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
As a fellow Australian, please no.
It also strikes me that she's not a completely different type to Daisy May Cooper, who of course the red tops were reporting was the new M a few weeks back. I don't buy the M thing, but it doesn't seem impossible there's some role they're looking at filling which would suit a comedienne, and although the tabloids make stuff up they do have contacts in the entertainment biz so there may have been a whiff of truth in the Cooper thing: and if there's a role that means there's some semblance of a script or at least ideas of characters they want to introduce... interesting...
Aisha, the Q Branch Tech from Double or Nothing is pretty much there, I love her personality and she gets some laugh out loud moments, particularly throwing her shoe at a bad suggestion from her coworker. Then again I'd love to see Mirren play their boss, Mrs Keator as this non-nonsense older woman who decoded Spektor's in the Cold War. It's criminal she's not been in the franchise already.
That’s only if you actually take Barbara Broccoli’s word of there being no script in development. I actually don’t believe her. I think she only tells the press there’s no development because that’s a way of getting them off their backs.
Michelle Monaghan in Mr and Mrs Smith is how I'd picture a female Q. Not sure I feel about a female Q though, it feels a bit too subversive to my mind.
To be honest, I'm not really a fan of either for a female Q. It's almost too obvious and I get the sense both actresses are a bit too 'larger than life' to really appear like they're organically a part of the MI6 world and not just the 'comic relief' which sticks out like a sore thumb (I'd argue Cleese's R suffered from this). I think if Cooper does appear in this film (which is a big if) I can see her more a henchwoman playing the role straight if they wanted to do a bit of 'subversive casting'. In all honesty I think she's a good enough actress to do it well.
As for Rebel and Daisy auditioning, their scripts are probably parts from old scripts. I believe EON has at least some ideas on where to go next.
As I've said in the past, I don't think the series should feel restricted by the expectation to have a Q or Moneypenny. They might not necessarily be needed and could potentially feel shoehorned in. Honestly, I'd rather see a version of Lolelia Ponsonby as a sort of assistant to the Bond/the 00's (even in the novels she serves much more of a function than Moneypenny ever did in the films, both practically and even emotionally) and then an M and Bill Tanner perhaps.
I'm not really sure if having an A-List comedian as a comic relief Q is needed or necessary.
Just give me good dramatic actors.
I wouldn’t mind if they weren’t around either, considering their minimal presence in the original books. And if the producers do go forward with a more monogamist Bond as has been hinted at, the “flirtatious banter” won’t be necessary anymore. It didn’t really happen in SP or NTTD even, they seemed more like just friends to me. And still minimal in SF I’d argue.
Yeah it feels a bit on-the-nose 'here's the funny bit'. I was a bit disappointed in Cleese taking the gig as well: felt like he'd sold out a touch.
I don't feel strongly about them taking a larger role: I just don't object to them being in Spectre, I know many people do.
Yeah, I don't think it'd feel right. Like I said though, I can see Cooper as a henchwoman or secondary villain played straight.
The great thing about Ponsonby in the novels was that Bond did have a kind of teasing banter with her, but she also did a lot for him practically speaking. There's definitely a sense that Bond knows he can't ever 'cross that line' with her, and again it's more playful than outright flirtatious as we get in with the early film version of Moneypenny.
It's actually quite interesting reading those passages of Fleming's novels. It never feels inappropriate given Bond's relative restraint/how much Ponsonby cares for him/the other agents. I think it'd be quite humanising watching a Bond interact with such a character in that way.
https://deadline.com/2023/05/quentin-tarantino-retirement-james-bond-tv-cannes-1235379761/
I’d also include the continuation novels with his comments if EON decides to adapt them.
There’s an interview from 1997 where he said he wanted to do Casino Royale. Would have set in the 60s, even suggested Felix Leiter would be played by Samuel L Jackson. But he made a weird error where he said the book ends with Bond KILLING Vesper and then making a call to say “the bitch is dead”.
Jump to 12:25, they all start off (rightfully) crapping on TND and then it changes to Tarantino talking about wanting to do CR.
I'm not entirely sure how much audiences would question or be confused by the change. I don't think it would be enough to impact their enjoyment of the film. I hope EON don't feel they need to be chained to those particular characters, especially considering they're creating a new 'Bond world' as it were.
An argument against May is that she really doesn't serve much narrative use and would be more of a cameo if anything. At most she would probably deliver a very minor piece of information and not be seen again for the duration of the movie. I suspect as well it'd be changed from her being Bond's maid to his landlady or something. I don't see much point in including her, but it could be nice.
Yes you're right. I think a lot of people would just think she's Moneypenny anyway though.
Yeah there are ways of doing it, but I guess there would have to be a story/plot reason for a character to be there first rather than just forcing in a character for the sake of it.
A lot of Tarantino’s films have lately been set in the past, he hasn’t really had a film that felt like it was set in the present since the 90s.
KILL BILL and DEATH PROOF felt very 70s cinema stylistically. INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS, DJANGO UNCHAINED, THE HATEFUL EIGHT, ONCE UPON A TIME IN HOLLYWOOD, and now THE MOVIE CRITIC are all period pieces.
It’s not that Tarantino wouldn’t know how to modernize it, it’s that he doesn’t want to modernize it. He wants to wallow in the kind of films he grew up watching as a kid. Even if he didn’t limit himself to ten films, he’ll probably never be interested in making a movie set in the 2020s.
He only stopped expressing interest in doing CR when Brosnan was let go. As far as he was concerned, Brosnan was the only Bond he wanted to work with. Though even if he still wanted to with a new Bond I kind of doubt Eon would be interested.