Where does Bond go after Craig?

1547548550552553691

Comments

  • Posts: 566
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Talkative patrons flashing smartphones would be better phrased. But does gossiping women really count as a dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women?

    Yes because it reflects an implicit bias — associating the out-group with a negative trait.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,359
    Cell phones are what are killing movies.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,250
    BMB007 wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Streaming killed the theater experience as well. We all got used to just waiting for it to come out on one of the many services since it's cheaper than going out to see it. Figure 10 years ago, if you missed it in theaters, you had to wait months before renting or buying only on a physical platform. 20 years ago it was even longer

    This I agree with. In the '90s it was "disastrous" not to be able to see a highly anticipated film in the theatre; it took about a year for most films to be released on VHS. Nowadays, there's hardly a difference between theatrical and home cinema releases. I haven't felt the need to go to cinemas post-COVID, except for NTTD and The Batman. I used to spend about 3 nights per week in cinemas. Granted, I'm a family man, now, but that's not the only explanation. A little patience, and you're able to see a film in the comfort of your home. Better than having an expensive ticket ruined by loud teens, gossiping women and flashing smartphones. Only a handful of cinema releases get me excited anymore to make it to their premiere.

    Gossiping women? I don't think any user — let alone a moderator — should engage in snide, casual misogyny. Men can talk just as loud in a theater as women.

    Mysogyny? Seriously? Well, I apologize then.

    In truth, I had two theatrical experiences destroyed by rows of, well, women spending most of the film talking ugly about other people. Both times they wouldn't be silenced. No "mysogyny" intended, friend. And may I also suggest you don't just drop accusations of mysogyny when someone is talking about gossiping women, @BMB007. I don't recall saying that all women are gossiping something-somethings who shouldn't be allowed in the theatre when we, men, are trying to enjoy a movie. That would be much closer to mysogyny. I merely referred to the people who have so far ruined a movie for me: loud teens, gossiping women, and folks who couldn't leave their smartphones pocketed and off.
  • edited May 27 Posts: 4,273
    I think people forget that even Fury Road wasn’t a smash hit by any means and only made around £380 million in 2015. I wasn’t expecting this new Mad Max film (which doesn’t seem to have Mad Max in it?) to be a huge hit either really, at least financially. To be honest I don’t think Mad Max is a franchise whose success is measured completely by its profits. Its appeal/core fan base is relatively limited, and the critical success/word of mouth of Fury Road was its big win. Fall Guy just came off as a Netflix film that got released theatrically (I didn’t personally feel I’d miss anything if I didn’t see it in the cinema). Truth be told it’s actually just not a good selection of summer releases this year. Deadpool and Wolverine’s the one I’ve seen the most hype for, and that’s an R rated film.

    Even more recent theatrical failures have a bit of context. I don’t think many people were exactly hyped for a new Indiana Jones film (I think the good will the franchise had for such a return had faded years after Crystal Skull) and again, would anything have been missed not seeing this film in the cinema? Ford returning to his iconic former roles isn’t exactly uncommon nowadays. Marvel films suffer from overproduction and a lack of quality nowadays too. No reason to pay to see those, especially when the later ones seem to be about lesser known superheroes no one cares about.

    Better (and probably more hopeful) indicators for Bond would be The Batman, or perhaps more accurately The Batman Part 2. The first one didn’t break a billion, but considering it’s an explicitly dark, slow moving neo noir take on the character it did exceptionally well, and fans were happy. The hype and advertising around it were solid. I guess we’ll see how Part 2 fares, as it’ll likely come out not too far away from Bond 26. Then you’ve got the new Superman film (not to say Superman’s a character with a consistent cinematic track record, and I’m not sure how many people really care about the character compared to Batman or even Bond, but if that film can get a healthy profit that’ll be a win. I’m not expecting it to break a billion personally, especially based on previous Superman films, but it’d be great if it did).

    No doubt streaming’s had an impact on what films people are more likely to go and see theatrically. Older people are less likely to go to the cinema nowadays too (which is natural - many probably wouldn’t have interest in the likes of Marvel, and as most people get older the idea of sitting in a dark room for 2-3 hours with other people gets less appealing). It’s something the big companies/franchises of the film industry are still getting to grips with, and in a particularity bad year for summer releases it’ll be felt. I think Bond has every chance of doing well even in this context though.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,250
    007HallY wrote: »
    I think people forget that even Fury Road wasn’t a smash hit by any means and only made around £380 million in 2015. I wasn’t expecting this new Mad Max film (which doesn’t seem to have Mad Max in it?) to be a huge hit either really, at least financially. To be honest I don’t think Mad Max is a franchise whose success is measured completely by its profits. Its appeal/core fan base is relatively limited, and the critical success/word of mouth of Fury Road was its big win. Fall Guy just came off as a Netflix film that got released theatrically (I didn’t personally feel I’d miss anything if I didn’t see it in the cinema). Truth be told it’s actually just not a good selection of summer releases this year. Deadpool and Wolverine’s the one I’ve seen the most hype for, and that’s an R rated film.

