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
YES!
*head in shame* ..sorry. See edit. I will have Brady quiet any loose ends. :D
Evidence? Please point out and identify this irrefutable evidence you're talking about that makes what reddit user @xyz123nobody as telling nothing but stone-cold, hard, reliable fact. Also, while you're doing that, maybe YOU should step back from whatever device you're using just a smidge, apply a modicum of thought and then really think if this "exclusive real news update" from reddit, a site notoriously known for users elaborately making stuff up to fool gullible people like you is actually serving you up a plate of bs or not.
P.S.
It's the former and you're lapping it up.
In other news, I just read on MySpace that Christopher Plummer has just been cast as Bond #7. I believe the late, great Abraham Lincoln said it best: "If you read it on the Internet, it must be true."
I think Purvis and Wade are making the case quite well themselves for their own future exclusion.
==== As I am predicting a 3rd and final installment of a Craig-Mendes trilogy.
I wonder if Mendes would actually want to call the new Bond , Shatterhand?
YOLT is one of the Flemings he has read,so he does know the connection that the name has with the source material
Also he does seem to like one word titles. And Shatterhand does offer a cinema-Bond vibe.
I am not a big fan of either of the two Mendes films thus far, but I am curious, now that we are this far down the rabbit hole, to see what he might do with a SP follow-up Blofled-Shatterhand film
These two guys, Purvis and Wade, lost every bit of inspiration. Hearing them talk like that, would make me seriously consider to fire them.
It's almost like they....give up completely. While I seriously think that especially the world we're living in makes the world of Bond so much more interesting. The late Ian Fleming would have gotten tons of inspiration out of guys like Julian Assange, Donald Trump, Snowden and Putin. It's the very essence of kicking off a good Bond story.
And frankly, I know myself that it's actually much easier than you think to create a fresh, new Bond story. I actually wrote one myself!
http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/17687/james-bond-007-in-murder-on-wheels-a-story-treatment#latest
No seriously, I'm done with Purvis & Wade.
We really do miss the best years of these actors' lives by allowing these gargantuan projects to take up 3-4 years of production.
Two years. The market is demonstrably there. Follow the Disney/Star Wars model. Form another production company if necessary. Get the resources in. It's not as if the returns won't justify the outlay.
There's no firing needing to be done. Purvis and Wade openly retired from Bond after Skyfall, then were begged back for one more when the team found themselves in a mess script-wise. Their comments about SPECTRE feeling like an end to things suggests that once again, after six films, they are done with writing Bond and would prefer to move on to other things. It sounds like they have plenty of interesting projects in the works and are not for want of work. In other words, Bond probably needs them more than they need Bond. The way the films are being put together lately—post Casino Royale really—I don't blame them for wanting out.
Also their comments on the state of things in the world at large doesn't make it sound like they are wanting for inspiration so much as they are commenting on how, sadly, the world itself is becoming more and more fantasy-like.
Having said that, writing to a Bond formula, with so many eyes over your shoulder, can't be easy.
But that's why I responed. And I understand their reaction. But I see it as a good thing, from where new inspiration can come from, whereas Purvis & Wade see it as a negative thing.
The period in which we are living now is very much becoming like Fleming's world shortly before and after the Second World War and during the Cold War. We're heading towards uncertain, ultra-nationalist, protectionist, isolationist times again. And in such an environment espionage......an with it James Bond....becomes important again! Plentiful inspiration for new Bond films if you ask me.
I agree with this. Some cool Bond stories, Zero Minus Ten, High Time To Kill, Devil May Care,and so forth have been created long after Fleming. Could be great movies.
Also, there were several Gardner titles I thought were very Bondian (Icebreaker, Role of Honour, Scorpius, Brokenclaw etc), and the elements that maybe wouldn't quite work in the continuation novels could always be altered. They had no problem changing Fleming's work.
At the very least it would give Eon a guideline and map for the future rather than the attitude of "what's the current world threat?" and trying to fit Bond into current topics.
This kills me. Similarly, the way some filmmakers feel about other properties. (e.g., after over 50 years of Spider-Man comics -- at least one a month and for many years several a month -- they feel they've run out of ideas after two or three movies. HUH?)
