This morning, the entertainment world was surprised by the announcement that longtime James Bond franchise producers Michael Wilson and Barbara Broccoli were stepping back from creatively guiding the franchise, handing those reigns over to Amazon MGM Studios as part of a deal that sees the three parties forming a new subsidiary to contain and exploit those film and television rights.
The pullback by Wilson and Broccoli mark the first substantial time since their late father, producer Albert Broccoli, first acquired the film rights to the star of the spy novel series from author Ian Fleming in 1961 that the movie franchise would be steered by someone outside of the family. The Broccoli family had been producing the Bond films through their Eon Productions banner, with first United Artists and then MGM handling distribution after it purchased United Artists in 1981. Amazon stepped into the picture when it acquired MGM in 2021.
What made the announcement somewhat surprising was that it has arrived on the heels of recent reportage that Wilson and Broccoli had been unable to come to terms with Amazon on what creative direction to take the franchise in the wake of the very definitive end of the Daniel Craig-as-Bond era. A recent report quoting Broccoli as describing Amazon execs as “fucking idiots” made the internet rounds. With this in mind, it is hard to not see this new arrangement as Wilson and Broccoli just throwing up their hands in frustration on some level. (And cue the speculation about the size of the check Amazon may have written to get Wilson and Broccoli to withdraw.)
The Next Mission
So, where does this lead the franchise itself? As we stated, it had been previously reported that Wilson and Broccoli and Amazon were at loggerheads as to the best way to move the Bond franchise into its next phase. Wilson and Broccoli were advocating to continue forward with theatrically released films only, while Amazon was looking to open things up a bit with various TV shows and spin-off films that would create something of a 007 Cinematic Universe. And there are both positives and negatives to each approach.
Now, I am sure that there are old school fans of the Bond franchise who would argue that Bond is a big screen franchise and should remain so. Tradition can be a strong feeling and I can sympathize with that desire, as I have always been an advocate for the theatrical experience and at its best, the Bond films deliver a great theatrical experience. However, Bond films, by their nature, are somewhat episodic, moreso than the usual three act structure you see in most other films. I would argue that that episodic nature could naturally lend itself to a limited television series format. Each episode of a Bond streaming series could see the suave secret agent arriving in some location, getting into a tussle or two before finding an important clue for his overall mission for the season and then jetting off to the next location. Wash, rinse and repeat.
But if Amazon were to go in this direction, the question then becomes how to formulate an actual Bond TV series in terms of episodes per season. If you stick with what seems to becoming the streaming standard of ten episodes per season, do you even do one storyline per season, or maybe break things into two or three stories? Sure, it’s a different format to tell a Bond story in, but one that could still facilitate the telling of a James Bond story.
As to whether Amazon should or should not expand the Bond universe out with various spin-offs and the like, that is something that is almost certainly going to happen. This is what Amazon was pushing for and Wilson and Broccoli were resisting, and with them stepping back from the creative side of the franchise, there is no real reason for Amazon to not try and move forward with this plan.
And to be fair, it’s not like stories that didn’t necessarily focus on Bond but centering on some his various supporting characters haven’t been told before. Dynamite Comics devoted a miniseries to Bond’s CIA agent buddy Felix Leiter. In the mid-2000s there was a trilogy of novels fully sanctioned by the James Bond literary rights holder which featured M’s secretary Miss Moneypenny in a series of adventures. More recently there has been a new series of books centering on the adventures of some of Bond’s double-0 colleagues. The idea of deeper explorations of some of the Bond franchise characters is not reflexively a bad one. Characters like Leiter, Miss Moneypenny or even someone like Bond’s gadget guy Q all have certain qualities that have led them to the important positions that they inhabit in the Bond world. Why not see what stories led them there?
Perhaps the biggest obstacle to over some with fleshing out an interconnected James Bond film and TV franchise is generating public interest. Already, there is some snark being directed at the announcement, cynically decrying an imagined unending wave of Bond films, spinoffs and television series just waiting to flood out into the world. Granted, one of the biggest stumbling blocks that the Marvell Cinematic Universe seems to have currently is that there is such an abundance of material, some feel like it is now “homework” to keep abreast of all the shows and films.
To be upset about unannounced plans for a franchise’s future being steered by a company and creative team entirely different and separate from the company and people who run a different franchise entirely and who have made choices one may particularly not like strikes me as a weak criticism. The key moving forward would be to not go hog wild in exploiting the IP – and let’s face it, that is what sixty years of James Bond films have been, the exploitation of an intellectual property – in a way that winds up burning people out.
But no matter what the future brings, there is always one thing we know for certain – James Bond will return.
