Daniel Craig Offered $150 Million For 2 More James Bond Movies

[FunkyMike]

James Bond is an iconic character and movie franchise. Over the years, several notable actors have played the Secret Agent on screen, with varying degrees of popularity and success. Daniel Craig has been the embodiment of 007 for the last four installments of the franchise, and has proven himself to be a popular Bond with both audiences and Sony, who have enjoyed great success with Craig at the helm. Though Spectre, the most recent Bond offering, did not perform as well at the box office or with critics as 2012’s Skyfall, it still made a very respectable $879 million at the worldwide box office, so it stands to reason that Sony would want to keep Craig in Bond’s tux just a little bit longer.

 

However, it seems as if Craig himself isn’t so keen; just prior to the release of Spectre, Craig went on record saying he’d rather slash his wrists than play the Secret Agent again any time soon. It was also rumored that the actor turned down a reported £68 million (nearly $100 million) to return to the franchise. With that in mind, the rumor-mill has churned out a multitude of names as potential Bond successors, including the ever-popular choice of Idris Elba, even though the actor insists he’s too old for the part.

 

Other popular 007 actor picks include Aidan Turner – currently playing the lead in BBC One drama, Poldark – and Tom Hiddleston, whose name seems to be rumored for just about anything, these days. For Sony, though, it seems as if the studio is only interested in Craig returning to play Mr. Bond right now. In fact, it’s rumored by Radar that the studio has offered the actor a massive $150 million to reprise his role for two more 007 adventures.

 

 

It’s important to stress that the rumor is just that: a rumor. However, it would make sense that Sony would try and keep Craig onboard, since it’s said that the studio wants to make two Bond movies “virtually back-to-back,” and they want to start soon. If another actor were to be brought in, that could stall proceedings while contracts were negotiated, and so on; though that’s not also to say that Craig won’t also drive some hard negotiations of his own behind the scenes. According to Radar’s source, Craig has “played a genius hand,” by stating that he didn’t wish to return:

 

Quote

 

“Everyone knows how much executives adore him, and the idea of losing him at such a crucial time in the franchise isn’t an option as far as all the studio honchos are concerned.”

 

 

Though Craig did state his intentions, he also added that he reserved the right to change his mind. If the rumor is to be believed then, maybe such a huge sum of money could sway Craig to knock two more Bond movies out before passing the baton on to someone else. All well and good- for Craig- but it does beg the question: is any actor worthy of that kind of paycheck to play a part in a franchise where the lead actor changes anyway?

 

No doubt about it, Craig is a great Bond, but that’s not to say others wouldn’t be just as popular or commercially viable, given half the chance. Would that money be better spent on the films themselves – on special effects or scriptwriters, for example? If Craig does stay, owing to the massive sum of money, will he give a genuine, impassioned performance as we saw in Casino Royale and Skyfall, or will his on screen presence fall short? In essence, will he give a half-assed performance because he’s only there for the money?

 

Time will tell in all respects, of course. Ultimately though, the decision rests with Barbara Broccoli, who is said to be focusing on the next two James Bond movies and hoping to rehire Craig – so this rumor could well prove to be true.

 

http://screenrant.com/daniel-craig-james-bond-movies-150-million/

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

He is probably the best since Sean Connery.

[macoman]

I like Daniel Craig as James Bond a lot... in every movie he put energy and substance to the character. Like Gary said, he is the best or one of the best I ever see since Sean Connery.

[Dick Montage]

I only want him to stay on if HE wants to stay on.  Dialing it in for lackluster performances just for $$$ will be an annoyance more than anything!

[Steven P. Administrators]

I like Craig as Bond too, saw this headline in my local news this morning and meant to look it up, so thanks for posting  

4 minutes ago, Nik Louch said:

I only want him to stay on if HE wants to stay on.  Dialing it in for lackluster performances just for $$$ will be an annoyance more than anything!

He said the same after Skyfall though and still did SPECTRE. Mainly because the part is so physically demanding.

[Dick Montage]

24 minutes ago, Steven P. said:

He said the same after Skyfall though and still did SPECTRE. Mainly because the part is so physically demanding.

Oh I know, and it's all part of the negotiation game

[George P Global Moderator]

27 minutes ago, Nik Louch said:

I only want him to stay on if HE wants to stay on.  Dialing it in for lackluster performances just for $$$ will be an annoyance more than anything!

I agree, but it really depends on if he says what he says as a smart play to get big money, specially seeing how his Bond movies have been making a good chunk more compared to the ones before, and no, I don't mean the old ones, I mean everything from Goldeneye and up.

 

 

[Yogurth]

In all honesty I miss the Roger Moore's Bond the most. It was a lighthearted break out of all fantasy seriousness painting all other James Bond series, and for me it is hard to immerse into Bond as serious thrillers. IMHO Moore's movies formula was the best even if some of those movies were not. 

[FunkyMike]

9 minutes ago, Nik Louch said:

Oh I know, and it's all part of the negotiation game

I also believe he was just burned out and if you watch the interview he wasn't actually making a hard statement but rather telling the interviewer how exhausted he felt. Also negotiation game.

 

Hopefully he can do a few more movies. It is only fitting that he does a few more movies after the previous long arc came to an end.

[lnmnky]

Nevermind the actor, can we have a storyline that makes sense? I'm all for outrageous, crazy, and unexpected twists, but Skyfall was just a mess. There was no way he (SIlva) would have planned it all out to fail and still have multiple back-up plans that were perfectly timed to later attempt to kill bond.

