Where does Bond go after Craig?

1172173175177178691

Comments

  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,154
    talos7's right - I doubt that any of the films before CR would've passed up the opportunity for just such a scene.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited July 2022 Posts: 6,359
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    After the Craig era, I feel like I've gotten bored with the idea of Bond falling in love with the Bond girl and the Bond girl having an everlasting presence in the next films, so I would welcome if they veered away from that for a while and just make the Bond girl either the villain or someone who tags along with and maybe flirts/sleeps with Bond too but they keep it platonic/professional. But that's just me.

    I would propose making the next storyline very mission focused (with the flavor of high stakes, colorful characters and glamour that Bond is known for, of course), instead of drama focused, put the villain's plot at the center, with focus on Bond and his detective skills. I am of course for giving him strong characterization but maybe his personal relationships can take a backseat now.

    True, I'm not really buying it and I didn't bought it with Bond and Madeleine, just not.
    You can soften Bond's side (Like Bond feeling for Elektra or his interactions with Kara) but not to the extent of making him falling in love in every film.
    Vesper and Tracy are enough, I don't want to see any of that replicated, especially when the character didn't came from Fleming or something from the books (Madeleine again for example).
    That's one of my wishlist for the next Bond film that they should get rid of.
    Enough with him falling in love, it's been done to death already.
    The more they've done it, the more it cheapens the romance in the Bond films, it should be rare and deserving.
    The Bond-Madeleine relationship had ruined the quality of writing when it comes to the love stories in the franchise in my opinion.

    After the Craig era, I feel like I've gotten bored with the idea of Bond falling in love with the Bond girl and the Bond girl having an everlasting presence in the next films, so I would welcome if they veered away from that for a while and just make the Bond girl either the villain or someone who tags along with and maybe flirts/sleeps with Bond too but they keep it platonic/professional. But that's just me.

    I would propose making the next storyline very mission focused (with the flavor of high stakes, colorful characters and glamour that Bond is known for, of course), instead of drama focused, put the villain's plot at the center, with focus on Bond and his detective skills. I am of course for giving him strong characterization but maybe his personal relationships can take a backseat now.

    I’m fine with the drama, I actually welcome it but the brand of drama in the Craig was a little unnecessary and veered away from what makes Bond so compelling as a character. I think Fleming put it best:

    It was part of his profession to kill people. He had never liked doing it and when he had to kill he did it as well as he knew how and forgot about it. As a secret agent who held the rare double-O prefix—the licence to kill in the Secret Service—it was his duty to be as cool about death as a surgeon. If it happened, it happened. Regret was unprofessional—worse, it was a death-watch beetle in the soul.

    - Goldfinger, Chapter 1: Reflections in a Double Bourbon


    Another from a 1964 Playboy interview with Fleming:

    "I don't think that he is necessarily a good guy or a bad guy. Who is? He's got his vices and very few perceptible virtues except patriotism and courage, which are probably not virtues anyway ... But I didn't intend for him to be a particularly likeable person." Fleming agreed with some critics' characterisation of Bond as an unthinking killer, but expressed that he was a product of his time: "James Bond is a healthy, violent, noncerebral man in his middle-thirties, and a creature of his era. I wouldn't say he's particularly typical of our times, but he's certainly of the times."

    Fleming’s Bond should be the core basis of the drama in the next iteration. He’s a human being who has been turned into a cold killing machine, who copes with a healthy dose of alcohol, functional/recreational drugs and a high octane lifestyle enjoying the best luxuries the world has to offer. We don’t need more love stories, secrets from the past, long lost foster brothers, etc. Do that and treat the supporting characters like real people with some semblance of depth and substance rather than mechanisms to execute the “formula” and rehash old tropes. If they do those two things I think there’ll be more than enough drama and it won’t feel so contrived.

    If they do want to go back to the romance well, I’d like to see the Gala Brand treatment happen. Bond develops interest/feelings for the Bond girl but she is engaged/married. She returns back to a loving, family life which Bond could never have, while he returns to the fray cold, alone, and probably knowing that it is for the best. I also wouldn’t mind acknowledgment that the events of OHMSS and/or CR took place with the tragic death of his lover, but I wouldn’t want to revisit it on screen.

    True, I'm on board with the Gala Brand relationship, also I want to see the Bond -Tiffany Case breakup to be made on screen. Those relationships for a change instead of just killing them off, it'll be refreshing to see.

    I'm with @FrankXavier. We've had 4 of the 5 recent Bond films with Bond in love/heartbroken, and I think it's time for a rest.

    I think a Brand- or Camille-like character is a good direction for Eon, whether or not Bond sleeps with her (preferably, yes).

    Brand is written a bit thinly and melodramatically, though, particularly when Drax's minion commits suicide over her (presumably because he's sex-starved and she's the only woman in the Drax operation?).

