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
If it's a mini series, I doubt Christopher Nolan would be a part of it, though. But there are many other talented series writers like his brother Jonathan Nolan, or Noah Hawley for example.
Most of those aren't really TV material though. I like them to read, but Quantum of Solace is a much like a Tales of the Unexpected only slightly less dramatic, and 007 in New York is a recipe.
I like the books and stories, but it's fine to enjoy them as books, they don't need to be adapted to moving pictures.
I mean, you could develop a whole story around 007 in New York, but there isn't much story there to begin.
And if you're adding story, then you're just doing what the films do anyway and adapting them for the screen rather than being 'faithful'. So I don't really see the point.
With Benedict Cumberbatch, no less. And they could keep Fiennes as M.
Perhaps part of Bond's character arc involves him exploring the history and legacy of spies/their place in the world. Maybe his new mission requires digging into the past of his 007 counterpart from the 1950's on some unresolved failure by MI6.
Anyway... this is where my "what would Nolan do" brain is going. Keeps both parties happy, and added bonus is the dream/flashback sequence would be a non-controversial way to bring back some Fleming era features like old cars, smoking, womanizing, etc. I feel like Bond's vices and bad habits need to be emphasized.
LOL, generally not into "AU" Bond adaptations but I could get into this.
The 'why not' would be that no value is being added, other than some slightly more 50s than early 60s cars about the place etc.; and you are actively looking at a film like Goldfinger and taking away what a lot of people would see as the perceived value. 'Why not' isn't really a good enough to spend millions of pounds on something, especially if it is, as you say, relatively niche.
If it were being re-adapted, with a fresh directorial vision and actually adding some new and interesting ideas and flavours, then great. But that doesn't seem to be what is being proposed here: folks are talking about 'faithful' adaptations which stick to the original text far closer than Broccoli and Saltzman ever did, and I don't really see what's exciting about that.
The films adapt the books for the cinema: that doesn't mean that every word is put on the screen just as written, but the text is adapted to fit the new medium, that the spirit and flavour is brought across but the exact literal words get changed in order for the spirit to make that jump. And I think they do a great job of it.
It's not as if everyone has the same experience when they read a novel anyway: everyone sees something slightly different in their head- if you aim for 'faithful' then you're always disappointing someone who didn't see it that way.
And the book was published 64 years ago. Movie released, 59 years ago.
But why re-tell this story? If there is a concept behind doing it I can get behind it, but I'm not really seeing one.
What value is being added?
And if the idea is to tell it in the correct time period, doesn't that suggest that it already has been? 5 years off is a lot closer that 64 years off.
Well, maybe not TB but god knows I don't need to see that story redone.
There is potential to re-do the '70s films/novels. Maybe a LALD/TMWTGG by-the-book mashup since they're both set in Jamaica anyway. And MR of course is crying out for a truer adaptation so maybe throw that in the blender with DAF.
I don’t see how going back to the 50s would help that.
The youth should grow under the distic of 007’s fictional world. 007’s fictional world should not cater to the youth. Nor to any demographics besides the one Fleming’s novels were meant to. Adults.
Let the children grow up to be adults. Not make adults servants of uneducated children’s whims.
My two cents, anyway.
No, it doesn't have a demographics problem.
I remember people in the '80s saying that too. And Bond's still here.
Bond does big international business and always will, with the right actor in the role.
Perfectly put my friend
Absolutely.
Period Pieces, let's just wait for the Dynamite Comics release of Moonraker, it's been a while, what happened to those? In that way we could see the Fleming books visually presented, and more truer to the source.
There is still plenty of unused material in the full length novels that hasn't yet been adapted. THR and 007 in NY never even registered with me as material that's worth adapting.
Personally I think these rumours of Nolan doing a period piece is just internet BS. Nolan may be in talks to do the next 2 Bond films but I am 95% certain it will be set in modern day.
There may also be some truth in Nolan adapting what's left of the unused Fleming material, but again, this would be for 2 new films set in modern day, not a faithful adaptation of MR set in the 1950's, or a remake of GF set in modern times.
I used to think the same but I don’t know if we can take that for granted anymore. And I think the reason Bond is still here is because EON answered that demographic crisis talk in the 90s, by modernising things. It annoyed some older fans (anyone else remember the stick the Brosnan era used to get on here for the machine guns, the electronic elements to the scores, etc) but the end result was it had appeal to a new generation.
They started doing that again in the 2000s, but after Skyfall I think they’ve lent into the nostalgia a bit too much, and when you couple that with the longer gaps and the brand not having the presence it used to, I think we’re at a point where young people don’t seem that arsed again.
It doesn’t mean Bond is dying, but it’s definitely something they should keep in mind imo. The new video game might help, and a younger actor. Personally I think they could do with some younger writers and creatives too. Didn’t really think until I read a great post from @007HallY the other day about the new Higson book about just how old some of the reliable hands have gotten. Purvis and Wade were writing them when I was still a kid.
Basically, I reckon we need a modern day Goldeneye. And like @Mallory, I’m skeptical that a period piece would be able to deliver that. Maybe if you went a bit Peaky Blinders with it, had some fun anachronistic stuff. But if you did that you’d annoy the fans who want the time of the novels done faithfully, which would sort of defeat the point of doing it in the first place.