rating on CreditWatch with negative implications in March after Icahn launched his first hostile takeover offer.

"MGM has one of the industry's largest film libraries, and it produces the lucrative James Bond films," S&P said. "A combination with Lionsgate would bring significant additional film library assets and cash flow but could entail substantial production funding and financing needs if the new company's management pursues an active production strategy under the MGM brand."


Read more: http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118025823.html
Visit Variety.com to become a Variety subscriber.

[Mazer Rackham]

Spyglass makes more scene, if Lions Gate somehow pulls it off forget about Bond for a long while.

[Blowfeld]

By Brent Lang
Published: October 21, 2010 @ 9:38 am
http://www.thewrap.com/movies/article/h ... debt-21885

It seems crazy to say it, but Lionsgate has a friend in Carl Icahn.

After engaging in a lengthy proxy fight with the studio, the renegade investor is throwing his weight behind its bid to merge with Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.

Icahn announced Thursday that he is prepared to buy debt from the studio’s creditors provided they vote against a prepackaged bankruptcy plan that would see Spyglass chiefs Gary Barber and Roger Birnbaum take control of the company. The offer comes a week before MGM’s noteholders are scheduled to vote on the Spyglass proposal.

TheWrap reported last week that Icahn planned to use his insider status to influence the vote.

“We should not allow ourselves to be railroaded into the Spyglass plan,” Icahn said in a statement. “This is the critical decision point for MGM lenders, yet we are being rushed into an extraordinary Prepackaged Plan with limited information and input, on a ‘hurry up basis’ that frustrates any dissent. I hope to defeat this ‘rush to judgment.’”

MGM has been laboring under $4 billion in debt for much of the past year, while it’s precarious financial position put such blue ticket projects as “The Hobbit” and James Bond in jeopardy.

Icahn has quietly bought up about 13 percent of MGM’s debt. His purchase offer will expire on Oct. 29, the same day the noteholders are scheduled to vote on the Spyglass plan.

Icahn slammed MGM’s management for refusing Lionsgate’s request to put their 11th hour offer out publicly. He said that MGM is also refusing to publicize a third offer for the studio by an unnamed party.

“the plan is being backed by certain members of the MGM creditors committee, and is being ramrodded through with the typical fear tactic that the ‘sky will fall’ if the plan is not approved." Icahn said. "It is more likely for the sky to fall if the Spyglass Plan was approved."

[Blowfeld]

(Reuters) - Film Studio Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc plans to make public a merger proposal from Lions Gate Entertainment Corp to dispute the purported cost savings, the New York Post reported, citing an unnamed source.

On Thursday, billionaire investor Carl Icahn offered to buy senior debt from creditors willing to vote down the company's preferred deal with Spyglass Entertainment.

Icahn, who says he has a "significant" position in MGM, is pushing an alternative proposal to merge the heavily indebted film studio with Lions Gate Entertainment Corp, in which he also has a large stake.

The Post said MGM intends to release a July proposal in which Lions Gate offered MGM lenders a 50-50 split in the combined company instead of the current 45-55 proposal, which was outlined more recently in a letter to MGM.

Lions Gate could not immediately be reached for comment by Reuters outside regular U.S. business hours.

(Reporting by Anand Basu in Bangalore; Editing by Will Waterman)

this story can be found at http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69L1NW20101022

[Kristatos]

Spyglass makes more scene, if Lions Gate somehow pulls it off forget about Bond for a long while.

Why is that?

[Mazer Rackham]

Spyglass makes more scene, if Lions Gate somehow pulls it off forget about Bond for a long while.

Why is that?

When Babs heard about the LionsGate offer her first comment was on long the lines of their operating budgets for a year is less than a Bond movie. Without a major injection of cash from someplace, under LG, the next Bond will be a long ways off.

LG is a bigger company therefore harder to get a stake in and harder to steer. SG is a much smaller, compact company and would easier to work with a lot less overhead. The healthiest thing for MGM besides selling out lock stock and barrel to WB is to slim down and make a healthy run for it under SG. They still might fail, but under LG they will lumber around for long while before starting to move forward. It is not a health mix for a lot of reasons.