    Brand is not the most successful part of the MR novel but for her ending.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,243
    I never felt the connection between Bond and Swann. For that matter I didn’t feel a drop of chemistry between Craig and Seydoux. Not to belabor my admiration for “ the receptionist “ from CR, but in their under a minute interaction, I felt more chemistry between her and Craig than I did between him and Seydoux in the two entire films
  • Posts: 678
    Yeah, I don't think MeToo restricts EON from having Bond have sex with a woman (at least I hope not, because that's just a natural thing), it's more about showing women as very naive and throwing themselves at Bond just to get used by him that is probably gonna be rare if not entirely gone nowadays, I feel. Like Moneypenny being obsessed with Bond and not being reciprocated is probably not gonna happen again too.

    I mean I did kinda cringe at that part of the Spectre opening. Even if on a whole it was an awesome opening.

    But they surely must understand a woman having agency and deciding to have consensual sex with Bond regardless of where it leads to should be fair game.

    Not that a sexless Bond movie doesn't work as well -- it certainly does -- I think there's room for both possibilities.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    I'm not saying that just because of metoo that Bond will be more monogamous, but I think given the rightful re-examination of scenes in films, the producers will find it easier to avoid that aspect of the series going forwards, at least short term
  • Posts: 1,864
    talos7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I’m not sure where he’d have fitted that in though, as he had Solange over that night! :D

    Sean would have. 😉

    I would have put it in as Bond is sitting in his room, following the initial beach encounter with Solange, doing research on his laptop. There’s a knock at the door; Bond, clad only in. towel, cautiously opens the door; he’s greeted by the smiling face of the receptionist who playfully says that she thought that he may need a spare key. The corner of Bond’s mouth responds in a knowing smile.

    Aside from wanting to see a bit more of Bond’s hedonistic side, I really wanted to see more of the receptionist. The actress did so much with such a slight role. I actually think that she would have made a great Moneypenny.

    Napoleon Solo did this well in the 2015 film.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,201
    Link isn’t working for me.
  • DB5MNDB5MN USA
    edited July 2022 Posts: 47
    Link isn’t working for me.

    Shoot how do you upload a photo on here? I have the screenshot but can't upload it.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,250
    DB5MN wrote: »
    Link isn’t working for me.

    Shoot how do you upload a photo on here? I have the screenshot but can't upload it.

    This will guide you through it:
    https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/19049/how-to-post-photos-and-videos-to-mi6-instructional-video
  • Posts: 2,022
    I've been more entertained by the previews for the next MI than I was NTTD.
    talos7 wrote: »
    I never felt the connection between Bond and Swann. For that matter I didn’t feel a drop of chemistry between Craig and Seydoux. Not to belabor my admiration for “ the receptionist “ from CR, but in their under a minute interaction, I felt more chemistry between her and Craig than I did between him and Seydoux in the two entire films

    What made Tracy and Vesper so interesting was their self-assurance and banter with Bond. I recall no clever dialogue between Bond and MS. For that matter did she ever smile? I recall the pouty looks, but not a smile. She probably smiled, I just don't remember. Spot on regarding the receptionist



  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,201
    She smiles a lot more in NTTD, but she is pretty somber throughout SP that it left a lasting impression.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,588
    CrabKey wrote: »
    I've been more entertained by the previews for the next MI than I was NTTD.
    talos7 wrote: »
    I never felt the connection between Bond and Swann. For that matter I didn’t feel a drop of chemistry between Craig and Seydoux. Not to belabor my admiration for “ the receptionist “ from CR, but in their under a minute interaction, I felt more chemistry between her and Craig than I did between him and Seydoux in the two entire films

    What made Tracy and Vesper so interesting was their self-assurance and banter with Bond. I recall no clever dialogue between Bond and MS. For that matter did she ever smile? I recall the pouty looks, but not a smile. She probably smiled, I just don't remember. Spot on regarding the receptionist



    On the train a couple of times, and at the very end. To your point, that's not a lot.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited July 2022 Posts: 3,800
    CrabKey wrote: »
    I've been more entertained by the previews for the next MI than I was NTTD.
    talos7 wrote: »
    I never felt the connection between Bond and Swann. For that matter I didn’t feel a drop of chemistry between Craig and Seydoux. Not to belabor my admiration for “ the receptionist “ from CR, but in their under a minute interaction, I felt more chemistry between her and Craig than I did between him and Seydoux in the two entire films

    What made Tracy and Vesper so interesting was their self-assurance and banter with Bond. I recall no clever dialogue between Bond and MS. For that matter did she ever smile? I recall the pouty looks, but not a smile. She probably smiled, I just don't remember. Spot on regarding the receptionist



