› ›

Where does Bond go after Craig?

1…468469471473474…679

Comments

  • Mathis1Mathis1
    edited February 10 Posts: 7,415
    Scaramanga1974 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    TND has one of my favorite pre-title sequences ; it’s its own mini movie that also leads into the rest of the film.

    I go back to it so many times as a guilty pleasure that I think its a compulsion by now ;)

    Totally agree. Great pre-credits sequence in TND. I actually prefer it to GE where the effects are a little ropey and I can't stand the line " closing time James, last call. Remember to buy me a pint".

    Its actually Bond who says "Buy me a pint!" And I hated those lines too! Along with the cringey "For England James,"
  • FeyadorFeyador Montreal, Canada
    Posts: 735
    @sandbagger1 Complete creative control for Park Chan-wook and his regular screenwriter Jeong Seo-kyeong would be ideal.

    That would probably never happen, of course; but if anyone could deliver something new and invigorating for the series it would be them.

    The result would be dark, noirish, intricately plotted, beautiful to look at and incredibly sexy. Huge fan. Decision to Leave being my favourite film of the decade so far ...
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 941
    Feyador wrote: »
    @sandbagger1 Complete creative control for Park Chan-wook and his regular screenwriter Jeong Seo-kyeong would be ideal.

    That would probably never happen, of course; but if anyone could deliver something new and invigorating for the series it would be them.

    The result would be dark, noirish, intricately plotted, beautiful to look at and incredibly sexy. Huge fan. Decision to Leave being my favourite film of the decade so far ...

    Yeah, it was one of the best films I saw last year. He’s said it would be fun to direct a Bond film, but I don’t know how serious he was being. I think he’d make something really interesting, though.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,977
    Wherever the next Bond film goes, I hope it is done without any callbacks to the Craig era. I liked Craig as Bond if not everything about his films. Craig and the producers wanted that era to end with the death of Bond, so be it. Bury it. Forget it. Move on. Why would audiences need to be reminded of a dead Bond? Which is why I hope none of the previous cast reprise their roles. That Dench pulled it off is not reason to do it again.

    If the producers are serious about reinvention, then do it. If they're not serious about reinvention, then why take all the time in the world, which they signaled at the end of NTTD. They killed Bond, Felix, and Blofeld. Might as well say goodbye to the rest of the cast as well. We'll have the music and the formula to remind us we are watching a Bond film, even if a younger, living Bond doesn't make sense. We can pretend the new adventure falls somewhere between QoS and NTTD or pass it off as existing in another timeline.

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Wherever the next Bond film goes, I hope it is done without any callbacks to the Craig era. I liked Craig as Bond if not everything about his films. Craig and the producers wanted that era to end with the death of Bond, so be it. Bury it. Forget it. Move on. Why would audiences need to be reminded of a dead Bond? Which is why I hope none of the previous cast reprise their roles. That Dench pulled it off is not reason to do it again.

    If the producers are serious about reinvention, then do it. If they're not serious about reinvention, then why take all the time in the world, which they signaled at the end of NTTD. They killed Bond, Felix, and Blofeld. Might as well say goodbye to the rest of the cast as well. We'll have the music and the formula to remind us we are watching a Bond film, even if a younger, living Bond doesn't make sense. We can pretend the new adventure falls somewhere between QoS and NTTD or pass it off as existing in another timeline.

    I would've been happy to see some of the case return simar to Desmond in Goldeneye or Dench in Casino, but it's been so long now that I think I agree, better to go with a clean slate and completely new version of the characters.

    I do hope that M Moneypenny and Q are all in the new film though.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,011
    What I would like for a bit of re-invention, is M, Moneypenny & Q not shown in the film, but Bond taking to them through the phone. This means Bond is already on his mission and doesn't need to see them. I would also like Bond to be on the move throughout Bond 26. He boards a plane, train, ship, checks into hotels, etc.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    edited February 11 Posts: 12,837
    SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ wrote: »
    What I would like for a bit of re-invention, is M, Moneypenny & Q not shown in the film, but Bond taking to them through the phone. This means Bond is already on his mission and doesn't need to see them. I would also like Bond to be on the move throughout Bond 26. He boards a plane, train, ship, checks into hotels, etc.

