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
Thankfully there are many other films coming out in the mean time. Bond isn't the be all and end all.
Including you, brother. Including you.
We probably would been at Bond 28 production thread by now if he was still alive.
We've had this cute little run around before. I make the very clear decision not to discuss things I don't know anything about, as I see how stupid it makes others look. It's why I didn't talk about the strike news, some of the issues surrounding distribution deals, etc. and why I don't give rumors the time of day until things are actually confirmed. If i have nothing to say about something, or if what I said wasn't backed up by data or experience on the issue, I take a seat back and wait for those who do to speak about it, which is frankly very few around here.
Great post. I had a laugh because it s all so true.
Hm, also true perhaps.
Bit unfair - QoS was originally going to come out in May 2008. Skyfall would have come out in 2011 if it wasn't for MGM and Spectre was originally going to come out in 2014. Cubby had his own problems in getting a Bond film produced between 1989 and 1995.
So much so that we even knew the title in advance.
Agreed, he did and I respect him for it. Having said that, there have been extenuating circumstances of late, either on account of MGM or legal troubles. Even Cubby ran into timing issues post Saltzman and post LTK. It's just that these issues seem to be more prevalent these days. Keep in mind the studio in question is owned by hedge funds at present and has changed hands a few times in the past (including being owned by Kerkorian at a few points). Hardly the most predictable outfit to be associated with.
If an actor wants a long break post Bond in the future though, and he becomes the primary holdup, then I'm all for giving him the sack.
Not even that. The gap has closed considerably of late, and yes we have a lot of great stuff to look forward to while the Bond machine figures itself out.
Regarding keyboard warriors, that's what the internet is for. The more the merrier and all opinions are welcome from my humble perspective. I don't presume to be an authority on what's happening here. I know as much or less than most, but don't begrudge anyone their opinions.
Yes, I know you do. I also understand your frustration with the people who go overboard in believing every single rumor that pops up. At the end of the day, most of us here are just fans with no ties to the production of Bond 25 and I think part of the fun lies in the speculation of what happens next. I'd hate to create an environment where we can't have any fun and not be able to share our opinions on what direction they should take next.
It just seems like you're too quick to shoot people down sometimes, that's all. I wasn't trying to antagonize you and that's the honest truth.
@pachazo, my apologies, then. We don't really converse on here, so I didn't know how to take your reactions (nuance is lost in text anyway). I'm sure that at times I could hold back a little, but I've seen the same cycle pop up endlessly over these nearly 800 pages (!) and so it's only inevitable that I try to point out how things could be better. It's just the same people, often myself, @jake24 or @RC7 pointing out pitfalls to avoid, and nothing really changing. Maybe I'm too dedicated to call it a lost cause?
I hate censorship and don't want to put a moratorium out on discussing anything Bond-related or otherwise, I just simply wish that people didn't take every whisper as a chance to plan a celebration party, or, if they don't like the news, throw EON under the bus for random reasons that have no logical correlation. We all want a new Bond film yesterday, but an attempt at patience must also be teamed with a certain restraint in these matterrs. Look at the news, mull over the facts, argue validity and all the rest, but avoid blindly accepting everything you read. A news report naming Uwe Boll as the next Bond director should receive the same scrutiny as one saying Daniel is returning for Bond 25, simply because it's all industry talk and not verified by EON. I think our main issue is that we don't speculate enough: instead, people skip speculation and treat pieces of news as confirmation of their own biases or wishes.
In short, I just wish we had more commenters saying "Nolan may direct Bond 25," than "Nolan will direct Bond 25." A lot of this will lead to broken hearts and minds, sooner or later, and I've just tried to help and make this process easier for all of us to get through.
lets talk about the lead up to Quantum of Solace it seems like every other day there was a new article or fan theory why Bond 22 will definitely be Risico or The Property of a lady for Bond 23 there was a whole leaked idea (which I am guessing was just fan made nonsense) that Bond 23 was going to be The Property of a Lady and definitely have a UN auction scene etc (which was really cool in my mind) Bond 24 a few good director rumors but when Mendes was announced we had no real exciting rumors till the leak and well that told us everything moving into the current time line a few rumors last year Hiddleston is 007 and Bier will direct were interesting but gone are the days when the sun would take a fleming title and say that is going to be the title of Bond 25 or (pick a random hot celebrity) is going to be a bond girl... I hate to say it but the good days of rumors for me at least are kind of over..