[katied]

If it's Lionsgate that will shut up all of the people that keep saying that Bond 23 will get started before too long.Very doubtful.

Yet more proof Babs does not care about what happens to the Bond franchise.

[Blowfeld]

Sylvester McCoy has told fans he has been cast as Radagast the Brown in the upcoming film The Hobbit.

Rumours of the Seventh Doctor's involvement in the Peter Jackson film have been around for a while but this is the first conformation from the actor that he has been offered a role in the movie.

McCoy was speaking at the Armageddon Expo in Auckland yesterday, It is understood that McCoy had meetings in Wellington with Jackson and co-producer and co-writer Philippa Boyens last week, where he was offered the role, but that no contracts have yet been signed.

The Hobbit is slated for release in two parts, the first due in 2012. Production is currently delayed due to a dispute involving the New Zealand branch of Actors Equity.

Love McCoy very glad he got the role. But Interestingly no contracts are signed yet. That says a lot not sure what it means precisely.

[Kristatos]

Spyglass makes more scene, if Lions Gate somehow pulls it off forget about Bond for a long while.

Why is that?

When Babs heard about the LionsGate offer her first comment was on long the lines of their operating budgets for a year is less than a Bond movie.

But is it less than a Bourne movie? Whatever DAD's shortcomings, the money was at least all up there on the screen. A movie like QOS shouldn't cost $200 million to make.

[Mazer Rackham]

But is it less than a Bourne movie?

Yes and no,

Bourne breaks down like this;

Code: Select all

Bourne 1 $60m + Prints & advertising (made worldwide $214m ) $25m is listed as P&A Budget might be for the North American Market only, not sure.

Bourne 2 $85m + advertising (made worldwide $289m) one source has P&A budget as $45m but that is likely only for the NA markets.

Bourne 3 $130m + advertising (made worldwide $443m) Probably spent more than $130m because of reshoots 

Given the break down the studios take of the profit Bourne not that great on the surface.
However the home video sales here is great, not one Bourne release has failed to generate over $100m domestically. I believe all have sold well over 8m copies and the TV rights for last one in the US was over $20m

Whatever DAD's shortcomings, the money was at least all up there on the screen. A movie like QOS shouldn't cost $200 million to make.

I agree although too much was spent on it. It was a travelogue of interesting sight and sounds.


I doubt many would dispute the Bond production cast have been bloated for a long time, I'd say since TND. Eon will admit to spending over $230m on Quark, I know it was closer to $280m before P&A. P&A cost for Bond is well over $100m.

Right now Babs would settle for $200m to make the next one except the studios needs over $300 cash on hand to do it. That's the rub. A bankrupt studio doesn't have that kind of dosh lying around.

Whoever ends up in Charge of the studios half of Bond is going to look hard at the cost, in a failing dvd market studios are forced to re-evaluate their expenditures and Bond will not pass the sniff test. Right off the top $30m of the production cost is going to Babs and Mikey for producing the movie, they then get 50% of revenues as well. In the current market studios can't maintain this kind of deficit spending counting on DVD to bail them out.

Cubby kept costs stable, for a long time it was $75m a movie including advertising. Easy to work with and to count on the payday long and short term.

[Goldeneye]

From today's Wall Street Journal
Special Thanks to Mazer

Code: Select all

MGM Drama Nears Climax 

By MIKE SPECTOR And LAUREN A.E. SCHUKER

LOS ANGELES—Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc.'s latest drama is near a denouement.

The lead character is the studio itself, which after a storied past as a Hollywood icon is looking at a frugal future as a hedge-fund asset.

On Friday, creditors vote on a plan to send MGM into bankruptcy court, to be relieved of a crushing debt load, not to mention a management that offered spending solutions at sharp odds with desires of the lenders.
[MGM]

But there is a last-minute plot twist: Stalking the studio with a rival plan of his own is activist investor Carl Icahn. This week, he sweetened an offer to buy debt from other MGM creditors, in an effort to upend the plan before them and raise the chances of ultimately controlling the studio's fate himself.