    Even more recent theatrical failures have a bit of context. I don’t think many people were exactly hyped for a new Indiana Jones film (I think the good will the franchise had for such a return had faded years after Crystal Skull) and again, would anything have been missed not seeing this film in the cinema? Ford returning to his iconic former roles isn’t exactly uncommon nowadays. Marvel films suffer from overproduction and a lack of quality nowadays too. No reason to pay to see those, especially when the later ones seem to be about lesser known superheroes no one cares about.

    Better (and probably more hopeful) indicators for Bond would be The Batman, or perhaps more accurately The Batman Part 2. The first one didn’t break a billion, but considering it’s an explicitly dark, slow moving neo noir take on the character it did exceptionally well, and fans were happy. The hype and advertising around it were solid. I guess we’ll see how Part 2 fares, as it’ll likely come out not too far away from Bond 26. Then you’ve got the new Superman film (not to say Superman’s a character with a consistent cinematic track record, and I’m not sure how many people really care about the character compared to Batman or even Bond, but if that film can get a healthy profit that’ll be a win. I’m not expecting it to break a billion personally, especially based on previous Superman films, but it’d be great if it did).

    No doubt streaming’s had an impact on what films people are more likely to go and see theatrically. Older people are less likely to go to the cinema nowadays too (which is natural - many probably wouldn’t have interest in the likes of Marvel, and as most people get older the idea of sitting in a dark room for 2-3 hours with other people gets less appealing). It’s something the big companies/franchises of the film industry are still getting to grips with, and in a particularity bad year for summer releases it’ll be felt. I think Bond has every chance of doing well even in this context though.

    Excellent post, @007HallY!
  • Posts: 1,425
    I wouldn't bet on the success of Superman. Too many unknowns.
  • Posts: 4,273
    Depends on what you mean by success. Superman Legacy’s main financial hurdle is that its budget is massive, which is a risk given it’s Gunn’s first DC entry. First films in these sort of new eras often set a good, but not explosive record, and work on increasing returns. It’s really the quality of the film, how it resonates with audiences, hype for future instalments etc which are key.

    Lesser known actors in something recognisable like Superman can be a positive though. Christopher Reeve was lesser known too. It’s easier to build them up as these characters/have the public accept them in this particular role without worrying about if they’re playing against type etc.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,438
    I agree with most of that except I don't think Bond 26 will be dropping in the vicinity of Batman Part 2. Its basically June now and if a new Bond era were launching in 2 years and change I think we'd know something about it by now. IMO it's far more likely that the videogame is used to tide over fans, since that's already been in development for over 3 years already, and then the serious business of a Bond reboot happens either in line with the 65th anniversary in 2027, or sometime in 2028. I really feel like they want to see the start of a new cinematic revival and direction, like we saw in the mid 2000's with the "gritty reboot". That doesn't really exist at the moment, not clearly defined, so the smart move is probably to wait it out. Its not like we already have an encumbant bond, and the clock is ticking before he gets too old, like, say, Pattinson as Batman - EON can take as long as they need to.
  • edited May 27 Posts: 1,425
    007HallY wrote: »
    Depends on what you mean by success. Superman Legacy’s main financial hurdle is that its budget is massive, which is a risk given it’s Gunn’s first DC entry. First films in these sort of new eras often set a good, but not explosive record, and work on increasing returns. It’s really the quality of the film, how it resonates with audiences, hype for future instalments etc which are key.

    Lesser known actors in something recognisable like Superman can be a positive though. Christopher Reeve was lesser known too. It’s easier to build them up as these characters/have the public accept them in this particular role without worrying about if they’re playing against type etc.

    Yeah, but they had Brando, Hackman, etc.

    Anyway, being a "good movie" isn't enough these days.
  • edited May 27 Posts: 4,273
    007HallY wrote: »
    Depends on what you mean by success. Superman Legacy’s main financial hurdle is that its budget is massive, which is a risk given it’s Gunn’s first DC entry. First films in these sort of new eras often set a good, but not explosive record, and work on increasing returns. It’s really the quality of the film, how it resonates with audiences, hype for future instalments etc which are key.

