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
Yeah, it was quite underwhelming for me too. A big reason also is that you could see it coming from miles off (if you're one of the ones who is familiar with the character) - we knew he was Blofeld as soon as he first appeared. The Oberhauser identity smokescreen was very transparent. There was no element of surprise or even an eyebrow raise. So it's a lose-lose, really.
The Eve thing was played much smarter, for my money.
I recall going through the IMDB list of Batman Begins in 2004. The film was still months away from its release, but seeing several character names and the names of the actors attached to the roles, made me dream of the final product and got me really excited. Imagine if Oldman had been listed as "Policeman" and Murphy as "Doctor"... That would've been lame.
Aaron Taylor-Johnson: I'm playing Sir Hildebert Bryce, a member of the British Aristocracy.
Reporter: Yeah, right, and I'm Franz Oberhauser.
ATJ: Who's that, mate?
Do you actually believe this too be true?
1. Hire a scriptwriter: write a script.
2. Hire a director: do a screentest.
3. From the script, the director would choose a scene for a screentest
4. Many actors are going to undergo a screentest.
5. There would be an elimination rounds for them, then the one who's left and caught both the Producers and director's heart would likely to be Bond.
So hire a scriptwriter first, then director, then the actor.
Number 3 seems to be typically the bedroom scene from FRWL. Never really been sure why this is the definitive audition piece, but it is.
Yes, it's typically that, but then the screentest of Brosnan in TLD was different (have you seen it?), as so was Craig's screentest in CR too.
For me, it depends.
From my understanding it's part of the many screen-tests they do for the final candidates. The FRWL scene is one and they'll do a fight scene as well probably to access the candidate's physicality, likely a spin on the hotel fight from OHMSS (similar to the one James Brolin did for his screen test in '87). Then a scene from the actual film they're doing.
I'm guessing they use the FRWL scene because it not only gives the director/producers an idea of how seductive the candidate can be, but how the actor acts as Bond during quieter moments (I mean, during that scene Bond has to go from suspecting an intruder in his room to having to quickly turn on the charm). That and they probably don't want to do too many scenes from the actual film maybe for fear of anything leaking?
I always wondered if this supposed to be the scene in Bond's hotel room in OHMSS.
Looks quite similar.
A little off topic, but if there's one thing I hope the future Bond films never do it's to pay homage to OHMSS by having the next Bond wear a white shirt with frilly ruffles.
:))
Of course, they will never do it, it's already dated and 'very much of its time'.
And I think there would be no OHMSS homages for now, since it's been done to death in NTTD.
Although the whole hotel sequence in OHMSS with Bond fighting Che Che and his interaction with Tracy would make a great screentest.
There's a great episode of Seinfeld where Jerry inadvertently agrees to wear a rather frilly shirt designed by Kramer's girlfriend on The Tonight Show. George's shirt in OHMSS always reminds me of that.
Anyway, like I said I don't know if they still do this scene for their screen-tests.
I hope so.
Just curious - you hope they ask, or you hope she's involved in the future?
Both, honestly. I hope Bond lightens up a bit next time, with no family drama. She would be a good person to start that trend.
The thing is that these bullet points aren’t monoliths, they all have sub-points and I feel like Bond is one franchise that could get away with splitting that first one up considerably. I’m not saying it would be the best way to go or that it’s likely, but I think it’s absolutely possible that they have some sort of treatment maybe even a very rough first draft from P&W and are currently in early development with that. So they’d talk to directors and actors and start planning with Locations and Special Effects and everything and whenever the strike is over they’ll get someone to actually make a full script out of this.
We all know there’s going to be Bond and a villain and a henchman and a girl and so on and there will be 3-4 action setpieces in 2-3 locations. It’s a bit mad-libs style and again, maybe not the way to write a classic, but don’t they tell their screenwriters: „It has to be in these 3 locations due to taxbreaks and production capacity. Also, Corbould came up with this, this and this.“ anyway?
