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
DarthDimi, I wish this could be so, that we could get a new Bond film every two years. But the industry has changed since the '80s and has moved far away from the studio system, and each new Bond film requires a new team to be assembled.
Eon wants each Bond film to be an event, and I don't see them adopting a Marvel-like factory-film approach, plus they don't have the abundant source material of decades of Marvel comics.
Eon does have remaining Fleming source material but a lot of it is dated and has been picked over for spare parts, and in the absence of a Maibaum (who was a master, and who grew up in the studio system), it's not easy to come up with something fresh, which is why AVTAK copied GF, TLD copied FRWL, etc.
Plus, they're competing not only with their previous 24 entities but also an entire genre in film or TV which Bond spawned. Bond is the granddaddy of spy films (second perhaps only to North By Northwest) and that fact puts pressure on each film to be better than all of the ones before.
All that adds up to...it is going to take time.
So does that mean Michael Crawford will play bond and Sarah Brightman as the bond girl?
This might be controversial but I prefer Gerard Butler and Emmy Rossum. More pleasing to my ears. And I've been in love with Emmy since before puberty lol.
I find the P&W draft of TWINE to be interesting since their one-liners are either too dull or too "on the nose" and more akin to Die Another Day. The later TWINE rewrites/polishes by Bruce Feirstein and Dana Stevens improved the script's banter. Dialogue is the Achilles' heel of P&W. They lack the trenchant wit of Richard Maibaum.
Lol guys I’m not saying that MI6 SHOULD be the foundation. I’m simply trying to say what I think is going on in BABS/ MGs mind. Bond films are very reactionary so it wouldn’t surprise me (panchito) if Boyle’s firing was a reaction to everyone loving MI6
I let all the negativity and positivity die re: THE FOREIGNER... I just wanted to watch it on its own merit.
I lasted just over ten minutes.
Apart from the very opening shot, it's staged like a cheap and ugly straight to DVD movie. It's plain ugly and horribly edited.
(a side note, and unrelated to my dislike, but Jackie Chan looks like he's morphing into Sly Stallone, or vice/versa).
I loved seeing PB in bed with an attractive lady-- he did look good.
But once I saw his tats, I laughed out loud-- and not in a good way. From the staging, to the script, to the paper-thin characters, all presented in ten minutes of film, I had to shut it down.
This was a B-film, through and through. And not one I was enjoying in the least.
Does this mean MC can't direct a Bond film? Of course not-- this just means MC directed a shite film, and I assume for the paycheck-- and there's nothing wrong in that. He did his best with the scabby script and budget given to him.
I haven't seen it yet but it did look "cheap".
Trust me, watch the whole film- it’s quite good.
I liked it a lot. I thought the action was top notch.
Excuse me? Try SIX years between LTK and GE. With no news whatsoever for most of that time. Not knowing if there would ever be another Bond film.
Fair play to you for still keeping the faith after two decades, but for my money that isn’t changing any time soon, so perhaps it’s worth finally knocking it on the head. I don’t think it’s a valid point of discussion - certainly not one that needs bringing up every five minutes.
Yeh, i was there for that! Utterly horrible and then the final kicker when it was announced Dalton wouldn't be back!....and the salt in the wound was Brossas signing! Horrible times indeed!
I concur, even at every 2 years back then you certainly weren't saturated with updates. You couldn't go to a place where you could communicate with like minded others.
2 years would feel like a lot longer for some of you who think you are entitled to be kept in the loop. Bond is not MCU and it doesn't have the ability to knock them out at that rate.
Also this constant comparison to Mission Impossible, Bond has been around for much longer has far more of a legacy.
James Bond films primarily about the character and his world, no actor is bigger than that, it's had it's ups and downs.
Whereas MI is totally hinged on one factor, Tom Cruise, an actor totally driven by his career, he has no other thing in his life and he's a living breathing loony tune.
Though as much as I dislike him can't personally understand his continued adoration by some here and elsewhere. That being said I accept he is and is still a bona fide movie star.
Though at some point he won't be able to play Ethan Hunt and the studio will have a litterall Mission Impossible looking for his successor.
EON will never have such a problem, Bond can be recast and evolve, it's unlikely anyone will step into EH's shoes.
