It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
And NTTD on BluRay of course! :)
It does not guarantee a good take on Bond, but it does provide the actors and filmmakers the biggest degree of freedom since Dr No.
Looks like a schoolboy...
AS I said, my dark horse.
Grady. Delbert Grady. :-t
Really? Not impressed by his acting at all.
As for the question whether she has a shortlist. I am sure she has a very rough list in her head and it's probably just a reflex for her - quite similar to how it is for us - to think "could this be him?" when she sees a British actor somewhere and to kind of slot them into "fits" and "doesn't fit" to varying degrees. Plus, she probably gets comments about it everytime she talks to agents and some such. What is up in the air to me is whether and how quickly she is able to get over losing Daniel. They really seem to have a genuine connection and I wouldn't be surprised if she has (or just fears she has) trouble seeing possible replacements at face-value at the moment because of that. On the other hand, she's a pro and it's her job to get going on the next era, so they'll probably figure it out.
I wonder if she asks Craig for input...
Exactly. How they choose to use this freedom is my greatest concern...
Babs and M.G.Wilson are renowned for being very reactionary with Bond since the reboot - CR after Bourne 1&2, QoS after Bourne Ultimatum, SF after The Dark Knight, SP & NTTD following Marvel-esque paths
As you say, they’re professionals, I don’t think there’s any reason to worry about getting over Craig- it’s more whether they can see a fresh direction for the series.
Arguably it started much earlier with Moonraker (and to some extent LALD) ...but if the assumption that they have "done" Marvel already is correct, so much the better!
More than anything I just think it was a situation like Cubby had with Moore in the 80s. Looking for a new 007 is difficult, plus audiences loved Moore in the role, each film was doing brilliantly at the box office, and so why change it if you can squeeze one more film out of him? They obviously pushed it too far with Moore, given the general opinion of AVTAK (I love it, but the BO was down on OP I believe). With Craig, they had an actor who audiences and critics liked, and so they hung onto him and were loyal to him (by not discussing any possible replacements at all) until it was necessary to end it.
Yes. I have pretty solid faith in Babs &co. when it comes to appointing the next 007 - it is the creative team, mainly the writers, that I am weary of. P&W need to be thanked and replaced, and don't pander to populism by letting PWBridge or similar do rewrites, it convolutes.
My gut feeling is that while the official line has been "we'll look in 2022." they also have a movie to promote right now and searching for a new 007 while that is out dilutes the message.
Behind closed doors, however, I've no doubt that there's been a number of questions and queries out there for quite some time. Very basic ones, but they will have been there.
I don't think she will ask Craig for input and even if she did I strongly suspect that his response would be "You've had your pound of flesh. Thanks but no thanks." Love him or hate him but he has put in the legwork for the last 15 years and it's time to let him go for both their sakes.
I've got a feeling he might continue to have a working relationship with EON on other non-Bond projects (there's that stage play coming up and with them he has an opportunity to rack up those co-producing credits while he's at it). I think there's a lot of admiration and respect there between both parties for their professional efforts.
Yes indeed, I don't think I've seen anyone criticise Craig for being too old or doing too many films with the release of NTTD: I think they judged it well.
I'm not sure success = populism. These are Bond films after all, they're not exactly niche! :D P&W still seem fine to me, it seems to be a bit of a repeated meme that they're awful but I'm not sure why.
A touch superior ;)
P&W get a bad rap and maybe some of might be deserved, but I also think they are scapegoats a lot of the time. Why are we criticising them and not PWB for example? Anything good in a script gets attributed to the co-writers or those doing the polish, and anything bad gets blamed on P&W. Seems a tad unfair.
If anyone has a problem with the general tone or direction of the series they need to have a word with Broccoli and Wilson. They are in charge. These are not writers and directors films (and all the better for it).
Yeah I think if he'd stopped at Spectre we'd all be thinking he had one more in him: this is the perfect amount, as you say.
Indeed, and on something like Skyfall they came in fairly late on someone else's script and reworked that, so it does feel like a bit of a repeated meme in that sense.
They also seem to come up with lots of fresh ideas every time to me, even back to their first.
Plus of course Wilson has actually written on these films himself before: I daresay that experience means he's steering the story quite a bit too. As we've heard many times, these films are a big team effort.
I am sure there are some out there who can pinpoint whose ideas were whose but I'm not clued up on that. I know Some Kind of Hero goes into this sort of thing a bit. Haven't read it recently though.
Agree, but maybe it will depend on the script (and director), too. I think he has some potential.
we have the new novel and the new video game so we have plenty to enjoy
of course on the other hand Hardy could be cast tomorrow and I wouldn't be surprised.
It's not enough to wear a suit and look the part to qualify. You have to wear the film, to carry it on your shoulders. That is what Babs and Michael are looking into next, they are not crazy.
The next Bond is going to be someone who can carry the film. Not a coat hanger who looks the part.
No ideia how the man looks without a beard though. Seems to be a problem with every actor we talk about. Even Theo James rarely appears with a clean shave. I know razors are expensive and that it takes some effort and ritual for a man to keep himself shaved everyday, but these kids don't seem to have the pep or the pride.
Me? I don't even feel clean without a shave. Don't know how they manage. It's simply not honourable, it looks like idleness and lubberliness. And it's a poor way to make yourself look manly, IMO.
Speaking of Army of Thieves, Ruby O. Fee could very well play a femme fatale, and Nathalie Emmanuel the main Bond girl, maybe?
I think Stuart Martin has a very weak lower face and uses a beard to compensate.
You may be right ;)
While Bond needs to be fit for sure, being a killer and being rock hard means far, far more than having big muscles.
I have been around loads of boxing and martial arts gyms and I've seen dozens of big and tough looking guys get embarrassed by much skinnier but more talented pretty boys.
Ant Middleton is the current face of the SAS but his body type (very similar to Craig's) is not necessarily typical of the SAS. It certainly wasn't typical until quite recently.
Basically, being big doesn't make you hard.