Financing Bond films

[Marky B]

Sorry I am a bit naive on this. Dr No was financed by Harry Saltzman and Chubby Broccoli for Eon films and it became a success. From the profits of Dr No,I am assuming,begat From Russia With Love,and so forth and so forth up until the last film Die Another Day. Have the financing of the Bond films relied upon the profits of previous ones,and if so,does that make the Bond franchise purely British.

Keeping on the same thread,but different films,I was surprised to learn that Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban,Troy and so forth were the most successful British films of 2004. Yes,perhaps they did use British labour - and why not? - but are they British? Surely the moolahs goes back into US pockets?

Ta Ta

Marky B thumbs_u

Not happy John Barry has been overlooked again in the honours. He is well overdue for a knighthood :mad:

[DB7]

</div><div class='quotemain'>Marky B:

Keeping on the same thread,but different films,I was surprised to learn that Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Troy and so forth were the most successful British films of 2004. Yes,perhaps they did use British labour - and why not? - but are they British? Surely the moolahs goes back into US pockets?[/b]

Rather than the origins of finance or destination of profits it's the amount of total budget spent in the UK that qualifies a film as British. I think it presently stands at 70% of total budget. I'm sure the guidelines are stricter for films seeking assistance from the Film Council.



Both Potter and Troy are Pinewood-Shepperton productions.



Personally I regard Troy as a US film.

[smudge]

Don't forget in the intervening period Saltzman jumped ship and sold his 50% (?) stake in 007 to UA in the very early 70s, hence a lot of the funds will have come from America since then. It is also not necessarily true that EON would be 'British' money ; for tax purposes such monies may have been homed elsewhere anyway.



When I grew up, a British film was a British film ; enough said. :) But as I grew older I realised how much of this British film production was subsidised by the USA either in the form of direct investment (ie Warner-Seven Arts stake in Elstree during it's 60s peak) or through distribution deals such as the one Sir James Carreras always had in place for Hammer with companies such as Universal.



Indeed, the irony being that the first Hammer Dracula is alleged to have saved Universal from filing for bankruptcy ! eek!



Film financing, like film-making, is rarely a solitary effort it seems...



SMUDGE