Total Film catches up with Bond supremos Barbara Broccoli and Michael G Wilson to hear the thinking behind the most successful reboot in the super-spy’s history… and, yes, to try and prise a few details out of them about Bond 23…

TOTAL FILM : So… Bond is our Reboot Of The Decade.

BARBARA BROCCOLI : Well, t🔥hat’s wonderful! Thank you very much.

TF: Of course, Bond has been rebooted before, say from the fantastical Moonraker to the more down-to-earth For Your Eyes Only . But with Die Another Day making a small fortune, what prompted the grittier app🃏roach?

BB: Well… Septembe♑r 11 happened and it felt inappropriate for the films to continue down that fant꧋astical path.

So we decided to move to a more serious Bond. And we had acquired the rights to Casino Royale in… when was it Michael – 2000?

MICHAEL G WILSON: 1999, I think…

BB: 1999. And of course that&rsq♔uo;s the 𝓀‘Holy Grail’ of the Bond books. You know, the one that Cubby and Harry had wanted to start with and the rights weren’t available.

I mean you know the history… it’s not been made particularly well either time. So we were working on another script and we kind of got stuck and then Michael said, “You know, I really want to do Casino Royale .”

And I said, “Th💖at’s a great idea, let’s do it.&rd꧙quo;

TF: It is, as you say, the Holy Grail of the Bond books.💜 And probably quite a personal project as well, given the hisꦜtory.

Did you fe🃏el under particular pressure not to screw it up?

MW: Absolutely.

And we were determ💜ined to keep the key elements from the book – Barbara told every writer and director we spoke to💖: Vesper has to die at the end; James has to say ‘the bitch is dead’ and there has to be the torture scene.

And in our films, how do you do that well without unꦑdermining the ratings? It was a challenge, but Martin [Campbell, dire🥃ctor] came up with it and of course, Daniel was fantastic.

Next: [page-break]

TF : With your approach to Casino Royale , ho𓂃w much freedom did you al🦩low yourself from the Bond formula?

MW : We approached it almost as🥃 though there hadn’t been ♌a Bond film made before.

We did have the pre-title sequence, but other than that we didn&r💧squo;t have a Moneypenny and we sort of took a newer look at it.

TF : Were you ✱always clear from the start that this would be a reboot of the franchise, a bit of a clearing of the decks?

BB: As Michael said: 📖we just decided that we would make it as if no Bond film had been made before and we were lucky we had the novel.

Of course, it was written in the ’50s so it had to be updated, so we called Rob [Wade] and Neal [Purvis] an♛d they did a great draf🧸t.

They invented a lot of the really exciting things, ꦿthe freestyle running, the house collapsing at♕ the end.

They had a really go👍od script, which excited Martin and then h꧟e got in Paul Haggis who did a wonderful polish.

So it wasn’t as if we were just starti🍰ng all o𒉰ver again.

TF: ෴ If you had one oveꦺrriding aim or priority for the film, what would you say it was?

BB: Well I think it’s about the character. You know,𒐪 it’s the first time you really get to understand the inner workings of Bond.

Events happen which defin♓e him: it’s his journey, it’s his chrysalis; he comes out the other end a completely transform🐲ed human being.

It’s a hell of a role, so I guess our priority൩ was about the character, and casting the right person.

Next: [page-break]

TF : Honestly, how short wa♍s the shortlist for the new Bond?

BB: Well, if you read the press it was a long list!

For us, we wanted Daniel, I would say, exclusively. We couldn’t r🐬eally♊ consider anyone else.

I mean, we met other peopl🥂e, but he just seemed to 🔯be right.

We were worried he𓆉 wasn’t going to agree to do it, so it wasn’t so much about finding our Bond, as it was about persuading him.

TF: It’s true t𓄧hen that, when you approached Daniel, he wasn’t entirely convinced?

Was♍ it seeing the script that helped persuade him?

BB: Yes. There was that and🌟 then we s💫at down and had some lengthy meetings with him about how involved he would be in the process and the ongoing series.

I think he unde🌳rstood the commitment it would be. But after a lot of thought he decided tha🦋t it was something he was willing to take on.

Next: [page-break]

TF: There was quite a vocal anti-Craig brigade by the time 🍨filming started.

Did thaꦍt create any difficulties for you? Were you shocked by it?

MW: Yeah, the🐼re were a lot of bloggers… and some of the press were pretty negative as well🃏.

They didn’t really give him♒ a chance, or themselves a chance to see him in thꦚe role.

But of course, we were se🏅eing the dailies so we kneꦫw he was doing an excellent job!

TF: So the chatter didn’t shake your coꦉnfidence at all in the direction you were taking?

MW: Didn’t bother us, didn’t 🐻bother t♐he director.

I think from Da💛niel’s point of 𝔉view he battened down the hatches and focused on the role.

He did his best to ignore it, but it has to aff♌ect someone at so𓆏me level. It certainly didn’t affect his performance.

TF It turned out tꩵo be one the best-received Bonds in terms of critical reaction. That 𒉰must have felt good.

BB It was great, particularly🉐 because of the Daniel st✃uff.

We’d gotten so much of t🍌hat at the very beginning, the critics’ response was very rewarding.