    I like the idea of Bond being introduced already on a mission, but I’m a bit bored of him constantly calling HQ or relaying everything back through an earpiece. I think you could take this approach and omit M/Q/MP entirely. Strip things down again to introduce the new Bond (maybe through the eyes of the Bond girl, like TSWLM, but not a direct adaptation) and it gives you a nice sequel hook too, wondering what the new MI6 team and his dynamic with them are like before we follow him back to London in Bond 27.
  • Scaramanga1974Scaramanga1974
    Posts: 724
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Scaramanga1974 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    TND has one of my favorite pre-title sequences ; it’s its own mini movie that also leads into the rest of the film.

    I go back to it so many times as a guilty pleasure that I think its a compulsion by now ;)

    Totally agree. Great pre-credits sequence in TND. I actually prefer it to GE where the effects are a little ropey and I can't stand the line " closing time James, last call. Remember to buy me a pint".

    Its actually Bond who says "Buy me a pint!" And I hated those lines too! Along with the cringey "For England James,"

    I know it was Bond saying it. I just condensed the sentence to save time.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,620
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Wherever the next Bond film goes, I hope it is done without any callbacks to the Craig era. I liked Craig as Bond if not everything about his films. Craig and the producers wanted that era to end with the death of Bond, so be it. Bury it. Forget it. Move on. Why would audiences need to be reminded of a dead Bond? Which is why I hope none of the previous cast reprise their roles. That Dench pulled it off is not reason to do it again.

    If the producers are serious about reinvention, then do it. If they're not serious about reinvention, then why take all the time in the world, which they signaled at the end of NTTD. They killed Bond, Felix, and Blofeld. Might as well say goodbye to the rest of the cast as well. We'll have the music and the formula to remind us we are watching a Bond film, even if a younger, living Bond doesn't make sense. We can pretend the new adventure falls somewhere between QoS and NTTD or pass it off as existing in another timeline.

    I hope so, too. EON is too attached to Craig, though. I think one of the main MI6 regulars will be back. It's fair, though. As for reinvention, it's the writing that needs to change, their trademarks have been getting stale.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,011
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ wrote: »
    What I would like for a bit of re-invention, is M, Moneypenny & Q not shown in the film, but Bond taking to them through the phone. This means Bond is already on his mission and doesn't need to see them. I would also like Bond to be on the move throughout Bond 26. He boards a plane, train, ship, checks into hotels, etc.

    I like the idea of Bond being introduced already on a mission, but I’m a bit bored of him constantly calling HQ or relaying everything back through an earpiece. I think you could take this approach and omit M/Q/MP entirely. Strip things down again to introduce the new Bond (maybe through the eyes of the Bond girl, like TSWLM, but not a direct adaptation) and it gives you a nice sequel hook too, wondering what the new MI6 team and his dynamic with them are like before we follow him back to London in Bond 27.

    Sounds alright, as well.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited February 11 Posts: 9,509
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Wherever the next Bond film goes, I hope it is done without any callbacks to the Craig era. I liked Craig as Bond if not everything about his films. Craig and the producers wanted that era to end with the death of Bond, so be it. Bury it. Forget it. Move on. Why would audiences need to be reminded of a dead Bond? Which is why I hope none of the previous cast reprise their roles. That Dench pulled it off is not reason to do it again.

    If the producers are serious about reinvention, then do it. If they're not serious about reinvention, then why take all the time in the world, which they signaled at the end of NTTD. They killed Bond, Felix, and Blofeld. Might as well say goodbye to the rest of the cast as well. We'll have the music and the formula to remind us we are watching a Bond film, even if a younger, living Bond doesn't make sense. We can pretend the new adventure falls somewhere between QoS and NTTD or pass it off as existing in another timeline.