    Lesser known actors in something recognisable like Superman can be a positive though. Christopher Reeve was lesser known too. It’s easier to build them up as these characters/have the public accept them in this particular role without worrying about if they’re playing against type etc.

    Yeah, but they had Brando, Hackman, etc.

    Anyway, being a "good movie" isn't enough these days.

    Fair enough, those names could have been a factor. I don’t think name recognition is everything though, especially in something like Superman. We’ll see I suppose.

    Success for each film is kinda an individual thing. Like I said, Fury Road wasn’t a massive financial success at all strictly speaking. But it’s because it was a ‘good film’ that it has the reputation it does today. The Batman didn’t need to make a billion as a) it’s the first film of this new era and b) it’s a very particular type of film - a three hour long neo noir - a type that often doesn’t have mass appeal. But certainly the perceived quality of the film benefited it. Lots of films simply aren’t likely to be big moneymakers, and if they enjoy good audience or critical reception (the sort of ‘that film was a lot more fun than I thought it was going to be’ reaction) then it can find its audience and reach its financial potential.
    I agree with most of that except I don't think Bond 26 will be dropping in the vicinity of Batman Part 2. Its basically June now and if a new Bond era were launching in 2 years and change I think we'd know something about it by now. IMO it's far more likely that the videogame is used to tide over fans, since that's already been in development for over 3 years already, and then the serious business of a Bond reboot happens either in line with the 65th anniversary in 2027, or sometime in 2028. I really feel like they want to see the start of a new cinematic revival and direction, like we saw in the mid 2000's with the "gritty reboot". That doesn't really exist at the moment, not clearly defined, so the smart move is probably to wait it out. Its not like we already have an encumbant bond, and the clock is ticking before he gets too old, like, say, Pattinson as Batman - EON can take as long as they need to.

    I dunno, I try not to make predictions (where possible), but from my understanding it would depend ultimately on the film/what EoN have put in place (ie. What scale is the film itself, how many locations, have preliminary things been put in place before official pre-production - potential actors, crew etc. how far have they developed the story). In theory you could have an official pre-production at the end of this year and get this film by 2026, but there’s so much we don’t know. Filmmaking at this level isn’t a science.

    I suppose what I meant by The Batman Part 2 and Bond 26 being released around the same time is (potentially) within a year apart from each other. But I admit I didn’t word it well and likely broke my own rule about not making predictions haha. And for context that film’s been pushed to late 2026.

    But I really don’t know. Could be 2026, could be 2028 for all I know.
  • edited May 27 Posts: 2,022
    This old person doesn't mind sitting in a darkened cinema for 2-3 hours if a film is worth my time, which there seems to be less of these days.

    Of the box office top 200 films in 2023, I saw 17 of those films, only five of which interested me enough to pay a visit to the cinema. Two of those I should have waited until they streamed.

    These are the top ten films of 2023, of which I only saw Oppenheimer.

    Barbie.
    The Super Mario Brothers
    Spiderman.
    Guardians of the Galaxy.
    Oppenheimer.
    The Little Mermaid.
    Avatar.
    Ant-Man.
    John Wick 4.
    Sound of Freedom.

    Looking at the top ten list and thinking about the audiences for most of these films, I wonder how much those tastes will influence the next Bond.
  • edited May 27 Posts: 4,273
    CrabKey wrote: »
    This old person doesn't mind sitting in a darkened cinema for 2-3 hours if a film is worth my time, which there seems to be less of these days.

    Of the box office top 200 films in 2023, I saw 17 of those films, only five of which interested me enough to pay a visit to the cinema. Two of those I should have waited until they streamed.

    These are the top ten films of 2023, of which I only saw Oppenheimer.

    Barbie.
    The Super Mario Brothers
    Spiderman.
    Guardians of the Galaxy.
    Oppenheimer.
    The Little Mermaid.
    Avatar.
    Ant-Man.
    John Wick 4.
    Sound of Freedom.

    Looking at the top ten list and thinking about the audiences for most of these films, I wonder how much those tastes will influence the next Bond.