Looking forward to getting some new blood into the Bond films -- people who would be honored (honoured?) to do the series and the character justice.
“Spectre felt like it closed off a certain way of doing Bond,” Purvis told The Telegraph. “And I think whatever happens next will be quite different.”
Very illuminating revelation there, from someone who has no incentive at this point to play tricks with the media.
Either another reboot (soft?) or at least a re-imagining of sorts.
It's interesting that you mention period movies, because after SP came out there was some talk of the producers meeting with Matthew Weiner (of noted 60's tv drama Mad Men fame), although that was debunked I think.
*Back* to period movies? They've never done a period movie.
To illustrate what I mean, look at Murder My Sweet (1942) and Farewell My Lovely (1975). They're both based on the same Raymond Chandler movie. The former was filmed three years after the novel came out. The latter decades later.
When you do a period movie, the dynamic changes. You know how world events turn out. At the same time, you're more free to confront issues when you do a period movie. (Farewell My Lovely confronted racial issues that Murder My Sweet didn't.)
If you did a period Bond movie, it wouldn't be a copy of the 1960s 007 movies made. Doing a movie *set in the 1960s* is different than movie *filmed during the 1960s.*
No worries.
If Eon did a Bond film as a period piece it would absolutely be a major change.
It was raised in this 2015 story in the Express:
http://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/611241/007-return-heyday-era-1960s
Personally, I never saw it referred to since. If anyone has more info, that'd be great.
There are so many avenues they could explore. Bond staying with Madeleine. Blofeld's escape and revenge. Brexit. An all-out attack on MI6.
Or just a stupid, nefarious villain in the grand tradition of Bond.
What's with the angst? I can just see Cubby saying "Get the movies out there. Get the best people in and crank 'em out."
The next era needs to resume the two year schedule with the exception of 3 years every now & then,
This.
Exactly right. Bond has never been a period character. Fleming set him present day, the films likewise.
Some continuation novelists thought that by recreating Bond in Fleming's era would make them as good as Fleming. X_X
The writers are essentially guns for hire. I imagine when they were parachuted in to do a rewrite on Spectre they had a myriad of ideas to rescue the script. It’s likely one of them was the Oberhauser angle – something that Mendes gravitated to. I know it’s stupid, but the whole Bond/Blofeld dynamic has Sam’s fingerprints all over it more than P&W.
DAT ASS!
Also, I feel the decision to make Bond walk over to Mi6 on the bridge is fantastic. I always found the ending on the bridge to be so twee and on the nose. “Which will Bond choose?” His decision to walk over to Madeleine is cringeworthy. Having him make the decision to choose his Mi6 life is pure Fleming. Just look at the ending of the Moonraker novel. It’s a shame that Sam chose the more obvious and gooey ending (having said that the final scene with Bond and Madeleine in the DB5 is fantastic).
I always see P&W as great writers to provide the bones of the script. I feel they write decent enough first drafts for subsequent writers to punch up. When it’s the other way round it doesn’t work. Here are some observations:
• Their script for CR allowed Paul Haggis to come in and sprinkle some magic. However, when Haggis was given free reign for QOS, we got a untidy script that was difficult to salvage.
• Clearly P&W did a good job on SF but John Logan gave the script the literate gravitas it needed. When Logan was allowed to do his thing for Spectre it led to something pretty unusable by all accounts.
For better or worse, P&W know the structure of these movies and understand Bond’s world. They provide the foundations of what will later become great films.
Treason
Lack of Trust in the home team
Mole/Double Agent
Bond goes rogue
MI6 is weakened
Public outrage on the spy world
Bond makes bad choices
And starting with the Craig era:
Almost every ally is killed, Bond blames himself or gets the bad rap from higher-ups.
Since The World Is Not Enough, we have been getting nothing but these. With these writers the Bond films have been derailed narration-wise. Get someone who actually knows what they're doing. There are plenty of people out there who can deliver the goods. Hell, even some people in here among the community can pen spot on stories and screenplays that would seem original every time. Purvis and Wade have been offering only one image. The features are listed above.
Time for a new blood.