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
I am still expecting something like that to be honest. P&W have been officially announced already (prematurely?) so they are not out of the picture yet
He could have literally given the same answer, word for word, if asked if Bond 25 will Deal with Brexit or the Russians, or what Brand of vodka he will drink. Its a non answer is what it is
The jews are behind everything.
What traditionalists here really want is not simply a mission centric Bond film, they want a mission centric traditional Bond film. Boyle could easily deliver a radical, but mission centric Bond film that's unlike any Bond film we have ever seen. I doubt such a movie would satisfiy the traditionalists.
I've mentioned previously that I would honestly prefer that the loose ends in the Craig narrative be tied off with B25, and therefore would actually be open to a continuity story for his B25 swansong. Why? Well, because it is my hope that if they tied off his story properly (as opposed to ham fistedly, as they did in SP) then perhaps I could look at his entire arc with more positivity than I do now (viewing all 4 Craig films in a row is quite a chore for me these days because of how it presently ends).
Having said that, a one-off story focused purely on a mission and without any connection to the past (or any personal b/s) would work fine for me too, although in such case I don't understand why they just didn't recast rather than soldier on with the old fella.
Boyle will bring a new (and perhaps energetic) flavour to the direction, and that would make a welcome change if nothing else.
I still personally see SF as a standalone, no matter what retro-rubbish they foisted on us in SP.
If B25 is a standalone too then I may just end up viewing CR, QoS (I don't mind this one because it's essentially a CR continuation), SF & B25 for a Craig run and just ignore SP entirely (like I normally ignore TWINE when going through Brosnan's films).
I am and remain truly excited it Boyle will really do it (the Hodge script could still fall through) and if so what the „cinema gold“ thing will be like. I doubt a period piece (which might become an option for B26).
I agree with SF being standalone. CR is as well. Even QOS often times feel like it. Contrary to popular opinion, I don't think SP really makes Craig's first few any less standalone. It just makes SP not standalone. After all, they make references to past Bond films in the older ones too (FRWL referencing Dr. No's death, OHMSS with the pictures and gadget montage, etc.). These little things need not make the previous films less standalone.
I think I'm just going to have to avoid SP going forward in order to continue to enjoy the earlier Craig entries as much as I used to. Just forget it exists.
He most certainly does. I think he looks back to his old self.
Fiennes shot down the idea of "Evil M".
Yes, they could recast, but chances of this scenario are slim to none.
The PTS is Craig paying a visit to Vesper’s grave. He puts some flowers on it, when he is abruptly summoned into a helicopter supposedly sent by MI6. As it turns out, the helicopter is sent by an unnamed villain who is a Christoph Waltz lookalike with a white cat. He taunts Bond until Bond finds a way to control the hijacked helicopter, then Bond gets the last laugh by dropping the Waltz lookalike down a chimney. The loose end is tied up. But not before Waltz lookalike offers a delicatessen in stainless steel.
From there, Bond meets a woman who is also after revenge. Well... I bet you can guess the rest.
I love to hate SPECTRE :-D But seriously: I am happy this did not at all affect my Bond enthusiasm - actually I appreciate Craig's first 3 entries even more than before. But I won't buy 4 movie tickets in advance like I did with SP for B25 but start with one, first :-)
But to me,SF is independent however I look at it,what they said in SP doesn't even need considering to me.
Same here, Silva had such a personal and clear goal for going after M. Adding Brofeld into this, who seemingly had no goal and no motivation, makes matters only confusing and unbelievable.
I think we will be getting some confirmation tomorrow. The shareholders are just as hungry for news as we are.
Disney CEO, Bob Iger regularly reveals big news on shareholder calls. Often, the announcements from Iger are very quickly followed by press releases from Marvel/Lucasfilm, etc.
I'm slightly concerned that the window for Boyle/EON to commit is closing very quickly...I think Eon may find themselves coming up a bit short if they don't get Danny to sign on quickly.
Personally, I think they need to get a great script together and focus solely on that. Then they need to hire a director who can simply execute the great script. Personally, I think they should hire Ridley Scott.
Ridley is a legend, and was once a true visionary artist. These days, he's proved himself to be a master technician. No one can make a film that looks and feels quite as good as Ridley. The film would look gorgeous and be expertly crafted. Plus Scott, works quickly and will bring the film in under budget and schedule. Only true veterans like Ron Howard, Woody Allen, Clint Eastwood and Steven Spielberg are as efficient.
However, Ridley isn't much of a storyteller anymore. He shoots the script. If the scripts are bad or half-cooked, then the movies are poor. Give him a good script and you get a good film. He won't ask too many questions and he'd make a very competent film. But EON need to focus on the script.
I am of the impression that he has the job. That's what Cashleypersia over at reddit has concluded after doing some digging among his sources.
I read a quote a few days back from Boyle that film remains a director's medium, whereas in his opinion tv is more of a writer's medium. He indicated that this is why he was only directing the first 3 episodes of his new FX series Trust, and then handing it off to someone else. I can't find the article now. EON have waited so long to get a director that I'm pretty sure they will go with whatever Hodge comes up with and then the Execs and P&W will finesse it for Boyle.
What surprises me to an extent is that they haven't made an official announcement. Why? My intuitive suspicion (and that's all it is at the moment) is that there is something big that's going to drop when that announcement comes. Not sure what, and not sure when, but I suspect it will come in May.
It's interesting that you bring up Scott, because he directed All The Money In The World, and Boyle is tackling precisely the same subject on tv with Trust. One can see the differences in approach and style by viewing the two finised products. It's quite noticeable. Boyle is more edgy and avant-garde. Scott is more traditional.
--
BTW, I recently realized a connection between Trust and Logan Lucky. It's Hillary Swank, who stars in both. What do people think of her as a Bond 'girl'? She's a double Oscar winner and is of the right age to play opposite our 'older' Bond.
I think she could be a good M, or a sniper.