    It's not if she smiles, it's just her coldness towards him and their lack of chemistry.
    She had no inner fire, the warmth.
    Tracy and Vesper both had inner fire and warmth, they're also fully fleshed out Bond Girls, they have complexities, and most important they both have chemistry with Bond.
    Madeleine had none of that, her character just made me liked Camille Montes more, because at least Camille was a bit complex and strong willed and her banter with Bond was interesting.
    Madeleine's characterization was almost paper thin, she's not even that interesting.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Pay more attention to your chef
    Posts: 7,057
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    I've been more entertained by the previews for the next MI than I was NTTD.
    talos7 wrote: »
    I never felt the connection between Bond and Swann. For that matter I didn’t feel a drop of chemistry between Craig and Seydoux. Not to belabor my admiration for “ the receptionist “ from CR, but in their under a minute interaction, I felt more chemistry between her and Craig than I did between him and Seydoux in the two entire films

    What made Tracy and Vesper so interesting was their self-assurance and banter with Bond. I recall no clever dialogue between Bond and MS. For that matter did she ever smile? I recall the pouty looks, but not a smile. She probably smiled, I just don't remember. Spot on regarding the receptionist



    It's not if she smiles, it's just her coldness towards him and their lack of chemistry.
    She had no inner fire, the warmth.
    Tracy and Vesper both had inner fire and warmth, they're also fully fleshed out Bond Girls, they have complexities, and most important they both have chemistry with Bond.
    Madeleine had none of that, her character just made me liked Camille Montes more, because at least Camille was a bit complex and strong willed and her banter with Bond was interesting.
    Madeleine's characterization was almost paper thin, she's not even that interesting.
    Madeleine is a rather sedate character, though in NTTD she's livelier, more passionate. And her backstory is cool.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited July 2022 Posts: 3,154
    Like Bond, Madeleine has spent years putting a front up to the world, keeping much about herself and her life hidden and keeping other people at a distance. Surely much of her demeanour is written into the character, rather than the result of a lack of chemistry or engagement between actors? In SP, we first meet Madeleine in a setting that's cold, icy and remote. That's not a coincidence.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited July 2022 Posts: 6,359
    Not to mention the ice at the beginning of NTTD, which is surely symbolic. Madeleine knows how to survive, despite or because of her father's profession. She definitely hews colder when compared to, say, Tracy. And while colder than Tracy, Vesper is given moments where her temper gets to flare (when she's mad that Bond is burning through chips), and also where she is vulnerable (the shower, obviously). Both Tracy and Vesper are allowed by their respective scripts to show a range of emotions.

    What's most intriguing to me about SP is when Madeleine drops her facade, at L'Americain. And again, very briefly, when she admits to Bond that she's scared at the base. The film needed to give her more moments like that, IMHO.

    Seydoux's a good actress, some would say among the best of her generation. But the SP script did her no favors because the character was so underwritten.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited July 2022 Posts: 3,154
    True enough - in one of the leaked emails, the studio execs complained that the earlier drafts of the SP script didn't go deep enough with regard to the reasons that Bond would leave MI6 for Madeleine. They said that the script needed to answer the questions 'Why this woman? Why now?' I'm still not sure that the final draft went far enough in that respect.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,243
    Being a great actor or actress doesn’t mean that someone is right for every role. Rationalizing that
    Léa Seydou’s performance suited Swann’s character , and backstory, doesn’t retcon her lack of chemistry with Daniel and general lack of screen presence in this particular role. To give her the benefit of the doubt, possibly it was the writing or direction.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,359
    talos7 wrote: »
    Being a great actor or actress doesn’t mean that someone is right for every role. Rationalizing that
    Léa Seydou’s performance suited Swann’s character , and backstory, doesn’t retcon her lack of chemistry with Daniel and general lack of screen presence in this particular role. To give her the benefit of the doubt, possibly it was the writing or direction.

    I basically agree with you. I wonder whether Craig and Seydoux did a chemistry screen test or not. I'd bet not, and that she was just cast off the strength of her previous roles.

    As usual, I blame Mendes.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,009
    Venutius wrote: »
    True enough - in one of the leaked emails, the studio execs complained that the earlier drafts of the SP script didn't go deep enough with regard to the reasons that Bond would leave MI6 for Madeleine. They said that the script needed to answer the questions 'Why this woman? Why now?' I'm still not sure that the final draft went far enough in that respect.

    It certainly didn't.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited July 2022 Posts: 3,800
    An Article from Yahoo

    James Bond: 'Reinvention' has always been 007’s greatest gadget

    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/james-bond-reinvention-007-greatest-gadget-150425428.html
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    Madeline Swann definitely lacked a "shower scene" that Vesper and Bond had. Lea is a brilliant actress but she was let down by the poor writing of her character.

    One of the biggest problems with her character in Spectre, were two of her big moments in the film are sandwiched in between probably the biggest highlight of the film, the train fight with Hinx.