It felt like all of the ᩚᩚᩚᩚᩚᩚ⁤⁤⁤⁤ᩚ⁤⁤⁤⁤ᩚ⁤⁤⁤⁤ᩚ𒀱ᩚᩚᩚhar🔯d work that he had put into it, and the crew had put into it, had really paid off.

Next: [page-break]

TF : Alth♓ough it paid off in the end, did you feel at the time that you were taking qu𒅌ite a big gamble with the franchise?

BB: It just felt like the right thing to do.

Michael and I of course were partnered with Sony for the first time and Amy Pascal who’s the head of Columbia Pictures was initially really excited that she was going to get a Bond movie… and then we sat do𒁃wn with her and explained ou🐭r plans! [Laughs]

“We’re going do another Bond; it’s not going to be Pierce; we’re going back to Casino Royale ; there&r🐼squo;s a 20-minute card game in the middle of the m൩ovie; he falls in love; she betrays him; she commits suicide; he gets beaten…”

To her credit thജough, although she had to get her head around it, she was fully behinℱd us; she backed us 100 per cent.

TF: It doesn’t sound like it 🧸was an easy sell&h🌌ellip;

BB: Amy said, “Well, it’s🅰 good that we’ll have Q in it.” We said, “No there’s no Q.”

“So we’ve got thওe🔴 Moneypenny scenes.” “No – there’s no Moneypenny either!”

So it took&helli🉐p; a leap of faith for her to stand behi💖nd us.

We really a♔ppreciate🅺d it because you don’t always get that.

Next: [page-break]

TF: Some have suggested that the success of the Bourne film🎐s, and their stripped-down style, may have coloured your approach to Bond.

MW: Well, I don’t think we had any big, conscious ideas of doing that. Strictly to update Casino Royale , we just followed the book.

We did put in𝕴 the free running at the beginning, but I think that was more in a Bond style than Bourne style.

BB: We kind of looked within our own group of films for inspiration and I think we wanted to go back more to a From Russia With Love -style film.

That was part of our template.

TF : Quentin Taran♏tino was quite vocal in claiming that he helped the film get made by publicly suggesting th𝔉at he would like to make Casino Royale.

Wouldღ you ever have considered ❀a director with his stylistic tendencies for the film?

BB: You know, we are big fans of his work, love his movies but, as we said, Cubby and Harry wanted to make Casino Royale for a long time. [Laughs]

It’s the first; the one t▨hat defines the character. We decided to make it then because of what&r🐻squo;s going on in the world.

When Harvey Weinstein mentioned Quentin, we had actually alrไeady decided we were gonna do it.

I think Quentin was right – it wa🔴s the rig✅ht thing to do – but it wasn’t like it hadn’t occurred to us…

Next: [page-break]

TF: Casino Royale ♓introduces the Quantum organizatio♔n.

Is t🏅hat kind of a modern-day replacement for SPECTRE, a more insidious ‘big bad’ that we might see in future Bond films?

MW: It’s reaღlly hard to tell. It was an interesting idea and it fits with the timing of the film.

But what, when and how 𝕴we might use it🍸 again is not clear to us.

TF: OK, what about Bond himself?

Now you’ve reintroduced the character with more layers, is that like♍ly to be a constant thread for the foreseeable fu♎ture?

BB: I hope so, that’s what w💧e’re aiming for.

I t🅰hink Daniel’s such a superb actor and I think his portrayal of the character is one where he explores his vulnerabilities.

And I think that part 🎃ඣof the excitement is about not just having Bond go through the physical challenges, but the emotional ones as well.

Next: [page-break]

TF: Do you yet haveಌ any specific priorities with Bo🎀nd 23 – funnier, lighter, anything?

MW: Well… we’ve hired the writers [Purvis and Wade again, plus Peter Mo﷽rgan] and we’ve been workin🅰g with them but it’s just too early to say anything.

You know, often at this stage, I find myself saying, “Oh, we’re gonna do this and that”, then six months from now you’ll say, &ldq🔯uo;That isn’t in the film at all – you told me it was…”

I think we’re at that stage where a lot of ideas are floating around that sound very 🅰good, but whether they make the final cut, who knows?

TF : Do you have a timeliꦰne for script, filming and relea🍎se?

MW: Well, our timeline&rs🌜quo;s a little up in the air what with the situation with MGM [who may be sold, or involved in a merger], so we have to be flexible.

We just don’t know enough about the situationไ to comment, but we know it’s uncertain.

TF: We’ll soon see the release of 澳洲幸运5开奖号码历史查询:James Cameron’s Avatar , which many beli♛eve could change the ‘bl🐟ockbuster’ landscape forever.

Can you foresee a time when Bond might go 3D?

BB: The Avatar tra🎃iler🐷 looks fantastic and I’m excited to see the movie.

You know what, director⭕s like Cameron, they’re fantastic because they get everybody excited about movies.

We’ve always said that the better the competition, the better for us, because all we hope for is that people keep going to the cinema and that movies keep breaking barriers a𒈔nd becoming more and more exciting.

We couldn’t ask for anything more.

Like This? Then try...

Sign up for our free weekly newsletter .

Follow us on Twitter .