The Hollywood/Wall Street culture clash at MGM was on vivid display in a scene at its headquarters in Century City last March. Speaking to a packed screening-room audience was the studio's top film executive, Mary Parent, who began by offering apologies for "Hot Tub Time Machine," a raunchy comedy that disappointed at the box office.

The rest of the news was bad, too. Cash from MGM's vast film library was falling, amid the burden of servicing some $4 billion of debt. An effort to sell the company had drawn only one cash offer, a low-ball bid from Warner Brothers

MGM management's solution: Raise another billion dollars so the studio could produce around 10 big new movies a year and recapture its glory. "If you're not willing to properly resource the company," Ms. Parent said, "you are going to wish you had sold it to Warner Brothers."

In the screening-room seats was no ordinary Hollywood audience but the increasingly powerful creditors, among them Charles Tauber of hedge fund Anchorage Advisors, one of the biggest MGM debt-holders. After the presentation he told a banker for the creditors, "We need to discuss alternatives."

The option they developed is what all creditors will vote on Friday. If it wins enough support—odds appear to favor it—MGM will file for a Chapter 11 bankruptcy as soon as Sunday, and the 86-year-old company, the source of more than 200 Academy Awards for classics like "Gone with the Wind," will pass to distressed-debt investors more accustomed to reworking home-health-care firms and community banks.

They aim to be ruthless about costs. They plan to outsource to another studio the task of distributing films to theaters, then focus on the television business—cutting deals with cable-TV channels, video-on-demand services and online streaming companies, especially abroad.

To do this, they would hand management to Gary Barber and Roger Birnbaum, founders of Spyglass Entertainment, a small production company half-owned by private-equity firm Cerberus Capital Management. Working with a budget half what Ms. Parent proposed, the pair would make just four to six movies a year, most with modest budgets of $50 million or so, though allowing for an occasional big one.

It's a gamble. The hedge funds are mostly new to Hollywood. They've been warned against trying to run a studio on the cheap.

"Part of MGM's problem has always been that many of its owners are financial players more focused on the short term than the long term," says Clark Hallren, a consultant and former banker for MGM. "Being in the entertainment industry is typically a long-term play because of the nature of distribution and massive amounts of capital needed."

That gamble won't be an issue if Mr. Icahn has his way. In an 11th-hour move, he is pushing a plan in which MGM would merge with Lions Gate Entertainment Corp., a rival studio he has been trying all year to take over. Mr. Icahn has acquired about 13% of MGM's debt and offered to buy debt from other creditors if they vote against the Spyglass plan.

He is now offering a premium to MGM debt holders, provided they vote against the Spyglass plan Friday. If enough agree to sell, the Spyglass plan could be scuttled and Mr. Icahn could end up owning enough MGM debt to block any future plan he dislikes.

But the Anchorage-led creditors backing the Spyglass plan already hold their own "blocking position," of over one-third of the debt. The result could be a stalemate that would push the struggle for MGM into a prolonged final act.

Ms. Parent is already gone, having negotiated an exit package and left in mid-October. A moving truck picked up office furniture she had installed herself in a modest effort to contain costs. This account of MGM's tumble from filmdom's glittering heights to a likely humbler future is based on internal documents and interviews with more than a dozen people close to the famed studio, many of them key players in the drama.

MGM was formed in 1924 by theater owner Marcus Loew to make and distribute films for his Loews Theatres chain. MGM soon dominated the golden age of film, for much of that time led by Louis B. Mayer.

While it changed hands, its future still seemed grand at the time of a 2005 leveraged buyout. A group of private-equity firms including Providence Equity Partners and TPG, along with Sony Corp. and Comcast Corp., bought the studio from investor Kirk Kerkorian for $5 billion, loading it with debt.

MGM's 4,100-title film library, with heirlooms like the James Bond and "Rocky" films, was generating over $500 million a year after expenses. The new owners figured they could pay for the acquisition by selling millions of DVDs. To get a decent price from cable channels and others for older films, a studio must group them with some new hit movies. The new owners relied on partner Sony to produce these hits. But Sony wasn't able to produce enough. Library proceeds started falling.

