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 could actually envision a world where Tom Hardy plays Bond. He's got the rough and the smooth down probably better than anyone, and there are far, far worse candidates out there. At 39, he's in a good position age-wise whether Craig does one more or not. Let's just say, I would not say no to Nolan directing Hardy as Bond for 25 or 26.
I don't think Nolan would copy Mendes copying Nolan. Nolan might surprise if given the chance.
A Nolan/Hardy bill would certainly get the general audience back enthusiastic in my opinion. They might be willing to get back in the cinema after being burned by SP.
http://screenrant.com/james-bond-25-tom-hardy-christopher-nolan/
The Daily Beast interviewed Hardy. Screenrant summarized the Daily Beast interview.
Here's the URL for the Daily Beast interview.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/01/15/tom-hardy-on-bond-rumors-and-the-mad-max-fury-road-sequel-s.html
Could they create a Bond universe similar to Marvel etc yes and they could do it in different ways
For Example
KEEP THE FOCUS ON BOND
I know what your saying how can we build a film verse but keep it on bond while I never read the young bond series a lot of people claim how good it was they could in theory do a film series based on those books (keeping it in the 90's) as well as a series of Military Bond books and the official series could continue as normal so let say starting in 2018 we could have
2018 Bond 25
2019 Silverfin
2020 Miltary James bond film (with a british actor in their 20's)
2021 Bond 26
etc with different directors and writers on the other bond projects
OR various sub characters getting their own film
While we joke about a Romcom featuring May bond' maid hear me out
Mallory is a really interesting character
Siliva also an interesting character
Moneypenny is now an interesting character
Now obviously all these are at best 2 film shots (sorry now matter how interesting young Mallory was I can't see audience connecting with him for more then 2 films)
so it would be
2018 Bond 25
2019 Mallory Part 1
2020 Siliva Part 1
2021 Bond 26
2022 Moneypenny
2023 Silva part 2
2024 Bond 27
2025 Mallory Part 2
but beyond all that I would gladly wait till 2019 if it meant a Nolan Hardy team up.. (hey I love craig as much as the next person but Hardy is dream casting for me so...)
I think it would be a good idea to skip Tanner for Bond #25 and instead let Felix Leiter return.
But they have been sitting idly on a very valuable piece of IP for far too long. If you wait around even for a year, there is a chance that casual fans and potential new audience members will be distracted by something else.
I don’t think that making a series of Marvel spin-offs is the right action for Bond. Marvel have a trove of characters to pick from; EON have one: Bond. If there was a spin-off every year it would saturate the brand and stop the films from being “events”. There is zero appetite outside the hard-core fans for movies like “Blofeld Begins” or “The Moneypenny Diaries”. It’s one of the reasons both a Jinx and Wai Lin film never happened. What’s the point?
When Bond arrives it gets the golden treatment – at least in London. Here we get a royal premiere at the Albert Hall and the marketing makes the film feel significant. Essentially unmissable (Not dissimilar to the buzz surrounding the Force Awakens last year). I can’t imagine a Blofeld movie would have the same allure.
If Bond was to release a Moneypenny spin-off, etc, these films would struggle to cross $300-500 million and the returns of the actual Bond films would drop in turn. As audiences turn off from the brand.
Trends and fads come and go – but Bond has endured nearly 60 years following the model they have used. There is no need to go down the “cinematic universe” route.
Also…………I have to admit the prospect of Christopher Nolan directing Tom Hardy as Bond is too good! Though I’m a little conscious that Mendes did a Nolan impression during his stint. Maybe it’s time to get the real deal or do something a little different (Nicholas Winding Refn, anyone?)
Caisno Royale used some ideas from the Jinx script. MGW and BB were furious when MGM cancelled the project.
What are you talking about?
Then, it's that kind of detour that led them to reboot the series with a new actor later on.
I was wondering the same thing, myself. CR is fantastic, so surely the ideas from 'Jinx' were better suited in that than a Jinx spinoff nobody would be lining up to see.
I hope I didn't make it sound like I was criticizing. I saw the Screenrant story first (via Twitter). I just try to find the original if possible.
I 100% agree with this.
Some people aren't thinking clearly. Marvel Studios' main task was to establish a cinematic universe because the characters are there to be utilised. The principle of it makes sense and fundamentally works and they've managed to execute it incredibly well. Now, just because it works for them it doesn't mean it works for Bond. There is no Bond "universe" as such because everything revolves around him; this one character. As much as Felix may have his fans, no one gives a shit about Felix, M, Q, MP or anyone else other than Bond to create separate franchises on. It's not a profitable strategy for EoN and Bond IS the sole attraction. I have no idea what @Risico was talking about with all those spin offs but that's just not going to happen.
Whatever the case, when things really pick up for Bond 25 I hope the film can at least deliver on the hype like how it used to be. Bond should never ever be lacklustre especially in this day and age.
But, as for M, Q and Moneypenny? I've nothing to disagree with them not being given a toss about. Because they are nothing but tools and instruments to move the plot. Nothing beyond that.
Whilst Jinx was a total flop of a character in DAD, the plan was to reinvent her majorly. The Jinx project was essentially EON’s attempt at making a smaller budgeted more gritty and realistic spy thriller.
The plot would have followed Jinx, who was merely an analyst for the NSA. She later gets embroiled in a plot which forces her into the field. Stephen Frears wanted to direct (apparently he wanted to work with Halle Berry badly) and Javier Bardem was sought to play the villain (this was probably the role he was talking about being offered on the Skyfall press tour).
The general tone and feel of the Jinx script was adopted in CR. I don’t know if actual scenes or moments were directly lifted, but the scripts share the same tone. Even if you watch the CR making-of documentary, Barbara admits that the Jinx script gave her confidence to make CR.
It’s VERY VERY HARD to be convinced that a Jinx film could actually be good. But the evidence is that the script was impressive.
Loads of info on it can be found in Matthew Field and Ajay Chowdhury’s book.
Nolan has clearly been inspired by Bond throughout his career. The only problem is whether he’d want to inherent the series in its current state. Interestingly, Baz wrote that he was in loose talks to direct Bond 24 before Mendes jumped back.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2325894/Dark-Knight-rise-James-Bond-Christopher-Nolan-approached-direct-007-film.html
If Bond was to go to Warner Bros, maybe it could be a concerted effort to get him to stay and do his 007 film. Nolan would be a fool to turn down the chance to work with Ralph Fiennes, Ben Whishaw and Naomie Harris just because he didn’t cast them. All fantastic actors.
I doubt he'd do his own trilogy - maybe a one-off?
Dream Team?
The thing is, a Felix comic getting good reviews isn't an indicator that it can be turned into a successful movie franchise. The 2 mediums are very different and Felix' pop culture status outisde of Bond fans is essentially non existent. There's no adequate audience for such a vehicle.
What could such a film offer that makes it stand out from every other CIA-centric movie out there? I don't think Bond will show up to cameo as that would diminish the character. The only way I see a Felix movie working is if it has a budget under $20million and released on Amazon or Netflix. It certainly doesnt warrent a theatrical release and even then, is it really worth EoN's time? Such a resource should be dedicated to Bond only; as he's the profitable IP and who audiences want to see. As things are we barely get Bond as we'd like and to delay that further in favour of a side character is far from agreeable.
Bourne tried to establish an Aaron Cross franchise, it failed. Brosnan himself tried to turn the positively-reviewed november man novels into a franchise, did one movie and the prospect of an intended franchise is now dead. The way I see it, a Felix franchise from a business perspective is a waste of time but hey, if 2016 taught us anything, it's that stranger things have happened and I could be entirely wrong.