    I hope so, too. EON is too attached to Craig, though. I think one of the main MI6 regulars will be back. It's fair, though. As for reinvention, it's the writing that needs to change, their trademarks have been getting stale.

    I dunno about this at all.

    I mean, EoN and Craig had a wildly successful run, and no doubt the actor and his producers became close friends.

    But the reality is, Craig's last film was released two and a half years ago. He's not coming back in any capacity, so it's kind of presumptuous to think he has such a hold on the hearts at EoN, that they'd bring back one of his castmates.

    I just dont see the logic.

    Whether one agrees, or not, they made a bold decision and killed this version of James Bond. Combined with the success of this era I imagine, from a creative and business perspective, bringing anyone back from the Craig Era would muddy the waters for audiences...

    My guess is they want to do everything they can to separate what will be the next era, to the one that came before. I just can't believe that Fiennes, Wishaw, Harris will return.

    As for the writing, I still see no problem bringing in the guys that the producers trust, to launch outlines and the first couple of drafts. Once again, things like the invisible car (that we got in the film), and Brofeld, came from others... And, to repeat myself: once any writer on any big tentpole film, starts to work on the outlines and scripts, they do so with the producer/studio notes already guiding them (before pen hits paper...)...
  • ForbseyForbsey Hampshire
    Posts: 8
    I know that the talk is about a relatively young actor so they can have a 4 or 5 film/ 15 year commitment to really explore the character arc and take itself very seriously..That’s what Craig did and fair enough, but it doesn’t need to happen every time. How about a change in approach and do a one off extravaganza with the biggest superstar available (probably Cavill) directed by…Quentin Tarantino.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,620
    peter wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Wherever the next Bond film goes, I hope it is done without any callbacks to the Craig era. I liked Craig as Bond if not everything about his films. Craig and the producers wanted that era to end with the death of Bond, so be it. Bury it. Forget it. Move on. Why would audiences need to be reminded of a dead Bond? Which is why I hope none of the previous cast reprise their roles. That Dench pulled it off is not reason to do it again.

    If the producers are serious about reinvention, then do it. If they're not serious about reinvention, then why take all the time in the world, which they signaled at the end of NTTD. They killed Bond, Felix, and Blofeld. Might as well say goodbye to the rest of the cast as well. We'll have the music and the formula to remind us we are watching a Bond film, even if a younger, living Bond doesn't make sense. We can pretend the new adventure falls somewhere between QoS and NTTD or pass it off as existing in another timeline.

    I hope so, too. EON is too attached to Craig, though. I think one of the main MI6 regulars will be back. It's fair, though. As for reinvention, it's the writing that needs to change, their trademarks have been getting stale.

    I dunno about this at all.

    I mean, EoN and Craig had a wildly successful run, and no doubt the actor and his producers became close friends.

    But the reality is, Craig's last film was released two and a half years ago. He's not coming back in any capacity, so it's kind of presumptuous to think he has such a hold on the hearts at EoN, that they'd bring back one of his castmates.

    I just dont see the logic.

    Whether one agrees, or not, they made a bold decision and killed this version of James Bond. Combined with the success of this era I imagine, from a creative and business perspective, bringing anyone back from the Craig Era would muddy the waters for audiences...

    My guess is they want to do everything they can to separate what will be the next era, to the one that came before. I just can't believe that Fiennes, Wishaw, Harris will return.

    As for the writing, I still see no problem bringing in the guys that the producers trust, to launch outlines and the first couple of drafts. Once again, things like the invisible car (that we got in the film), and Brofeld, came from others... And, to repeat myself: once any writer on any big tentpole film, starts to work on the outlines and scripts, they do so with the producer/studio notes already guiding them (before pen hits paper...)...

    I'm sorry for repeating myself. Some things do need to change for the future.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Wherever the next Bond film goes, I hope it is done without any callbacks to the Craig era. I liked Craig as Bond if not everything about his films. Craig and the producers wanted that era to end with the death of Bond, so be it. Bury it. Forget it. Move on. Why would audiences need to be reminded of a dead Bond? Which is why I hope none of the previous cast reprise their roles. That Dench pulled it off is not reason to do it again.