    I suppose it plays into what else I said - namely people beyond that 40+ age bracket don’t always care about a lot of films released nowadays (my ‘they’re not interested in Marvel’ comment). I mean, it makes sense. I suspect at any given time in cinema it’s been the same though, regardless of the quality of said films/the era they’re in. People just lose interest if they think it’s ’not for them’.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,250
    I think multiple reasons can be found for deminishing interest in the cinema experience:
    • Ticket and concession prices
    • Improved home cinema equipment
    • Faster releases on BR, DVD and streaming
    • Noisy audiences, smartphones, ...
    • Busy life (kids, job, ...)
    • Cinema habits still not fully recovered from COVID-19
    • Too much junk in the program
    • Changing tastes
    • ...

    If there were one or two big causes, I'm sure film companies would have already taken steps to change their ways.
  • Posts: 4,273
    Yeah, there’s definitely a few reasons. But a good Bond film can definitely stand out and even be very successful. If anything this year’s releases is missing something like Bond, something that’s escapist and thrilling, but also familiar/reliable enough even with a new lead.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,438
    The ultimate one true cause is that films have been playing it extremely safe for over a decade, and the pandemic woke people up to that reality. When you look at Fast X, Thor Love and Thunder, The Flash, The Little Mermaid, Aquaman 2, Ghostbuster Frozen Empire, these are barely even trying to deliver something original or interesting, it's just the most transparent, cynical capitalising off IP and brand recognition and doing what we know has worked in the past, only worse. Even if the next Bond film only has a 150 - 170 million production budget they need to do something out of the box that will genuinely catch the interest of a new generation, whilst remaining true to the legacy the series has built for itself.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,359
    CrabKey wrote: »
    This old person doesn't mind sitting in a darkened cinema for 2-3 hours if a film is worth my time, which there seems to be less of these days.

    Of the box office top 200 films in 2023, I saw 17 of those films, only five of which interested me enough to pay a visit to the cinema. Two of those I should have waited until they streamed.

    These are the top ten films of 2023, of which I only saw Oppenheimer.

    Barbie.
    The Super Mario Brothers
    Spiderman.
    Guardians of the Galaxy.
    Oppenheimer.
    The Little Mermaid.
    Avatar.
    Ant-Man.
    John Wick 4.
    Sound of Freedom.

    Looking at the top ten list and thinking about the audiences for most of these films, I wonder how much those tastes will influence the next Bond.

    Perhaps if you tried some indie films/films from up-and-coming directors, who also influence the culture and ultimately Bond, you'd be a little more hopeful about the prospects of cinema?

    I can't believe I'm using this example of a film that wasn't in the top ten in its year but ultimately proved influential to blockbuster cinema but...

    Memento.
  • Posts: 2,022
    @007HallY - Fair enough. As a matter of interest, of those top 10, which did you see?
  • edited May 27 Posts: 4,273
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @007HallY - Fair enough. As a matter of interest, of those top 10, which did you see?

    Barbie, Oppenheimer, Guardians, John Wick, Spiderman, Super Mario. John Wick was more my thing to be honest, and I’m a fan of the previous films. I liked Guardians and Spiderman but I don’t tend to keep up with Marvel that much (though I know people who were really excited for these particular films). Oppenheimer was good but not really my thing, and I wasn’t a fan of Barbie.

    Super Mario I’m pretty sure I was drunk watching but it was a nice night out. The film didn’t leave much of an impression though. None were my favourite films I saw that year or anything (except John Wick 4) but all had their audiences. I didn’t bother with Avatar as I didn’t enjoy the first one. The others I wasn’t bothered about seeing and simply didn’t have the time/chance.
  • Posts: 1,425
    echo wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    This old person doesn't mind sitting in a darkened cinema for 2-3 hours if a film is worth my time, which there seems to be less of these days.

    Of the box office top 200 films in 2023, I saw 17 of those films, only five of which interested me enough to pay a visit to the cinema. Two of those I should have waited until they streamed.

    These are the top ten films of 2023, of which I only saw Oppenheimer.

    Barbie.
    The Super Mario Brothers
    Spiderman.
    Guardians of the Galaxy.
    Oppenheimer.
    The Little Mermaid.
    Avatar.
    Ant-Man.
    John Wick 4.
    Sound of Freedom.

    Looking at the top ten list and thinking about the audiences for most of these films, I wonder how much those tastes will influence the next Bond.

    Perhaps if you tried some indie films/films from up-and-coming directors, who also influence the culture and ultimately Bond, you'd be a little more hopeful about the prospects of cinema?

    I can't believe I'm using this example of a film that wasn't in the top ten in its year but ultimately proved influential to blockbuster cinema but...

    Memento.