In early 2008, MGM hired Ms. Parent, who had made her name at Universal turning films like "Gladiator" into box-office smashes, with a plan to ramp up a big slate of new films and return MGM to glory. The erosion in film-library revenue wouldn't allow that, however. The owners in 2009 brought in a turnaround specialist, Stephen Cooper, who shared a new executive suite with Ms. Parent.

Lenders grew testy. On an autumn 2009 conference call, Mr. Cooper told them the studio planned to stop paying interest on its debt and consider bankruptcy, so the creditors should start to think of MGM as "your studio." Said one lender on the call: "This deal has sucked from Day One. The sponsors are corrupt, management's incompetent, and you're an a—."

"Thank you," Mr. Cooper replied. "Next question."  

At creditors' insistence, Mr. Cooper put MGM up for sale. When it drew no better all-cash offer than a $1.5 billion bid from Time Warner Inc.'s Warner Brothers, spooked investors in MGM bank debt started selling.

In Manhattan, Kevin Ulrich decided to pounce.  A former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. debt trader, he had helped start Anchorage Advisors, and with co-founder Tony Davis managed some $8 billion. Anchorage started buying MGM debt at a big discount. Doing the same were three other hedge funds: Highland Capital Management, Davidson Kempner Capital Management and Solus Alternative Asset Management.

To funds buying MGM's debt, it wasn't so much a classic Hollywood studio as an asset with a famous brand and attractive film library. They could take it over and make deals to improve library cash flow, which had plunged to $228 million.

They waited to strike until after Ms. Parent's late-March address to creditors, where she said MGM needed a range of big-budget comedy, action and family films. One creditor asked why it couldn't make just two films a year to save money.

"That's why you have a movie slate, to diversify," Ms. Parent said, to blank stares. "Let's put it another way," she added. "Would you feel comfortable if the only asset you had in your investment portfolio was MGM?"

After Anchorage's Mr. Tauber told a banker from J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.—MGM's lead creditor—they needed to discuss alternatives, the banker rounded up big creditors for an impromptu meeting and asked who would sit on a committee to plot MGM's fate. Ultimately, Messrs. Ulrich and Tauber of Anchorage joined, plus people from Highland, Davidson Kempner and Solus. Anchorage was on its way to accumulating over $700 million of MGM's debt, and the other three more than $800 million combined.

Anchorage brought in Creative Artists Agency partner Bryan Lourd as an adviser. The hedge funds then sought out other Hollywood luminaries for a crash course in the film business and to find an eventual new MGM chief. Over two days, the moguls visited the creditors at the offices of investment bank Houlihan Lokey.

Most, such as Joe Roth, ex-head of Walt Disney Studios, echoed Ms. Parent's contention that MGM needed a bold effort. "You either compete head-on or you don't compete at all," Mr. Roth, who had no interest in running MGM, said in an interview. "By making half-efforts, you never get the right product or talent." Terry Semel, ex-leader of Warner Brothers and Yahoo Inc., also visited, and also suggested that MGM produce many films and TV shows.

Jonathan Dolgen, a former Paramount head, pitched a plan in which he would lead the studio, with director Ridley Scott serving as the creative head along with his brother, Tony Scott.

The lights dimmed and Mr. Dolgen showed clips called "sizzle reels" of films directed or produced by the Scotts, such as "Robin Hood." When the lights came up, he folded his arms, leaned forward and said: "I think that speaks for itself. What questions can I answer?"

A pause followed. Patrick Daugherty, a blunt Texan and a partner at Highland Capital, had been checking his iPhone while Russell Crowe's Robin Hood fired arrows. "What would be your plan to run this company?" he asked. The hedge funds were concerned that Mr. Dolgen and the Scotts hadn't teamed up before and hadn't developed detailed plans for the studio.

The Hollywood visitors who clicked best with the hedge funds were Messrs. Barber and Birnbaum of Spyglass, who mentioned they didn't feel their creativity curbed by Spyglass's private-equity half-owner, Cerberus. One sticking point: The hedge funds wanted board approval for every substantial deal the studio struck.

Mr. Barber protested. He cited a remake of "Star Trek" last year, saying Spyglass had just 24 hours to decide to co-finance it with Paramount, too little time for a board meeting. The pair were told they would have deal freedom but also a strict budget.