    If the producers are serious about reinvention, then do it. If they're not serious about reinvention, then why take all the time in the world, which they signaled at the end of NTTD. They killed Bond, Felix, and Blofeld. Might as well say goodbye to the rest of the cast as well. We'll have the music and the formula to remind us we are watching a Bond film, even if a younger, living Bond doesn't make sense. We can pretend the new adventure falls somewhere between QoS and NTTD or pass it off as existing in another timeline.

    I hope so, too. EON is too attached to Craig, though. I think one of the main MI6 regulars will be back. It's fair, though. As for reinvention, it's the writing that needs to change, their trademarks have been getting stale.

    I dunno about this at all.

    I mean, EoN and Craig had a wildly successful run, and no doubt the actor and his producers became close friends.

    But the reality is, Craig's last film was released two and a half years ago. He's not coming back in any capacity, so it's kind of presumptuous to think he has such a hold on the hearts at EoN, that they'd bring back one of his castmates.

    I just dont see the logic.

    Whether one agrees, or not, they made a bold decision and killed this version of James Bond. Combined with the success of this era I imagine, from a creative and business perspective, bringing anyone back from the Craig Era would muddy the waters for audiences...

    My guess is they want to do everything they can to separate what will be the next era, to the one that came before. I just can't believe that Fiennes, Wishaw, Harris will return.

    As for the writing, I still see no problem bringing in the guys that the producers trust, to launch outlines and the first couple of drafts. Once again, things like the invisible car (that we got in the film), and Brofeld, came from others... And, to repeat myself: once any writer on any big tentpole film, starts to work on the outlines and scripts, they do so with the producer/studio notes already guiding them (before pen hits paper...)...

    I'm sorry for repeating myself. Some things do need to change for the future.

    I agree but they will be organic.

    Like other companies, in film, tv and stage, often producers feel their ideas are best in the hands of people they trust.

  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,288
    Forbsey wrote: »
    I know that the talk is about a relatively young actor so they can have a 4 or 5 film/ 15 year commitment to really explore the character arc and take itself very seriously..That’s what Craig did and fair enough, but it doesn’t need to happen every time. How about a change in approach and do a one off extravaganza with the biggest superstar available (probably Cavill) directed by…Quentin Tarantino.

    If anyone can coax a passable performance out of Cavill, it is probably Tarantino.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,173
    Forbsey wrote: »
    I know that the talk is about a relatively young actor so they can have a 4 or 5 film/ 15 year commitment to really explore the character arc and take itself very seriously..That’s what Craig did and fair enough, but it doesn’t need to happen every time. How about a change in approach and do a one off extravaganza with the biggest superstar available (probably Cavill) directed by…Quentin Tarantino.

    The problem with a one-off is that if they do it well, we will eternally regret that there was never another one. OHMSS... Sigh.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,205
    I would like to them have a 10 to 12 year plan with an actor committed to 3 films in that time . It could either be a 3 film trilogy or 3 stand alone stories.

    A commitment to this timeframe, and number of films, also expands the age range of potential actors, with early 40’s back in play.

  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited February 11 Posts: 4,132
    I suspect it’s quite tricky having such a plan on a long term scale, especially when it comes to story decisions. It’d take much more time than approaching each film one by one, and I think there’s much to be said about being open to new ideas which often come in the heat of writing these scripts. Anyway, ideas are constantly scrapped when it comes to films, and better ones can take then in new and often better directions.

    For what it’s worth, I don’t think further long term planning would have benefitted the Craig era. I suspect they planned ahead more than we as fans believe (ie. I think on a broad level EON always intended for the Craig films to become more ‘traditional’/incorporate tropes and elements from the older films). Personally I don’t think the issue is that they later incorporated SPECTRE/Blofeld more than what they did with them.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,173
    I assume they want to test the waters again with every new entry in the series. How did audiences respond to the latest film? Had DAD made twice the amount of money it did and to rave reviews, there might've been another DAD in '04 for all I know.
  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 7,415
    talos7 wrote: »
    I would like to them have a 10 to 12 year plan with an actor committed to 3 films in that time . It could either be a 3 film trilogy or 3 stand alone stories.