Also MI 6 has possibly now plateaued. This is the franchises Skyfall and from the reviews it's been receiving I think they'll struggle to top it. The Mission Impossible series may indeed produce it's very own SPECTRE the next time round, it also has a click on it that Bond hasn't, it can't go on forever.
This is why Bond is totally unique, we want these films ( at least I hope we do) to be events. Look I hated the last one and I probably have a lot less patience on entries from the previous, the last 3 Brosnan films verge on the unwatchable for me but I still love the character good and bad and this constant comparison to other franchises which that are in their mere infancy is futile and seems to forget this series is nearly 60 years old and despite constant comparison and complaining is going strong, I think as fans that despite its issues something we should collectively proud of.
I'd add plot/story to dialogue. In fact I'd say P&W's Achilles' heel is their writing.
Agree with your points completely. Well said chaps.
Ain't that the truth and that's down to a lack in organization. Marvel Studios in its infancy before being bought by Disney were organised enough to have a plan, mostly stick to it and keep things running smoothly; but that's what happens when you have a producer on their p's and q's.
And? So what? This is something a lot of Bond fans keep falling back on and its a weak point when discussing the current state of the Bond movies and what's to come when there's been a noticeable drop in quality and creativity, particularly in the midst of a landscape where films and TV shows are doing what Bond should be doing and they're doing it better. Your Goldfingers, Thunderballs etc were almost 60 years ago; this is 2018 where in the last almost 40 years there have only been THREE standout Bond films. This is why guys like Sam Mendes riddled his Bond films with the whole cheap nostalgia factor and the producers allowed it because that's all they can really offer, recalling their hey day and thinking that's what audiences want to see. That whole Blofeld reveal in SP which failed to resonate or illicit any sort of positive reaction from audiences is a key example of this. No one cared. It's all well and good having a legacy and having stayed long in the game but if you plan on STAYING you need to switch up and adapt, especially in this new climate and landscape where even television is competing with and in many instances surpassing movies wgennit comes to overall production values.
Bond doesn't need to reinvent the wheel or do anything too drastic. Bond simply needs to tell an interesting and engaging story, with legit stakes and leaving out dumb gags and woefully flat one liners and bring on great action that we can actually see and appreciate.
Don't see why Tom Cruise's personal life needs to be brought up when the topic at hand is the craft of film making. Its a bit rich when some fans on here call out others for having an opinion on the producers but those same people are quick to talk reckless about Cruise who produces and stars in these MI films. The fact that Cruise is the main draw is a testament to his star power and the legacy he's carved/cultivating for the MI series. Take Cruise out of the MI films and his other films are more successful than any work any Bond actor does outside of Bond. One may not like the guy for whatever reason but his hustle is respected. I can't remember where I read this but as it happens the MI theme music is now more recognised than the Bond theme...no one should be surprised by this.
What's not to understand? People enjoy his work. He's a solid, versatile and entertaning actor that delivers particularly on the action front.
Cruise is 56 and is more credible in this role than any Bond actor in thier role when in their prime. He'll still be doing this when he's 60. MI isn't competing against Bond when it comes to longevity. That would be dumb, especially when Bond has a 30 year head start. Where MI is competing and winning is where it really counts and thats in the creativity and overall entertainment department; and to add, the films cost less to make and are making about $700Million at the BO. SF and SP are the only Bond films in over 50 years to make over $700Million.
Well EoN have nothing else to do and even their one and only job is proving a bit too much for them these days. Cruise has other films and franchises to star and headline and paramount pictures doesn't rely on the MI films as their sole bread and butter.
MI's Skyfall? I don't think so. The film has recieved a lot of praise and for good reason but it's not the landmark film that SF was. Secondly, I think there's a better sense of Cruise and McQ having a better grasp of what they want to do going forward moreso than EoN with Bond. Does MI have to top Fallout? No. Can they? Its entirely possible and wont be such a huge surprise if they do. However, the level of consistency these films have displayed sets a precedent to expect the next installment at the very least wont disappoint.
