Oh Good, James Bond Works For Amazon Now
You may remember that in 2022, Amazon acquired MGM, i.e. the James Bond franchise. This morning, it was announced that not only is Amazon the number one distributor of 007, but that they have creative control of one of the longest running franchises of the 20th century. While the legacy of Bond is firmly rooted in its rich history and the vision of its original creators (and British people in general), the integration of a corporate behemoth like Amazon raises red flags about the future direction of 007, and you know what? Let's freak out about it.
Under the deal, Amazon MGM Studios will have creative control over future Bond films, a total departure from how the franchise has been run in the past, with the Broccoli family making all creative decisions, often to the detriment of the films. While Wilson and Broccoli maintain co-ownership, the fact remains that Amazon, a company known for its business-first mentality, will play a central role in shaping the character and stories that have endured for over 60 years. Is this the right move for a franchise that thrives on its rich heritage, or are we witnessing a tumultuous new chapter defined by profit margins over artistry?
Mike Hopkins, head of Prime Video and Amazon MGM Studios, expressed gratitude for the franchise’s legacy and enthusiasm for its future. Which, duh, he would do that. But statements like that are often merely corporate rhetoric. The question lurks: will Amazon prioritize the creative integrity of the franchise, or will it lean toward market-driven decisions that favor sensationalism over substance?
Another potential concern arises from Wilson's decision to step back from producing Bond films to pursue art and charitable projects. While his dedication to the franchise is commendable, his absence raises the issue of whether anyone else can adequately fill his shoes. The iconic films of the past were shaped through a journey steeped in tradition and thoughtful storytelling. Transitioning to a model dominated by corporate interests doesn't necessarily align with the values that have guided Bond's creators.
Barbara Broccoli has also implied a shift, suggesting a willingness to step aside and let Amazon "lead James Bond into the future." This could imply a concerning relinquishment of creative oversight at a time when the franchise is navigating uncharted waters after Daniel Craig's departure as fans call for more diversity in the ranks of the double 0s.
How is Amazon’s control of the Bond franchise different from the Broccoli’s running things? They’re both companies, after all, but but the Broccoli family’s control over Bond has always felt like a stewardship over a piece of art. One that isn’t always perfect, but that is a product of the times. It’s not like Bond wasn’t shilling BMW in the ‘90s, or whatever watch he wears today, but by giving control to Amazon it feels like that commercialization is going to become impossible to ignore, and even worse, who knows who Bond will be fighting against going forward. More often than not Bond is fighting against the tyranny of mad billionaires, but now he’s working for one.
With Bond 26 on the way (likely sooner than later now that they're on a corporate schedule), there’s a worry that the combination of a global streaming giant and a legacy franchise will completely upend the identity of Bond, where the focus shifts to speed and volume rather than the meticulous craftsmanship that has long defined the series. Or maybe this is the change that the Bond franchise needs; not every 007 film is a winner, but is giving up control to a global corporation really the thing that's going to save Bond? He might as well join SPECTRE at this point.
