James Bond, Movie Star?

Some people are exhausted by the endless speculation about who will be the next James Bond over the last few weeks. I am not tired at all – this is gossip, classic Hollywood gossip with Gen Z twist, and a lot of how it’s playing out is a reflection about the state of the industry right now, a good case study to help us understand the business.

That said, so many of the rumours have come from rando sources, the Daily Mail’s usual f-ckery, and amateur hour people on social media without the foundational experience to properly assess the Bond arms race. This is why Matt Belloni’s latest report at Puck is all over the algorithm – he’s a well-established analyst with proven sources, all kinds of insider access…and in his latest newsletter, “One James Bond Choice Makes Perfect Sense”, he’s all but crowned Robert Pattinson.

Ever since news broke exactly a week ago that Robert Pattinson and Nicholas Hoult both screen-tested after Callum Turner, Jack Lowden, and Josh O’Connor, it’s been a general assumption that RP would automatically be the frontrunner, given his profile. Matt’s adding more detail to the situation – his sources say that all contenders have contracts in place should they inevitably be chosen (this is standard operating procedure) but where Jack's and the Josh’s deals are for four films in total, RP has signed for three, and for So Much More Money. Also, for what it’s worth, his deal was “difficult to close” which you can read in multiple ways. Did the studio make it difficult because they weren’t all that interested, or did they make it difficult to test how interested he is, or are they so serious about it they want to lock him in for sure because they’re confident he’s the right horse to back…or…?

Matt Belloni lays out a number of points that support his position that Robert Pattinson is the one. Among them is what I wrote earlier this week about RP’s Gen Z popularity – they are obsessed with him, and Amazon MGM needs to secure the interest of a younger generation in their Bond. And, per Matt, they’ve already spent so much money acquiring the IP, they have to minimise risk on who their Bond will be.

Which is why, unlike all the Bonds who came before, who were not widely known at the time of their confirmation as 007, Amazon MGM isn’t following the same protocol in their selection that the previous stewards of the franchise were known to observe. During the old regime, they wanted to center James Bond, keep the character as the main character, instead of having the star be the star on equal standing to the spy.

Now, with so much money at stake, a whole new iteration riding on one actor, Matt argues that the studio simply can’t afford to roll the dice on a wildcard – which makes Robert Pattinson the sure thing, with a built-in fanbase, and almost 20 years of celebrity, who can handle the pressure and already knows how to put on a cape and deliver a win.

And my first thought when I read this was…

But I thought the Movie Star was dead?!

There’s been a prevailing idea over the last decade, especially with so many adaptations and IP blockbusters, superheroes etc etc, that the Movie Star is irrelevant. But now with the Bond search, unlike in the past, where James Bond was enough and they could make a star out of whoever played him, if Robert Pattinson is indeed the 007 for the next 15 years or so, the takeaway here is that Movie Stars still matter. 

Also attached - Nicholas Hoult promoting How to Rob a Bank in New York with Anna Sawai and Rhenzy Feliz.