There could of been a film in 2004 and 2010
You enjoyed all the fake celebrity castings, @Risico007? That was a part of the experience I was happy to see go, actually. The less I have to see of a shirtless Hiddleston trying to act like he's got some hair on his chest, the happier I shall be. The same goes for the laughable Taylor Swift Bond girl nonsense, an offshoot of some of the same stories that circled Kate Upton, I believe.
At the very least, as annoying as the latest rumors can be, they do have more believability than the very obvious click-bait stories of all the Bond betting casting choices and the random Bond girl news stories, which just became journalistic parody over time. I'm a lot easier on those who are taking the Syncopy story and running with it, as it at least seems like something that could actually happen.
and as for celebrity bs at least Hiddleston was possible this Syncopy/Nolan nonsense was well just that again the whole situation has changed for me.
I don't think a lack of titles being reported stops anyone from making art. I see Bond 25 fan posters on here all the time, using Property of a Lady, Shatterhand and plenty of other original titles too. All the reports you reference end up being bullshit at the end of the day, so it's not like anything is lost. Fans make posters no matter what, and if they don't have a title they make one up. Either way, the trailers and posters will always be there in some capacity.
There wasn't, so what? There are other things in life besides James Bond films. How did you cope in 2004 and 2010 then when there weren't Bond films? There was Euro 2004 and World Cup 2010. Darn it, 2017 has no major football tournament or Bond film, what on earth will we do?!!!
Pssst, we all know that and all have other interest but this is a J A M E S B O N D site and people come here to discuss J A M E S. B O N D Lol
Really? Good point, so why wasn't there a Bond film in 1966, 1968, 1970, 1972, 1975, 1976, 1978, 1980, 1982, 1984, 1986, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2016, 2017 - Eon are just terrible aren't they? Denying us all those Bond films - shame on them!
Eon have been very good custodians of the James Bond franchise. I find it annoying when people slam BB and MGW just because the next Bond film won't come out until 2018/19 - some people need to grow up a bit I'm afraid.
Well done. Like someone plucked out my thoughts and plastered them about. Welcome to Team Patience, @tanaka123. Good to have you on board.
Bingo!
Very much agreed here, too. I never understood the beef cake Craig comments, with people saying he was too muscly to be Bond. He simply looks like a man who would do the job he's doing, and I love Dan forever for being so committed to gain that muscle and credibility as Bond.
It has been very apparent from jump, and later proven in how he acts in QoS and SF especially, that Dan's Bond is built as a military man who has taken all his naval experience and fitness into the 00 job after his time with the Royal Navy was over. Dan's fitness is very fitting of a military man, and even his run is very military in style, very stiff and in control, with no sense of imbalance. It's all drive and purpose. Like everything with how the character has been written, it all comes back to a distinct and well expressed character portrait. You can see the navy alive in Bond in a very overt way like never before.
100% agree.
Most certainly. I always found the muscular/hulking cimments ridiculous and amusing but I think and this is just my opinion, that people are used to seeing Bond actors with a rather ordinary looking body.
Outisde of Craig the only Bond actor who looked physically impressive was Connery (particularly in TB). The days of heroes like Bond pulling off all these incredible physical feats while their bodies look like they've never undergone any sort of physical training/conditioning are over. With what we know today about diet, nutrition and various ways of working out, combined with what we're supposed to believe and accept when it comes to Bond's capabilities, he has to look, well, look physically capable and Craig delivered. The way some people talk about him you'd think they were talking about him as though he was as swole as Jay Cutler.
All the stuff Craig's Bond is able to do doesn't require much suspension of disbelief because not only has he appropriately(which is the key word here) made himself look credible in the role but he's done the physical training to do all this stuff which in turn transforms his body to look capable; moreso than any other Bond actor.
That being said, it's not terribly difficult for anyone who's in moderate shape to transform their bodies into looking more defined, sculpted and impressive. The key component is diet; a huge emphasis on that, disciplined training and consistency.
https://mi6-hq.com/news/index.php?itemid=1572
Because I'm a Bond super fan and I want more Bond. 2004 it was rough cause I really wanted a 5th Brosnan film. 2010 wasn't so bad actually cause I had a lot going on that year.
You mean you're one of them ... an obsessive?