Spyglass and its Deutsche Bank advisers worked out a plan for Spyglass to get a nearly 5% interest in MGM after merging some older Spyglass films with MGM's library. The creditors envision the library's cash flow rising to $455 million annually in five years.

The hedge funds also entertained and rejected ideas for mergers, including with Lions Gate. But in late September, Mr. Icahn, who has built a large stake in Lions Gate, summoned Anchorage's Messrs. Ulrich and Tauber and asked them to again consider merging with that studio. When MGM went ahead with plans for creditors to vote on a prepackaged bankruptcy deal putting the Spyglass officials in charge of MGM, Mr. Icahn made his move to scuttle that plan—setting up Friday's showdown.

Spyglass's Messrs. Barber and Birnbaum are behaving as if their deal will go through. They have parking spaces at MGM and have already helped the studio with a key project: two "Hobbit" films in partnership with Warner Brothers, a project MGM's financial woes had jeopardized. Those much-anticipated films should eventually give the MGM library a boost.

The pair have helped get the Hobbit films back on track under "Lord of the Rings" director Peter Jackson. The new plan under consideration: Warner will foot the production bill and be partly paid back by MGM later

[Blowfeld]

MGM creditors have voted on a reorganization plan and despite the best efforts of investor Carl Icahn, they decided to move the company into Chapter 11 bankruptcy rather than sell their debt to the billionaire.

From MGM:

Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc. (“MGM”) today announced that the secured lenders voting in the Company’s solicitation process have overwhelmingly approved its proposed plan of reorganization (“Plan”). MGM will now move expeditiously to implement that Plan, which will dramatically reduce its debt load and put the Company in a strong position to execute its business strategy. MGM is appreciative of the lenders’ support.

The vote came after Icahn had made two separate offers to buy up MGM debt in order to merge the company with Lionsagte, a studio where he is the majority shareholders. Icahn’s offers would have given him a 51% share of MGM and the heft to force the merger.

But yesterday Lionsgate sued Icahn in New York Federal Court claiming he had been playing a “double game” with Lionsgate and MGM. Icahn had initially resisted Lionsgate’s efforts to merge with the company. He later came out in full support.

No word on whether the lawsuit was the final straw for debt holders who were concerned that Icahn could not be trusted with MGM, which owns the rights to the James Bond franchise and the upcoming film version of The Hobbit.

Does this mean Icahn will go away and quietly lick his wounds? Don’t count on it. The shareholder agitator seems to constantly be looking for a fight and he always seems to find new ways to try and get what he wants.

Under the bankruptcy plan, MGM will have about a month to get its house in order and all of the $4 billion in debt will be turned into equity. The company will then come under the management of Spyglass Entertainment heads Gary Barber and Roger Birnbaum. Spyglass already has a long history in Hollywood. The company helped finance successful films like Star Trek, Wanted and Four Christmases.

This story can be found at http://blogs.forbes.com/dorothypomerant ... m-for-now/

[Dr. No]

If I understand what is going on the Hobbit is getting made only because WB is going to foot the bill with the understanding they will be paid back when MGM is solvent?
Holy cow!

I don't think Bond is coming back any time soon. Whats the deal with this Icahn guy? Sounds like he will keep MGM in the ditch as long as he can....

[Blowfeld]

First I have heard of moving Bond to another studio.
Sounds like fanboy drivel but could there be something to this Mazer? Maybe Paramount could finance a movie like Warner is doing for The Hobbitieses?

Although with all the pre production problems together with Daniel's schedule 2013-2014 does seem reasonable.

James Bond 23 Inches Towards Production
October 30th, 2010
James Bond 23 may soon see the light of day

Creditors have officially approved the MGM restructuring plan that will put Spyglass Entertainment in charge of the studio, getting it moving once again. MGM will no longer be a distributor, but a working studio, which now puts James Bond 23 on the auction block and closer to an actual start date. Here is the official announcement from MGM:

"Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc. ('MGM') today announced that the secured lenders voting in the Company's solicitation process have overwhelmingly approved its proposed plan of reorganization ('Plan'). MGM will now move expeditiously to implement that Plan, which will dramatically reduce its debt load and put the Company in a strong position to execute its business strategy. MGM is appreciative of the lenders' support."