 

Edit : http://movieplotholes.com/skyfall.html 

Edited September 5, 2016 by lunamonkey

[Draconian Guppy]

waiting for the headline "craig signed..."

[+Warwagon MVC]

Oh god, I thought we were finally rid of him after the last movie.

[Hum]

He seems too old.

 

Probably be tempted by the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[George P Global Moderator]

3 hours ago, lunamonkey said:

Nevermind the actor, can we have a storyline that makes sense? I'm all for outrageous, crazy, and unexpected twists, but Skyfall was just a mess. There was no way he (SIlva) would have planned it all out to fail and still have multiple back-up plans that were perfectly timed to later attempt to kill bond.

 

Edit : http://movieplotholes.com/skyfall.html 

Not going to argue that it has faults but if you take all the movies as an arc, then it all ties into Spectre as the entity behind it all, so when you look at it as Silva wasn't doing it on his own but had Spectre behind him, backing him, something the movie itself does basically say, then it makes things more plausible.

[Skiver Veteran]

That is an insane amount of money but I've got to imagine someone who's had the success it just gets to the point where that level of money is just hard to actually need without living some crazy lifestyle!

 

I can't imagine he will back down if he was exhausted as he seemed to suggest he was after the last movie. Surely signing up to another two movies is committing yourself to another 3-4 years of that life.

[George P Global Moderator]

27 minutes ago, Skiver said:

That is an insane amount of money but I've got to imagine someone who's had the success it just gets to the point where that level of money is just hard to actually need without living some crazy lifestyle!

 

I can't imagine he will back down if he was exhausted as he seemed to suggest he was after the last movie. Surely signing up to another two movies is committing yourself to another 3-4 years of that life.

True, but actually it sounds like the studio wants to do two of them back to back, so it wouldn't be 3-4 years if you film them together, more like 2, tops.   Then they can release them a year apart, ala Matrix 2 and 3 and so on.

[xrobwx71]

I grew up with Roger Moore, that being said, in today's movie shadow, he seems more of a fit for Downton Abbey. Opinions on Gerard Butler as Bond?

[HawkMan]

After the lst "james Bond" movie... which was anything but, and despite finally getting back spectre and having every opportunity to make the best damn bond movie in decades they churn ut the most boring piece of dodo dung ever... I'd rather see Craig go, and fresh blood be brought in across the board. give us back proper bond, give us a modern Bond like they did with Dalton. bring back action, gadgets, supervillains... Bring back BOND!

[FloatingFatMan]

On 05/09/2016 at 4:51 PM, Yogurth said:

In all honesty I miss the Roger Moore's Bond the most. It was a lighthearted break out of all fantasy seriousness painting all other James Bond series, and for me it is hard to immerse into Bond as serious thrillers. IMHO Moore's movies formula was the best even if some of those movies were not. 

I agree. Bond lost something when they got more realistic with the villains and plots.  I want more volcano and sea bases! More super villain space stations and world domination/ending plots, more shark tanks and 7 foot guys with bionic teeth! That's what Bond is FOR!  Keep the more realistic spy stuff for things like Bourne. Bond is all about unrealism!

 

[ThisSiteHasLostItsCharm]

well we got blofeld back, so some classic bond should be possible now right?

[HawkMan]

1 hour ago, Slarlac249 said:

well we got blofeld back, so some classic bond should be possible now right?

did you see the boring trainwreck that was the glorious comeback of SPECTRE ?

[Draconian Guppy]

1 hour ago, FloatingFatMan said:

I agree. Bond lost something when they got more realistic with the villains and plots.  I want more volcano and sea bases! More super villain space stations and world domination/ending plots, more shark tanks and 7 foot guys with bionic teeth! That's what Bond is FOR!  Keep the more realistic spy stuff for things like Bourne. Bond is all about unrealism!

 

Well, we could have that realistically too you know.

 

Problem with that is, the mission impossibles, bournes and bonds now have to set themselves apart.

[FloatingFatMan]

16 minutes ago, Draconian Guppy said:

Well, we could have that realistically too you know.

 

Problem with that is, the mission impossibles, bournes and bonds now have to set themselves apart.

Only the Bournes and MI's have to do that. Bond was there first, so defines the genre!

[FunkyMike]

The more realistic tone of the films will probably age much better but I wouldn't say that a certain degree of realism hurts the Bond franchise. Casino Royale is one of the top movies and it didn't need the cheese or the gadgets.

 

48 minutes ago, HawkMan said:

did you see the boring trainwreck that was the glorious comeback of SPECTRE ?

 

I think the film suffered from the financial situation at Sony. The hack didn't help either but the leaks did show that internally they were not happy with it and a lot had to be tacked on.

 

Quantum of Solace doesn't seem that bad overall when you take Spectre into consideration.  And Quantum of Solace was made during the whole writers strike fiasco whilst Spectre just suffered from a weak Sony which resulted in a weaker script / story.

[FloatingFatMan]

1 minute ago, FunkyMike said:

The more realistic tone of the films will probably age much better but I wouldn't say that a certain degree of realism hurts the Bond franchise. Casino Royale is one of the top movies and it didn't need the cheese or the gadgets.

I beg to differ.   There is only ONE Casino Royale... The Woody Allen one made in the 60's! The one Craig was in was just a humdrum action flick...