    A commitment to this timeframe, and number of films, also expands the age range of potential actors, with early 40’s back in play.

    Isn't that what the usual contract for a Bond actor is, a 3 picture contract with the option of a fourth, Moore, Dalton ( he got out of his through circumstances, the long gap with the lawsuit) and Brosnan had them, not sure about Connery and Craig?
  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    Posts: 1,332
    The third is the charm. The actor needs time to be fully accepted
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,133
    DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »
    The third is the charm. The actor needs time to be fully accepted

    That didn't happen for Pierce Brosnan.
    talos7 wrote: »
    I would like to them have a 10 to 12 year plan with an actor committed to 3 films in that time. It could either be a 3 film trilogy or 3 stand alone stories.

    A commitment to this timeframe, and number of films, also expands the age range of potential actors, with early 40’s back in play.

    100% agree with you on this @talos7
    That timeframe gives EON the time to come up with a great story and script, and too make a (hopefully) great Bond film.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    Benny wrote: »
    DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »
    The third is the charm. The actor needs time to be fully accepted

    That didn't happen for Pierce Brosnan.

    Because he was accepted the day he took the job.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »
    The third is the charm. The actor needs time to be fully accepted

    That didn't happen for Pierce Brosnan.

    Because he was accepted the day he took the job.

    He was accepted before Dalton got the job. :D
  • BirdlesonBirdleson
    Posts: 2,161
    Yes, Pierce was the most universally welcome Bond that I have seen come along (and I've been alive for them all, but only remember the debuts of Moore/onward). Personally, I was dubious, I was much happier when Dalton got the role in his stead. When Pierce did step in, I was pleasantly surprised at his ability to become Bond.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,173
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Yes, Pierce was the most universally welcome Bond that I have seen come along (and I've been alive for them all, but only remember the debuts of Moore/onward). Personally, I was dubious, I was much happier when Dalton got the role in his stead. When Pierce did step in, I was pleasantly surprised at his ability to become Bond.

    Yes, and that happened almost thirty years ago. I remember the day well, when Brosnan was announced. I was too young to know the man. "My" Bond was Connery, simply because the Connery Bonds were playing most often in the house. GE, in any case, was a superb debut for Brosnan. He helped the film, and the film helped him.
  • Colonel_VenusColonel_Venus
    Posts: 579
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    I'm not saying Nolan will be the guy, but I think reports that he has left the picture have been greatly exaggerated. I still believe he is very much under consideration,
    I really hope you are right. The week following the Oscars would be the perfect time to announce Nolan. And if they did that, the near complete radio silence in 2023 would instantly make complete sense.
    sandbagger1 wrote: »
    I think it would make sense for Eon to go with Nolan for the prestige name, but the practicalities of finding a timeframe that works for both Nolan and Eon will probably scupper the idea.
    ? They don't need to find a timefrime. EON is ready to make a new film and so is Nolan. Right now.
  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    edited February 12 Posts: 1,332
    Murdock wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »
    The third is the charm. The actor needs time to be fully accepted

    That didn't happen for Pierce Brosnan.

    Because he was accepted the day he took the job.

    He was accepted before Dalton got the job. :D

    Brosnan needed 3 movies too. TLD, LTK and GE. ;)
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited February 12 Posts: 8,395
    DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »
    The third is the charm. The actor needs time to be fully accepted

    That didn't happen for Pierce Brosnan.

    Because he was accepted the day he took the job.

    He was accepted before Dalton got the job. :D

    Brosnan needed 3 movies too. TLD, LTK and GE. ;)

    That is true, haha. Goldeneye WAS Brosnans third movie.
  • Colonel_VenusColonel_Venus
    Posts: 579
    Does anyone here seriously find it likely that EON hasn't found their director yet? I find it more likely that they have, but have decided to keep it a secret for a little longer for some reason.
Sign In or Register to comment.