    The first moment is her and Bond having a intimate almost revealing chat about Bond's thoughts and her walls coming down. The other moment being Swann and Bond sleeping together. Every audience I watched that with laughed, nobody bought that these two characters were falling in love. It played more like a gag from the Roger era.

    Also great point @Venutius I never thought about the location of introduction mirroring her character
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,154
    Didn't Craig have final approval of his Bondgirls? He was certainly reported as having insisted on Eva Green and their chemistry was off the scale, so it's not as if he's unaware of that aspect. If Dan had the final say, he'd hardly have agreed on Lea Seydoux if he thought they weren't a good match, would he?
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited July 2022 Posts: 3,800
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Madeline Swann definitely lacked a "shower scene" that Vesper and Bond had. Lea is a brilliant actress but she was let down by the poor writing of her character.

    One of the biggest problems with her character in Spectre, were two of her big moments in the film are sandwiched in between probably the biggest highlight of the film, the train fight with Hinx.

    The first moment is her and Bond having a intimate almost revealing chat about Bond's thoughts and her walls coming down. The other moment being Swann and Bond sleeping together. Every audience I watched that with laughed, nobody bought that these two characters were falling in love. It played more like a gag from the Roger era.

    Also great point @Venutius I never thought about the location of introduction mirroring her character

    Simple, they want Madeleine to be different than Vesper and be his next Tracy.
    But the problem if we're going to compare her to Tracy, at least Tracy had the montage, the barn scene, the scene of she and Bond skiing together, and showing her tough side when Blofeld kidnapped her, she had many moments in the film.

    And in my opinion, aside from poor writing, Seydoux, looking at her performance (paticularly in SPECTRE), it looked like she wanted to be in the other movies rather than Bond, her heart was not in it, some of her scenes felt forced and not natural.

    She's a great actress, but she didn't gave her full self in the role, may be she had no choice? She just did it for money?

    It's like that "I didn't liked this role, but since they hired me, so okay, I'm just going to act it out" kind of attitude, she's not sincere, hence the lack of chemistry or the emotions was forced.

    At least to me, Rigg and Green both played their characters with sincerity.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,243
    Venutius wrote: »
    Didn't Craig have final approval of his Bondgirls? He was certainly reported as having insisted on Eva Green and their chemistry was off the scale, so it's not as if he's unaware of that aspect. If Dan had the final say, he'd hardly have agreed on Lea Seydoux if he thought they weren't a good match, would he?

    Possibly, but in person chemistry is not always reflected by on screen chemistry; there are several instances where a couple got marvelously in character but loathe each other personally.
    I think that sometimes a performer who is in a longtime role begins to have too much say in everything from costars to wardrobe.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited July 2022 Posts: 3,154
    If Dan chose Eva Green, I'm glad he had the final say...😉
  • edited July 2022 Posts: 16,204
    talos7 wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    Didn't Craig have final approval of his Bondgirls? He was certainly reported as having insisted on Eva Green and their chemistry was off the scale, so it's not as if he's unaware of that aspect. If Dan had the final say, he'd hardly have agreed on Lea Seydoux if he thought they weren't a good match, would he?

    Possibly, but in person chemistry is not always reflected by on screen chemistry; there are several instances where a couple got marvelously in character but loathe each other personally.
    I think that sometimes a performer who is in a longtime role begins to have too much say in everything from costars to wardrobe.

    I agree. Sometimes an actor who has too much input on other aspects of the production tends to make personal choices at the expensive of the film's overall quality.
    Prime example.....and this is just my opinion.....Connery choosing Michel Legrand to score NSNA.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    Personally I thought the Spectre "experience" let down all of the actors: Craig, Seydoux, Fiennes, Scott, Waltz....

    In my eyes, NTTD rectified the thin characters from the previous film and, maybe because I've hit my head too many times, I absolutely adored and believed the relationship Bond and Madeleine shared in the film-- and I DID NOT want Seydoux back when I heard she was cast for the follow-up...

    I'm happy that my bias from Spectre was corrected and the two leads oozed a dysfunctional type of love.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited July 2022 Posts: 3,154
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Also great point @Venutius I never thought about the location of introduction mirroring her character

    I think I first heard it suggested by Darth Dimi but it's definitely there, so worth reiterating, eh! ;)
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited July 2022 Posts: 16,574
    Venutius wrote: »
    Didn't Craig have final approval of his Bondgirls? He was certainly reported as having insisted on Eva Green and their chemistry was off the scale, so it's not as if he's unaware of that aspect. If Dan had the final say, he'd hardly have agreed on Lea Seydoux if he thought they weren't a good match, would he?

    I guess this is in the eye of the beholder as I never really saw all this apparent chemistry with Green. They acted well together, but they're good actors. I actually got more vibes of a genuine adult relationship from the beginning of NTTD with Seydoux.
    I still think Green was miscast, good though she is.
Sign In or Register to comment.