Going strong? More like plodding along. Going strong would be the films having a consistent release of a film with no more than 3 year gaps; not waiting to see if the lead actor wants to return or not, not having the degree of uncertainty that has noticeably plagued the series for the last 8 years, not having a pattern of firing and rehiring your writers, your production in shambles for the last 2 movies despite having years of prep and being told "things are moving aling". It's nonsense.
I love Bond and as a fan I'm more than comfortable to call out what I feel to not sit right with me and acknowledge where I feel improvements need to be made and if the competition are doing things better.
Considering Hodge was apparently already working off P&W’s draft in the first place, I always assumed under the Guild rules that P&W would get some kind of credit in arbitration. However, now we know that they are writing a new script and using parts of Hodge’s work. I also assume the eventual director will hire a writer or do it himself.
Do we think it will be the following:
Story by John Hodge and Neal Purvis & Robert Wade
Screenplay by Neal Purvis & Robert Wade and [New Writer]
Also the big wildcard is Danny Boyle’s contribution….
Story by John Hodge and Danny Boyle and Neal Purvis & Robert Wade
Screenplay by Neal Purvis & Robert Wade and [New Writer]
I think it’s fairly certain that Hodge (and possibly Boyle) will only get story credit. I think Eon will do everything they can to keep Boyle’s name away from the credits though. Boyle would probably want credit as residuals could be huge in year’s to come….especially if some semblance of his ‘idea’ is still in the script.
As for those continually whining about those whining about preferring Bond films on a more regular schedule, all I can say is get used to it. Fan frustration is a result of fan neglect and fan disappointment. Treat the fans with respect and give them what they want and they'll be satiated and stop complaining. Ignore them or let them down, and you will feel their wrath. C'est la vie. The internet isn't going anywhere and neither are opinionated enfranchised and entitled fans. The 80's is long gone.
We all want the best for this franchise, and these people have a 'golden' opportunity to show us all how good they are next year. The ball's firmly in their court. Bring on the promised 'high'.
Of course in reading the treatment of The Property of a Lady I feel that as much as I wanted a third dalton film has they gone with that the film would of bombed at the box office
But EON won’t feel fan wrath. They aren’t looking on here. They will make their decisions regardless of any internet comments.
My point is 'it is what it is'. If they deliver next year, things will die down and I'd posit that you may even see some euphoria here, difficult as that may seem to contemplate now.
I personally am completely fine with the ongoing discussion however, no matter how repetitive it may become. There's really nothing anybody here can do about it, except let it play out.
Cheers @bondjames and you're bang on the money.
Danjaq spokesman Charles Juroe explained, "When you get up to 17 in one series, you do things differently. You don't wait until 17 is a success to say, 'Oh, we better do another one'. This two-year cycle does not give Danjaq the luxury to wait 10 or 11 months down the line to get started on the next one. They've learned they have to be ahead of the game. When United Artists say they're ready to do another one , they're expected to have one ready."
Could have been written by any number of posters on here.
Sober reading from the archive: https://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/bond_17_intro.php3
We're running around in circles over and over again after our own tails. And we all want the same thing. Very good posts above from, well, everyone, and even if some points differ, all I can gather is we are all gagging for it, frustrated and angst for the most part. I've been told by a respectable source that EON reads these forums from time to time and they must be aware of the effect all of this has on the fan community. Sadistic is putting it mildly. Yes, we must wait and despair. And learn to be frustrated. And learn our place, which is none at all. In the meantime, let's bite each others hears and snarl all around. I'm an all out EON defender, but they should really get someone to handle the communications department and have close contact with the fan base. A monumentally diplomatic person, of course ;) And the thing I was babbling about some posts ago is that they had this person, they had this connection, and then they froze it. Why?
You're right that a lot of this will be up to the WGA, and dependent on how much is used from the Hodge script.
But I imagine, and with a big dose of assumption on my part, that Hodge would receive at least Story By credit...
Re: any new writers: often times polishers aren't credited (and they make an incredible salary for a couple weeks worth); so, once again, it depends how much work new writers put into the script (were they "doctors/polishers"? or did they do some heavy re-writes?)
Surely the notion of "fan frustration" actually comes from "fan entitlement", "fan impatience" and - sorry - an often fan-tasy understanding of how films are made, negotiated, written, commissioned, produced, directed, edited and marketed.