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
Having seen him play an extensive part in Wallander I was expecting him to have at least a few lines of dialogue in Skyfall.
Blame Mendes not us mate.
Scrappy Doo ?
Daniel and Idris in a pseudo Lethal Weapon reboot? I'll pass thanks.
They've already made a reboot of Lethal Weapon.
So who do we want as a Director for Bond 25?
How about Pierre Morrel?
Even with characters that are dead like Ronson (Bond uses his real name rather than call sign/code name etc so the audience see him more as a person and so does Bond), it works as we see straight away that Bond is/has worked with him and around 1 min 20 sec in to the movie we get emotion/drama straight away as we see that Bond actually cares about him and considers sacrificing the mission to provide first aid ("I have to stop the bleeding") and immeidiate conflict with M (Bond pauses at the door and looks back at Ronson, telling us that its a hard decision for Bond to make) and then, later, Bond uses Ronsons death to poke at M and hint that M was responsible for the loss of a team member. "Ronson didn't make it, did he?" (apologies for the SF geekines)
So, within 2 mins, the audience dive in head first and find it easy to make connections and assumptions with very little exposition and it works. (the same within Goldeneye)
No, I think Mendes is back. There's a good chance of it anyway. I already have quite a good picture of the Bond 25 PTS will look like in my head.
I agree. For some reason we haven't really seen that much of the "00" section in action (not Q and his team, the actual agents themselves). I would love to seeing other "00's" in action. In Goldeneye we saw 006 and 007 together, and it was absolute magic. I'd like to see more of this one day.
I don't want to see Bond girl equals, Scooby gangs or teams of 00s.
Bond on his own with a girl in tow and perhaps a colourful local ally to lend a hand here and there is more than enough.
But Bond cant work solely alone in the field so some help or involvement along the way from another double 0 agent is far more prefereable/believable IMHO than Q or M coming out of their office and playing spies.
MP's spy role on SF would have been much better played by a female double 0 agent on her first mission and found herself "in at the deepend " and perhaps "out of her depth" working alongside THE most experienced agent.
Perfect to just leave there and perhaps taunt us for a return of the character later on in another movie when she has gained more experience.
Why? Well to appease and accommodate those who feel Bond is a misogynistic dinosaur of course. Those who expect more equality in a Bond film. I'd rather we not have any plot lines that further such misguided (imho) ambitions to further global box office. The temptation will be too great, I fear. I just don't trust the current producers enough at this point.
Indeed.
The pressure to be diverse along with Babs position on the board of BAFTA feminists (or whatever it's called) suggests this PC tripe being foisted on Bond sooner rather than later.
And what easier way to do it than have a few female/black/gay/disabled/Muslim etc 00s who are ostensibly Bond's equal?
It's depressing to think that this conversation is certainly happening in script meetings at EON.
there were hints of this within Goldeneye and the banter with M. Bond's character rubbing up against the outside World could provide for some new material if handled well (and having the guts to keep Bond as Bond) , but the gutless way forward is to start to lose the very essense of what makes Bond, Bond;
No connections beyond Bond being annoyed when one is killed like in OP or the very brief scene with the locket with the microchip and the family portrait (who knows if it was real) in AVTAK. You can even imagine when Bond in TB says in the pretitles of Boitier "He murdered two of my colleagues" he could've very well been talking of fellow 00s or just random agents.
I've never had as much enthusiasm for the Trevelyan character. To think he would become a 00 and go through all that just to later get revenge doesn't sit well. It's all part of that trend of there's a traitor we thought we trusted scenario so overdone in spy culture.