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
Furthermore, from what I understand, both Lazenby and Connery said that OHMSS and YOLT were going to be their last prior to the film's respective release, and both underperformed in comparison their immediate predecessor. So that perhaps isn't always a good thing to play up, if financial success is the goal. Best to keep it vague.
Exactly! ;)
Yes, I quite agree. And I'm a big Craig fan.
But, if Bond25 is awesome - yes, I used that word -, I know I'd want him to come back for another. Up until he's 60. After all, I'd love for Dalton or Pierce to be doing Bond films as we speak.
I disagree somewhat. By the late '60s, the spy craze was dying down and the focus was on more independent, gritty films. So we're in a different time, film-wise.
It's all about marketing. There's never been a Bond film advertised as the actor's last. Eon's never had that chance yet. They can market the film as the Craig's last, just as it is somewhat easier to sell an actor's first. I wouldn't be surprised if the title itself connoted some finality.
https://deadline.com/2019/01/james-bond-wonder-woman-barbara-broccoli-lucinda-syson-artios-bifa-csa-1202534603
The accolades will be handed out January 31 at The London Edition hotel during BIFA’s pre-existing Most Promising Newcomer Dinner.
It might just be my projection of hope.
The only way that happens is if CJF shoots two films' worth of material and they're released separately--highly unlikely. I actually think that this was possible with Spectre, and probably should have been.
Definitely. I actually think that if he did return for Bond 26 (and there is that possibility, since anything Bond is a guaranteed success unlike the rest of Craig's career), he would risk driving the franchise right into the ground.
As for his tenure, I see it less as playing the role for 14 years and more as doing 5 movies and then hanging on during long periods of inactivity.
Same here. I've said it before, I'll say it again: new writers would be the best place to start.
I sincerely hope they continue with that approach at the end of B25, rather that going for definitive closure of this iteration. I have already explained my rationale previously.
I don’t know... If B25 is a big success then I would expect EON to want him back. He would then have the incentive of being able to create a movie from the ground up. He would also get big money which for someone who’s not use to that kind of pay would be another incentive. I think it’s more about how much B25 takes out of him physically/mentally that he wouldn’t come back. This all assumes B25 is great and is a success of course.
On the flipside, there is the risk of having shot one's load the first time out of the gate, and the Mendes experience is still fresh. It's not so much about the reality, but more the critical perception. It's difficult to get two winners in a row.
Really? Fine with the "open-ended" but it didn't felt "vague" to me. Probably because it wasn't. Madeleine's character wasn't designed to be just a random fiancé. "The daughter of an assassin, the only woman who could have understood him". The scene on the bridge right after sparing Blofeld's life is pretty emblematic. He chooses her over the MI6. Have you forgot about the train scene where Madeleine is pushing Bond to quit with his life as an assassin?
M: Is this really what you want? Living in the shadows? Hunting, being hunted? Always looking behind you? Always alone?
B: I'm not alone.
M: Answer the question.
B: I'm not sure I ever had a choice. Anyway I don't stop and think about it.
M: What would happen if you did?
B: I don't know.
M: You know I think you're wrong. We always have a choice.
B: I'll drink to that.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=VfKj8Enhilk
The director himself said this (during the press tour): "It's about whether or not to pursue the life he's always pursued, whether he matters and is he going to continue or not," Mendes said. "And you're going to have to come to see the movie to find out whether he does." We went to see the movie and we saw his decision.
Considering SP finale "vague" is a misinterpretation and this is very different compared to what they did with the other Bond actors. The fact that Madeleine will be the first main Bond girl to come back in the following picture is again pretty emblematic.
Q "I thought you'd gone?"
Away for the weekend? Long sabatical? Retired?
The point is the whole movie is about Bond "choosing life" over the assassin work. Everything in the movie led to this choice and I just think there's nothing open to interpretation in the finale. He quits for her. To be honest it felt a little bit like The Dark Knight Rises finale, where Bruce left with Selina. But since we're taking about 007, it doesn't mean this choice will last forever. That's why I felt there was the need for a sequel after SP, and the fact Madeleine is back is just perfect to me.
Bond decided to "try life", as Moneypenny told him during the Rome chase. But the symbolism of the bridge scene is just too strong to assume he left for a week-end.
Since Madeleine is back in almost 12 months we will probably have a definitive answer to that.
I agree that's why Christoph Waltz needs to come back as Blofeld.
Unless they plan a very quick turn around after Bond 25 in casting a new actor, director, writers and so on.
I'm sure Craig will be asked in the press conference for a definitive answer
However, that doesn't mean that the ending couldn't be interpreted differently. As @patb noted, it could just be a holiday (in fact, Bond alludes to the fact that he is due for one in the opening post-Titles scene in M's office).
We had a thread (or several) here at the time of SP's release debating this very matter. Why would we do that if it was such an open and shut case?
After the fact and with the benefit of hindsight we can now say that there is a reason for Madeleine to be back, but was anyone clamouring for that when Boyle was in charge? Not to my knowledge. Many members were saying how great it was that we were supposedly getting a fresh 'standalone' at that time. So hindsight is 20/20.
Keep in mind also that Fukunaga has alluded to a journey from CR, and not an SP continuation. He didn't even mention SP once. So frankly we don't know how they will deal with the Madeleine matter at the moment, or the events of that prior film. It remains to be seen if Craig Bond left the force only to come back, or if all of that will even be acknowledged.
My earlier point is that the end of SP allowed for different ways of looking at things. Some could have said holiday, others that he left for good and yet others that it was the end of this interpretation, with a new one to just follow on after years have passed (with a new man as Blofeld). Did anyone wonder where Stacey and the soap were when Tim was introduced? No. We just moved on, even with Gogol, M (played by Brown) and Q (played by Llewelyn) in tow. That's one of the reasons these films have been so successful continuously imho - because they don't directly acknowledge time and events too much - it's there but it's vague.
Yeah - it was very much the anti-Fleming ending.
Fleming always had Bond live in the shadows. Bond always wanted to retire and run off with the girl. But Fleming consistently denied Bond this - instead Bond accepted his role as a silhouette. The last passage of Moonraker sums it up perfectly:
“And now what? wondered Bond. He shrugged his shoulders to shift the pain of failure – the pain of failure that is so much greater than the pleasure of success. The exit line. He must get out of these two young lives and take his cold heart elsewhere. There must be no regrets. No false sentiment. He must play the role which she expected of him. The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette.”
Bond driving off with Madeleine was a fitting end to SP's story - but it never felt like anything more than set-up for a sequel.
If there was ever a time to do a more authentic adaptation of the Moonraker novel now seems the time. Maybe that is the villian role they are casting for?
Very true. I would say the only director to make two bonafide great Bond films in a row was Terence Young, and he had Fleming stuff to heavily draw on. Some may argue Gilbert had two huge box office hits one after the other with TSWLM and MR, but let's be honest, Spy was an all time classic, MR a tired re-tread.