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
Doctor Who doesn't have a floating timeline, no. Despite being a time-travel show, it does have a linear continuity. The character does regenerate younger, older etc but the character's age is still increasing all the time.
If Bond's death was not well received by the public - similar to some fan reaction to The Last Jedi - it might impact Bond 26's box office. If a lot of fans (casual or hardcore) hate Bond dying they may be reluctant to support Bond 26?
The way they have handled the Bond series over the past 50 years is for the most part by not acknowledging time and I think that plays into the essential 'timelessness' of it, and why it has survived while other series have gone through much more ups and downs (I'm thinking of Batman in particular because he is a similarly iconic character).
I realize that they already started to acknowledge time during the Craig era, much to my chagrin, but I don't think they necessarily need to continue this concept to its conclusion. Given that five years of actual time will have passed by the time B25 hits, they could just as easily give us a standalone entry to reset things a'la FYEO. That's still what I'm still hoping for, rather than any attempt to 'wrap up' this reboot era conclusively.
As always with anything, it's about the execution of course, but I'm more concerned about the future after this particular iteration has concluded.
Again, I'm taking all of this with a grain of salt since it's just an unsubstantiated internet rumour at this stage. If it actually makes it into the film proper, it won't be a surprise anymore since it's been given a fair amount of airtime in the media.
The hiring of Fukunaga suggests that this film could be polarizing. I admire them for taking a chance on him, but am wary that the eventual product may not please everybody.
This is indeed a risk, particularly since they've already acknowledged the link to prior Bond films with all the tropes (including DB5 etc). The link is clear, so a death (no matter how vague or open to interpretation) could be a Pandora's Box of sorts.
I'm for all of this and quite agree on your last point. The guy may have to tone it down at the press conference and during interviews, because we don't want him outstyling the cast. I expect a stylish Bond film, if nothing else.
That's my main worry about a Fukunaga Bond film. Love his work on True Detective, but I can see the end product not being for everybody.
That's the right way to put it. If they explore the possibility of killing Bond, they can easily explore any other (controversial) thing to do with the character.
This era is coming to a close be it just he walks into the sunset or be it they leave an ambiguious exit or an outright full stop that can't be continued, meaning they kill him off definitively
I would have thought those wanting an end to this era and Craig as Bond would be happy, as they get their wish and the new Bond starts with a clean slate.
Of course, but I was thinking (and I'm sure @bondjames meant the same) along the lines of the possibility of Bond 25 being a divisive film. I can see them exploring elements that some of us might not like at all. This quote was interesting in that regard:
“We are delighted to be working with Cary. His versatility and innovation make him an excellent choice for our next James Bond adventure."
I've mentioned Fallout previously on this thread. I don't want them to copy that film at all, but what I like about it is that it succeeded in making most people like and admire it and very few if any 'hate it'.
Can this be done while staying true to one's creative vision? I definitely think it can, and that's what I hope for. The two are not mutually exclusive and I think it's as much about the execution as it is the vision (and this is where Fukunaga may nail it). The product doesn't have to be watered down. It just shouldn't polarize imho.
---
@Shardlake, I can't speak for others, but from my perspective this has nothing to do with Craig. It has to do with the longevity of the series and the ability to continue post-Craig without any hiccup. Not acknowledging this era as self-contained, but rather blending it into the fabric of the other actor runs (which is what they tried to do with the SP ending) is how I'd prefer them to play it. I'd prefer that we don't end up with a post-Nolan Bat situation.
Agree on all points, @bondjames. Haven't watched Fallout yet (will do so when it's released on home media), but if that film could entertain the audience, get good reviews and please most of the audiences, why can't a Bond film do that too?
I think it would be more of a symbolic and thematic gesture, than a definitive 'ending'.
I imagine the story wouldn't use the idea as a gimmick, but would instead naturally build to it. Plus, it would make sense with Craig's more harrowed interpretation of the character. We'd have seen his Bond become 007 and go from the rookie to the season pro to the old vet.
I imagine his death would be akin to the beginning of SF. We'd see Bond die (watch him fall off the bridge).
The next film could then either reboot or pick up the story with a new actor (a soft reboot) with a quick explanation what happened.
I think if they 'killed' Bond off it would be a symbolic and emotional moment. but one that could be quickly rectified.
I mean, look at Logan. We all know that there is going to be a new Wolverine film with another actor.
I think Eon, after 50 plus years and entering into their 25th film, are wise to be bold and brave with their choice of director - and perhaps - likely - with the material to match the talent. And there's no doubt this guy is loaded with talent. Bond 25 is going to be special, I'm confident of that, even if it's not to everyone's tastes. As I said before, how can it be?
There, I said it.
Look, I'm all for Fukunaga as director – I think it's great news. Killing Bond off (if we're to believe rumours), I can't get on board with. Not watching that – even with Fukunaga directing.
I agree that this film is likely to be 'special', unpredictable and maybe a little controversial (just as its predecessor was). Much as I'd prefer that it were not this way, all I can hope for is that I am on the 'liking' end of the spectrum this time around.
I think you're bang-on!
Absolutely. It was one of the things that made me most excited about the previous shortlist, i.e. Demange, Mackenzie, Clarkson. All relatively fresh blood with careers on the up.
Eon just managed to get someone even more exciting who has already left a mark. It's great.
This will be a bold film, and an ending like FRWL, or YOLT, would also be bold. Fukunaga is uncompromising with his vision and voice. And if the snippets of EoN wanting to "freshen" things up is even half true, they have a director who will deliver.
I also think it's fair to say that there will have to be more of a hard re-boot for the next Bond.
The Craig era has been it's own time-line, and I can't imagine a completely new actor playing Bond as if he experienced Vesper and everything that followed thereafter.
Perhaps after the next guy, they will go back to soft re-boots.
So, having an ending that puts a firm end to the DC time-line shouldn't be unexpected. And if this is the case, a FRWL-type conclusion, or YOLT, would be wholly appropriate to this era and it cleans the slate for the next guy.
I 100% agree, Peter. I can see Craig wanting his ending to be something unique and, for the wider audience, very surprising. The SP ending, obviously designed as a potential Craig farewell, didn't have great impact. I think Craig knows that.
I have a distinct feeling that those who are most wary and concerned about B25 at this juncture are going to be the most pleasantly surprised by the eventual result. This is how it tends to go with Bond films of late. Reduced expectations can do wonders for how one sees the eventual product imho.
I totally agree with you and peter.
Just a few things. I honestly see the SP ending just like any other ending of the previous entries where Bond left with the girl, maybe with just a little bit more resonance given the fact Madeleine was something special. On the other hand, as Mendes said, the SP ending was written as something that could’ve fit almost every further development, from a regular Daniel Craig return to a direct sequel to SP to a new reboot of the franchise with another actor.
Speaking about myself, my first reaction after watching SP was: Daniel Craig will obviously return. I was right (fortunately).
This guy really has to be careful that he doesn't outshine everybody on this project. He's definitely a very dapper looking chap.
Here's an interesting Indiwire article on him.
https://www.indiewire.com/2018/09/cary-fukunaga-bond-25-perfect-director-1202005410/
For those unhappy with he fit of Daniel’s suits, perhaps Fukunaga will give him some guidance. ;)
It's a problem when the director of Bond is more handsome looking than Bond himself. Ha.
Well…Depends on the style he's going for, of course: