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
I always thought that Goldeneye Reloaded and Bloodstone filled out part of this gap. Quite well actually.
I mean if you define things only by the cinematic Bond's standards then sure, whatever, but that misses the point. All these films are just adaptations and continuations of original stories that involve a secret agent that didn't really "have fun" on his missions (except for his womanising). Sure you could have fun reading it in the more whimsical stories like Dr. No, Thunderball, or any of the times maybe Felix Leiter got involved, but Bond is never having fun: he's a professional doing an extravagant job.
I think it's also bizarre cinematic Bond should have some sort of aversion to revenge and revenge stories, when that is Bond's motivation for the first 5 or 6 books (specifically against SMERSH for what they've done to Vesper). Nevermind the fact that Bond's job is revenge for Her Majesty (or His in modern day stories). Fleming's "airport literature" never descended in the comedy and parody that we see in Moonraker or Die Another Day.
Even Casino Royale, one of the top three direct adaptations, has a more cinematic tone with location hopping, and a more grandiose mood than the tense one in the novel. (I mean it's also clear that Bond is very much in love in the novel. He becomes Vesper's playtoy and is at her command in a way that we've never seen in a Bond film. He also considers leaving the service for her.)
Quick comment on the "non-Bond films" since TND: since when did Bond films have a gimmick? What's the gimmick in FRWL or TLD? Never the fact one could say things like female villain (and the best villain in terms of manipulating Bond). QOS is a poorly put together film, but Bond's characterisation is very source accurate: Craig is a ruthless killer, an efficient professional with a brash streak that's also socially aware and funny. Bond's malaise in Skyfall until he is demanded to fight for his country is also directly from YOLT. Where Craig failed was taking itself too seriously over the last two films where both the plots were not serious and plot-hole ridden. (Imagine Skyfall's mood on TMWTGG or DAF!)
One thing in which I do agree is the comments on Bond's relevance. Not that it's really in doubt now (and realistically it wasn't over the past 10 years anyway). Things like industrial espionage are on the rise, and if the 2nd Cold War was brewing before it's certainly happening now. But sorry, I don't want "fun" in the next film; I want an espionage story that is pacy and atmospheric like Fleming's early novels.
I fear if they hire Nolan or Villeneuve it will be (mostly) exactly this - a Craig 2.0.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I get the feeling that they don't want to deviate much from the Craig era in terms of style and tone.
I think with a new actor come new possibilities. A new actor won’t be Craig and there are things he will want to do that exhibit his strengths. The films may still be grounded, but with a new lead in the role, new stories to tell and a new director, then it will feel fresh, because it is: seen through the eyes of the new guy… (and I doubt we will have the suicide -death of a lover as the inciting incident of the new guy’s run)…
Yes, @Denbigh … even in an alternate universe but it was Cavill in CR-NTTD, it would have been presented in a very different way to suit the actor and what he brings to the role.
I don't know why "work harder" has become synonymous with being more cerebral and less concerned with escapism. If you want to evolve the formula, you can take one simple idea you want to explore, keep everything else the same and overlay it on the standard bond formula that has existed since goldfinger, fine tune where needed and voiala! There's no need throw the baby out with the bathwater, and lose the escapist fun of Bond in order to have an story that engages a modern audience. I'm not saying it's easy, but it is possible to tell a story with a bit of depth without having to directly compromise on being an escapist thrill ride like TND. My issue isn't that bond films shouldn't have ideas, but that the formula, flow and breezy feel of a bond shouldn't take a backseat so that those ideas can work. There's no reason why that should have to be the case IMO.
IMO, Casino (but they had a good reason with this one), Quantum, Skyfall, SPECTRE and B25 all compromise or moderate their fantasy escapist bond aspect, in order to put greater emphasis on the depth of storytelling and I can see why it was justified with Casino, and even Skyfall, because their stories DID justify it, however with the other three I just don't understand, and I don't think they earned it. A engaging, modern story doesn't have to come at the expense of a fun ride with imagination and high on rewatchability factor - they should fit hand in glove.
What'd ya say?? It’s kinda win/win for all (you get to actually live out your perfect Bond film that came from your most brilliant mind, and you don’t have to come on here and complain anymore! Then perhaps you could engage in actual discussions with the other members, instead of pontificating about what “we” want. Come on! Give it a go!!)
I’ll take that as a ‘no’ to my question then. 😂 No worries.
When you put it like that, it’s so easy.
I wonder why EON haven’t already done that.
It will come from the world’s greatest brain.
And EoN can’t possibly live up to your standards, so this way you get to read the finest screenplay ever written, you get to act the scenes out in your bedroom, and you don’t have to come on here, pontificating in a ten thousand word essay what EoN *should* be doing, not wagging your finger and telling us what *we* want.
Like I said before: win/win.
Then perhaps you can just join friendly conversation and debate with respect and maybe you won’t automatically think you’re right on everything (let alone some things)…
@Benny I'm not sure if this is sarcasm benster, but I'll treat it as sincere - because its extremely difficult I would imagine. Trying to craft a script that balances all the existing aspects of Bond formula, which is already very complicated, and then layer some kind of subtle weightiness on top and have it all hold together nicely is not a task for the faint of heart.
I mean, yes it does. My point is that the writers haven't cracked how to merge these two sides together yet. Once they figure out how to intergrate the sophisticated storytelling into the existing formula so that it can be applied to any kind of story, then they will have the key to unlock some great bond stories. Remember, weightiness doesn't have to come from staring out over a misty moor, or sat in your dressing gown gazing wistfully at a photo with one of the faces burnt out. You can have a story with some dramatic heft, but it's not necessarily referred to in every line of dialogue, or alluded in a poem read at a public hearing. As long as its communicated clearly, it will have the intended effect.
Skiing was one of the biggest things I missed throughout the Craig era. And we came oh so close with SP - not just having the snowy environment, but I'm pretty sure one of the original scripts had an epic skiing chase written in.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-13245179/bond-film-remake-sydney-sweeney-zendaya-aaron-taylor-johnson-007.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=social-twitter_mailonline
And it *could be* a remake!
And going back to the tone of the Brosnan pics!
And (sigh), pretty sad they lifted the Villeneuve rumour off of this site, 😂!!
EDIT: if they kept their lie about a secret audition to 2022, instead of now saying it happened last year when there were no writers working due to the strikes, and then the actors went on strike, it’d still be a terrible and lying piece of nonsense, but shifting the auditions where there was not one, but two strikes that killed the year (and ALMOST a third, but the DGA got out unscathed), just dropped their BS to -100 on the truth meter.
Once again, I’m not saying ATJ won’t be Bond (although I don’t think so), but this stuff, everything they’ve written is utter nonsense (and I wish I could drop a few F-bombs in there too, 😂)…
A more sobering report in Entertainment Weekly wrote on Friday:
“While a recent report claimed that Kraven the Hunter star Aaron Taylor-Johnson had been offered the role and would replace Daniel Craig as Bond, a source close to the situation told EW that no official offer had been made.”
https://ew.com/eiza-gonzalez-rooting-henry-cavill-next-james-bond-8621796
So the question here is is @DEKE_RIVERS and @Mendes4Lyfe going to believe what a reputable entertainment media discovered via their source, or, are they going to believe the two rags, and the only two, to say he was offered the role (and should have signed two weeks ago now)?
We already have @Mendes4Lyfe and his answer….
https://medium.com/texas-mccombs/movie-studios-build-buzz-with-fake-film-tweets-c1ad0a470f7a
. “And on the flip side of that, I know producers who are like, ‘Yeah, if I throw a pyramid with an eye on it somewhere in my film, all the crazies on YouTube come out and I get three times as many views.’”
More people talking about a movie will, almost inevitably, lead to more interest and therefore bigger box office." Forbes 2020
I've put the above links or quotes because, on a serious note, what I believe is happening here is what the film industry has been playing since about 2015 and onwards:
Studios are known, have been caught, but continue to plant fake news stories in the tabloids. These fake news stories are planted to either take down a competing film, or bring your own potential project up.
And if I was to guess where these "sources" (that are only speaking to The Sun or The Mail (because the big entertainment media will be able to vet all "sources" and would blow the cover off of this bad agents), are coming from, I'd say it's someone associated to the Kraven film. Their actor is going to sign as Bond (and when this Kraven film comes out, he will still be ready to sign, but just not yet...), and he's going to be surrounded by hot, young, "it" Euphoria actresses...
And once this film is released (but still bombs), these tabloid reports will die with it...
Once again, this isn't me saying ATJ won't be Bond , but he will win it via the appropriate chain of procedure (you need a script, director, and then call in the Big Boys)...
EDIT: And please read the first article about how lies can go viral ( people on here said about these rumours, where there's smoke, there's fire. This explains it)...
And honestly @Mendes4Lyfe , these guys have told us everything, that EoN now has NO announcement to make. Do you really think they'd let that happen?? Truthfully, don't you think they'd have got in front of the *next* article if there was any accuracy on this casting???
Just like when the wolves closed in in Craig's mum, they expedited his announcement. Well, these lies about ATJ have been going on for two weeks and, basically everything, from the suits, to the amount of films, to the colour of his underwear have been revealed. But nothing from EoN.
This is a rotten Studio plant and I'd guess it's someone from Kraven The Hunter...
I just think EON are likely to release the film in Oct/Nov, and if we presume that 2026 is the target, then it makes sense we would start to get some credible information. The other possibility is that NOTHING is happening, the stories about Villeneuve and ATJ are false, and we aren't likely to see another Bond until 2027. :-<
I mean, for God's sake, they're saying the surviving Bond members are going to be at the unveiling (they won't be), so if this is true, what's left to the pomp of EoN's big announcement?
What's left?
Nothing.
Absolutely nothing.
But EoN hasn't stepped in because none of this is real. It's fake.
This is a studio plant.
The Fall Guy doesn't need any help to bolster numbers. Not at all.
But we all know what Sony has been creating recently, and with Madame Web being the latest to get annihilated, someone on Kraven is doing anything they can to have a big opening weekend.
This is all bullsh!t, none of what they've written has any accuracy.
(But yes, I still believe Villeneuve is the main candidate but not because of this article (I've been saying the Villeneuve thing since mid February, at least, and that has been gleaned by chatting with smarter people than me whom are in the thick of big productions, and then what the director himself has dropped.
And yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if some of these hacks have perused a site like this and lifted the Villeneuve storyline (it'll be about the only thing they get right).
Ah, the good kind of SS.
Bye, bye, Villeneuve.
Maybe EON don't want Nolan.
Maybe Nolan doesn't like the way EON want to go.
Maybe EON and Nolan have discussed things behind closed doors, and neither could come to an agreement.
Maybe Nolan wants too much creative control.
Maybe Villeneuve has a great plan / story to bring in a new Bond era.
Maybe EON don't want Villeneuve or Nolan because Bond 26 isn't at the stage of needing a director yet.
Maybe EON haven't even started writing a script for Bond 26.
Maybe we'll get some news when EON are ready to share something worthwhile.
Maybe EON do read the pages here, and laugh and laugh and laugh.
You choose one.
Maybe Nolan doesn't like the way EON want to go. -> it would be a bad strategic move on EON's part to decide which way to go BEFORE hearing pitches from writers/directors
Maybe EON and Nolan have discussed things behind closed doors, and neither could come to an agreement. -> sure, it's possible, and in this case I would be siding with Nolan. He has a much better track record than EON does and I do believe he has a better understanding of Bond than they do
Maybe Nolan wants too much creative control. -> giving Nolan TOTAL creative control to make a Bond film woud be one of the least risky decisions a producer can make
Maybe EON don't want Villeneuve or Nolan because Bond 26 isn't at the stage of needing a director yet. -> you cannot get a director such as Nolan or Villeneuve without involving them in the script writing process
Maybe EON haven't even started writing a script for Bond 26. -> that would be alarming considering the last Bond film premiered over 2 years ago and was completely finished 4 years ago.
Maybe we'll get some news when EON are ready to share something worthwhile. -> we will get substantial news months before that. we always do.
Maybe EON do read the pages here, and laugh and laugh and laugh. -> hopefully they are spending their time in a more productive way, like making Bond 26
It doesn't need to be protracted. The gap between NTTD and Bond 26 isn't big because they have been searching for a big name director. Also, if they right now wanted Bond 26 to get made as quickly as possible, they should hire Nolan.
Nolan's next movie (whether that's Bond 26 or something else) will very likely get released in the summer of 2026. If EON hires someone other than Nolan, Bond 26 very likely won't be released before late 2026.