James Bond Works for Jeff Bezos Now. What Does That Mean For 007's Future?
CultureAfter rumored behind-the-scenes turmoil, Amazon MGM Studios has officially taken creative control of the long-running British superspy franchise. Where does Bond go from here?By Killian Faith-KellyFebruary 20, 2025Save this storySaveSave this storySaveIt has been pretty silent on the James Bond 26 front for a while now. While reports have suggested that all is not well behind the scenes, we've been cautiously optimistic that a new James Bond would be anointed this year. But today it was announced that Barbara Broccoli and her half-brother Michael G. Wilson—who have been at the helm of the series for 30 years—are ceding all creative control to Amazon MGM Studios, who acquired the rights to everything 007-related in 2022.Is this good news? Well, little is certain in this life. But if bookies offered odds on such subjective markets as “will Amazon MGM’s assumption of creative control prove to be good or bad for the future of Bond,” I’d be putting a fairly sizable chunk of my (admittedly barely-existent) worldly wealth on “bad.”Here’s the backstory: In 1951, Barbara’s Dad Albert “Cubby” Broccoli and his fellow Hollywood producer Irving Allen established a production company in the UK, mainly so they could take advantage of certain tax incentives being offered for movies made on British soil. That trucked along nicely enough, until Broccoli and Allen had a big falling out over whether or not they should acquire the film rights to Ian Fleming’s James Bond novels, which Allen felt weren’t quite up to scratch.Cubby booted Allen in favor of Harry Saltzman, who already had some of the Bond rights, and together they formed a new production company, Eon Productions—which, with a few chops and changes here and there, allowed Cubby to be the brains and money behind the James Bond film franchise for the next 30 years.Then, in 1995, Cubby decided to hand control over to his daughter Barbara and stepson Michael G. Wilson, who have been squeezing themselves into a shared occupancy of the driver’s seat since.One thing—back in the Cubby and Saltzman days, Saltzman ran into some financial difficulties, which he resolved by selling his half of the parent company that owned Eon Productions to United Artists. UA in turn eventually got bought by MGM, which in turn was scooped up by Amazon in 2022, and so between now and then we’ve had a scenario where the Bond franchise has been half-controlled by the daughter and stepson of the man who brought Bond to the big screen, and half-controlled by the world’s second-largest company. And now, though Broccoli and Wilson have formed a joint venture with Amazon to retain co-ownership of the Bond rights, they’re letting all creative control go to their business partners.How might this change Bond? Well, the obvious answer is that the loss of Broccoli and Wilson’s caretaker-like influence, imbued as it is with a sense of tradition and weight of responsibility passed down from Cubby, in favor of the altogether more financially-motivated Amazon MGM, will probably lead to a more brazen mining of the golden seam of Bond IP for all it’s worth.The impasse that’s stopped us from seeing a new Bond film since 2019 has supposedly been Broccoli's refusal to let Amazon proceed until all of the creative ingredients in place—script, director, and not-least-importantly leading man—are of a quality that she deems necessary for making a Bond film. Amazon, meanwhile, supposedly wants to get on with making lots of money.Somewhat alarmingly, Jeff Bezos has asked fans on X who they want to see as Bond, reinforcing the idea that he's going to play a pretty major part in that decision, which is more than a little worrying.X contentThis content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.Broccoli has resisted such predictably-lucrative opportunities as TV spinoffs and a casino (not all proposed by Amazon, it should be said), while also having supposedly had to insist to Jeff Bezos’s business that Bond continues to get a big-screen premiere, no matter what the money may say. Now that she’s gone…Look. It could be fine. It could be that Amazon want to leave things as they are, and do their utmost to preserve the old-Hollywood feel and the supremely classic substance of Bond. But that’s not a safe bet at all.Maybe some people want this. Maybe some people think the MCU-ification of Bond, with inevitable TV spin-offs, prequels, origin stories and probably a theme park of some sort, is desirable. But I strongly suspect not. The problem is that for as long as the production of creative media is funnelled into the hands of fewer and fewer people, who are decreasingly concerned with the artistic merit of what they produce and increasingly concerned by its profitability, what people want isn't something that has to be given all that much consideration.It sounds a little like one of Fleming's plots, doesn't it? The anti-democratic takeover of the cherished institution, the looming hostility of the moneyed string-pull
It has been pretty silent on the James Bond 26 front for a while now. While reports have suggested that all is not well behind the scenes, we've been cautiously optimistic that a new James Bond would be anointed this year. But today it was announced that Barbara Broccoli and her half-brother Michael G. Wilson—who have been at the helm of the series for 30 years—are ceding all creative control to Amazon MGM Studios, who acquired the rights to everything 007-related in 2022.