While Bond wasn't completely serious as people always know, he actually made some funny comments and humor, his grittiness comes from the fact that he's a man of World War, a man who experienced such, back then, it's a bleak world of Black and White, full of dullness, it's a very serious world back then because of World War, and Bond was one of those.
Fleming and the books (that includes Bond's character), wants us to see the reflection of World War, that those things that Fleming wrote reflected World War and it's theme being played in the background.
In the films, it's often misunderstood, like he's serious because it needs to be: often because it's the 'trend', yes, even the Dalton ones, and especially the Craig Era ones, they just went the serious approach because it needs to be and that's the understanding of the character, which in my view, was wrong.
Aside from the books not being that gritty, the context or the aspect behind the seriousness of the novels was came from the World War theme.
Now, this is what misunderstood in the Craig Era, Bond did those and why? Why he needs to be gritty? His grittiness in Skyfall doesn't makes sense, because there's nothing to be serious of, to get dour of, I don't see the point, maybe it's just me.
Something that couldn't be replicated today, yes, even by Period Pieces, there's still that misunderstanding with regards to the main point behind the tone of the character.
Now, it's serious, because the modern cinema were aiming for more serious tones, it's the trend, not the fact that what Fleming wants us to realize, the effects of World War that's being played in the books, hence the seriousness, but as we can see, the books weren't that serious, because again, it's not intentionally played, there's a humor, of course, because Fleming wasn't targeting the seriousness of the character, he's not interested in the seriousness and grittiness, if anything he's more interested in escapism which he stated many times, the seriousness aspect of the books was all about the effects of World War, the bleakness of it and how it affected the mood back then.
The seriousness of the books had that Wartime shadow mood and atmosphere into it, but if we look closer into those books, they're just normal, often sprinkled some humor for it not to be dour.
Not just Fleming wanted to made Bond serious because he wanted him serious, or because he's serious himself, no, Fleming wanted to depict the bad effects of World War, the effect it had in terms of spirit and presence.
Bond in the books still had humor and made jokes, in fact, maybe it's only me but Archer is the one I saw when reading some of his lines in his books, but Bond's seriousness at times depicts the bleakness of the people's attitude caused by World War.
He's a killer, surrounded by other killers and people are dying. I'm not sure what there isn't there to be serious about?
And Craig's Bond still has humour and makes jokes: more than Dalton's does even, I'd say. I think it's always a misreading of his portrayal to say it was nothing but gritty.
Replicated by whom? And how? All of Bond's experiences are fictional (even if details like the use of stimulants are based in reality), so there's nothing to replicate.
Give me clarifications about this:
For example, if the Bond of today would use drugs for example, or even his grittiness, what it originally represented, or the reason behind of Bond's grittiness is something that couldn't be replicated, because the current statement that if Bond is serious and gritty, people would think of them as being close to the books, but my point here is, there's a reason why Bond was serious, there's an experience behind that, and it couldn't be replicated today.
For me, Bond was gritty because it's the trend, it's the demand, not by going close to the books, because Bond in the books was serious because of the World War experiences, something that couldn't be replicated today, even if the next Bond will be gritty that essence that "yes, he's like that because of his World War experiences" is not felt.
For me Bond's seriousness in the books was heavily influenced by World War, in the films, Bond's gritty for a different reason.
I never felt in Dalton's Bond or in Craig's Bond that they're somewhat gritty because of World War experiences, for me, it strikes me more as they're killers, that's why, but the reason why the original Bond as depicted by Fleming was serious because of World War experiences.
Same for his booze or drinking, it's the aspect of him which built by World War, but Bond doing it today or in general Bond doing it in films, the essence behind that habit wasn't there.
It's just an observation from mine.
"“What was really cool was getting to audition for Bond,” said Wilson, who stressed that the role she went for wasn’t actually James Bond, but rather another character in the movie. The audition took place last year, though the star played coy about whether or not she landed the gig.
The next instalment of the famous franchise is currently in script stage. Broccoli and Wilson last year told Variety that finding the new Bond is “not just about casting an actor for a film. It’s about a reinvention.” One frequently discussed frontrunner for the role is Aaron Taylor-Johnson."