It has been speculated by varying sources that with MGM back up and running, Sony Entertainment, the company that distributed the last two 007 adventures Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, will announce their take over of the franchise. Deadline, on the other hand, tend to believe that James Bond 23 may go to Paramount, as they have a very close relationship with Spyglass and are currently working with them to produce Star Trek 2.

James Bond 23 may still be quite a ways away from actually happening, as star Daniel Craig is commited to three chapters in the Millennium Trilogy, starting with the currently in-production The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. There is currently no talk of hiring someone else to play James Bond, but if Craig is to reprise the role a third time, we still won't see James Bond 23 until 2014 at the earliest.

James Bond 23 is in development and stars Daniel Craig, Judi Dench. The film is directed by Sam Mendes.

This story can be found at http://www.movieweb.com/news/NEnua3HoQsLzqv

[katied]

I just saw the last of the Swedish language Millenium Trilogy movies(The Girl Who Kicked The Hornet's Nest) last night. Good stuff, but Fincher may have a hard time equalling it.

[Mazer Rackham]

Actually this guy is talking about distribution only. MGM could let somebody else make the Bond films and fund it but it would be a bad deal for the studio picking up the tab. Nobody is going to do that.

The talk of the day is "will they even bother to develop the story that would have brought Craig back" along with him being "unavailable" for too long. Thus beginning the recast narrative. Along side the Bond movies have cost too much narrative.

Remember the flack I got for telling you all how much Bond 22 aka Quark cost? Well in today's Daily Express ( express.co.uk /Will the Lion Ever Roar Again?) we got some independent verification.

Bond had been placed on hold indefinitely despite the last film in the series, 2008’s Quantum Of Solace, making £381million worldwide.

The big problem is that getting Bond to screen in that film cost £175million, making it the most expensive ever

Everyone say it with me £175m GBP = $280.5M USD. $280.5m ($283m in 2008) before the Print and Advertising budget.

[Kristatos]

Remember the flack I got for telling you all how much Bond 22 aka Quark cost? Well in today's Daily Express ( express.co.uk /Will the Lion Ever Roar Again?) we got some independent verification.

I don't remember anyone here giving you flak, except maybe the pro-Craigers. I think I speak for most of us here when I say that we regard you as the man in the know.

[Mazer Rackham]

I don't remember anyone here giving you flak, except maybe the pro-Craigers. I think I speak for most of us here when I say that we regard you as the man in the know.

You are right. It wasn't the members here per say it was a few flunkies questioning my veracity. This was back in the thick of the Qos war when the fall out was just beginning. I feel vindicated because back then I couldn't offer a public source because it wasn't on the record so to speak.

I forgot to mention the other narrative starting up, Craig isn't getting the respect he deserves and wants to do more art driven projects. He is done. I doubt the studio will want him back any more than he will want to come back. He made enough money off Bond to rest comfortably for the rest of his life and he can try to be a serious actor now.

[Dr. No]

Not getting the respect he deserves?! the only person getting more positive press coverage in the last 4 years with no questions asked is Obama!

Speaking of, hey GE who have you sold us out to? I keep getting Obama Needs Your Help Ads, very disappointing to find he wasn't looking for help moving out of the White house

more seriously I think as many other ahve said as well Craig finds Bond beneath him. We were talking about how he like to do art house films and wants to bring that to Bond. A big difference in how bond needs to be to be enjoyed and how he would feel good about it. I haven't seen anything about him wanting to do more art house stuff. I mean Cow boys and aliens isn't high brow.

[Kristatos]

Speaking of, hey GE who have you sold us out to? I keep getting Obama Needs Your Help Ads, very disappointing to find he wasn't looking for help moving out of the White house

I don't think GE has any control over what ads get posted on the site. I suppose we should be flattered that the White House considers us a site worth advertising on. We get the POTUSA, Craig gets Tyrell's Crisps. I'd say that's 1-0 to us, whatever you think of the current occupant.