Is this good news? Well, little is certain in this life. But if bookies offered odds on such subjective markets as “will Amazon MGM’s assumption of creative control prove to be good or bad for the future of Bond,” I’d be putting a fairly sizable chunk of my (admittedly barely-existent) worldly wealth on “bad.”
Here’s the backstory: In 1951, Barbara’s Dad Albert “Cubby” Broccoli and his fellow Hollywood producer Irving Allen established a production company in the UK, mainly so they could take advantage of certain tax incentives being offered for movies made on British soil. That trucked along nicely enough, until Broccoli and Allen had a big falling out over whether or not they should acquire the film rights to Ian Fleming’s James Bond novels, which Allen felt weren’t quite up to scratch.
Cubby booted Allen in favor of Harry Saltzman, who already had some of the Bond rights, and together they formed a new production company, Eon Productions—which, with a few chops and changes here and there, allowed Cubby to be the brains and money behind the James Bond film franchise for the next 30 years.
Then, in 1995, Cubby decided to hand control over to his daughter Barbara and stepson Michael G. Wilson, who have been squeezing themselves into a shared occupancy of the driver’s seat since.
One thing—back in the Cubby and Saltzman days, Saltzman ran into some financial difficulties, which he resolved by selling his half of the parent company that owned Eon Productions to United Artists. UA in turn eventually got bought by MGM, which in turn was scooped up by Amazon in 2022, and so between now and then we’ve had a scenario where the Bond franchise has been half-controlled by the daughter and stepson of the man who brought Bond to the big screen, and half-controlled by the world’s second-largest company. And now, though Broccoli and Wilson have formed a joint venture with Amazon to retain co-ownership of the Bond rights, they’re letting all creative control go to their business partners.
How might this change Bond? Well, the obvious answer is that the loss of Broccoli and Wilson’s caretaker-like influence, imbued as it is with a sense of tradition and weight of responsibility passed down from Cubby, in favor of the altogether more financially-motivated Amazon MGM, will probably lead to a more brazen mining of the golden seam of Bond IP for all it’s worth.
The impasse that’s stopped us from seeing a new Bond film since 2019 has supposedly been Broccoli's refusal to let Amazon proceed until all of the creative ingredients in place—script, director, and not-least-importantly leading man—are of a quality that she deems necessary for making a Bond film. Amazon, meanwhile, supposedly wants to get on with making lots of money.
Somewhat alarmingly, Jeff Bezos has asked fans on X who they want to see as Bond, reinforcing the idea that he's going to play a pretty major part in that decision, which is more than a little worrying.
X content
This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.
Broccoli has resisted such predictably-lucrative opportunities as TV spinoffs and a casino (not all proposed by Amazon, it should be said), while also having supposedly had to insist to Jeff Bezos’s business that Bond continues to get a big-screen premiere, no matter what the money may say. Now that she’s gone…
Look. It could be fine. It could be that Amazon want to leave things as they are, and do their utmost to preserve the old-Hollywood feel and the supremely classic substance of Bond. But that’s not a safe bet at all.
Maybe some people want this. Maybe some people think the MCU-ification of Bond, with inevitable TV spin-offs, prequels, origin stories and probably a theme park of some sort, is desirable. But I strongly suspect not. The problem is that for as long as the production of creative media is funnelled into the hands of fewer and fewer people, who are decreasingly concerned with the artistic merit of what they produce and increasingly concerned by its profitability, what people want isn't something that has to be given all that much consideration.
It sounds a little like one of Fleming's plots, doesn't it? The anti-democratic takeover of the cherished institution, the looming hostility of the moneyed string-pullers, and only one man can put a stop to it all… and who knows? Maybe there's a trick or two up his sleeve yet.
This story originally appeared in British GQ.