    Nolan! ;)

    I don't think EON can discover a new Nolan.
  • Posts: 2,022
    For me part of the success of the Bond films is the periodic changing of actors. I hated it the first time it happened, but it was inevitable and I got used to it, even if I didn't care for RM and PB as Bonds. With the exception of the story arc during the Craig era, Bond films don't rely on a history to understand the current film, unlike Star Wars and the Marvel/DC series. In that sense there is a freshness to Bond films I appreciate. And I am fine with a younger actor in the role of Bond. But he has to own the role to sell it. It won't be about the stunts, the set pieces, and CGI. It will be whether the new actor can introduce himself as Bond, James Bond that convinces us he is indeed the real deal.
  • Posts: 1,864
    On top of all the other things that films in general have going against them at the moment, NTTD did not feel as uplifting, other than in the Cuba sequences, as the usual Bond film and may also affect the audiences excitement to rush out to a theater see the next one.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,438
    delfloria wrote: »
    On top of all the other things that films in general have going against them at the moment, NTTD did not feel as uplifting, other than in the Cuba sequences, as the usual Bond film and may also affect the audiences excitement to rush out to a theater see the next one.

    Very true.
  • Posts: 4,273
    I don't think that'll matter at all. The gap will be long enough between films, we'll have had a Bond video game, a reality TV show, and all kinds of rumours of ATJs/other actors getting the role/a build up to it that no one will care about NTTD.

    The closest they'll get to an issue around this is perhaps someone's Mum or Dad saying at the dinner table 'I thought they killed off Bond in the last one' followed by whoever saying that this will be a new film, and like the new Batman films a new 'universe'. Dependent on the parent/conversation it'll either get drawn out a bit or they'll just shrug and say 'oh' and move on. Apart from that I really don't think that many will care.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    007HallY wrote: »
    I don't think that'll matter at all. The gap will be long enough between films, we'll have had a Bond video game, a reality TV show, and all kinds of rumours of ATJs/other actors getting the role/a build up to it that no one will care about NTTD.

    The closest they'll get to an issue around this is perhaps someone's Mum or Dad saying at the dinner table 'I thought they killed off Bond in the last one' followed by whoever saying that this will be a new film, and like the new Batman films a new 'universe'. Dependent on the parent/conversation it'll either get drawn out a bit or they'll just shrug and say 'oh' and move on. Apart from that I really don't think that many will care.

    Exactly 👍🏻. By the time the new actor is introduced, set pics are leaked, the first trailer and commercials are everywhere, and finally, when the film is released, no one will be thinking about NTTD!
  • Posts: 12,514
    I don’t know if anyone is even thinking / caring about NTTD right now, or really has been for a couple years now. Whenever I hear James Bond brought up in day to day, non-cyber life, I don’t really see it singled out these days for better or for worse. If people bring up Craig, it’s always still CR or SF it seems like, and often more just about the older films or series in general. I think everyone’s just ready for whatever’s next, although I do wonder / worry just a little how big the appetite is with the general public for more Bond.
  • edited May 27 Posts: 1,425
    Yeah, Craig's Bond is not a problem.

    The issue is the gap. They have to win over a new audience.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I don’t know if anyone is even thinking / caring about NTTD right now, or really has been for a couple years now. Whenever I hear James Bond brought up in day to day, non-cyber life, I don’t really see it singled out these days for better or for worse. If people bring up Craig, it’s always still CR or SF it seems like, and often more just about the older films or series in general. I think everyone’s just ready for whatever’s next, although I do wonder / worry just a little how big the appetite is with the general public for more Bond.

    We saw the media explode when the Sun fabricated their ATJ nonsense. People here wanted to believe it. People on the street thought it happened. Other media published the rubbish (oh yeah, what happened to he’s signing by the end of the week, shot the gun barrel, suits were being measured and contracts of three to four films were being negotiated, 😂!).

    I don’t think we have to worry about the appetite of filmgoers.

    The issue is getting the right man, telling the right story, and let their marketing team do their job.

    Bond is fine.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited May 27 Posts: 2,179
    peter wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I don’t know if anyone is even thinking / caring about NTTD right now, or really has been for a couple years now. Whenever I hear James Bond brought up in day to day, non-cyber life, I don’t really see it singled out these days for better or for worse. If people bring up Craig, it’s always still CR or SF it seems like, and often more just about the older films or series in general. I think everyone’s just ready for whatever’s next, although I do wonder / worry just a little how big the appetite is with the general public for more Bond.

    We saw the media explode when the Sun fabricated their ATJ nonsense. People here wanted to believe it. People on the street thought it happened. Other media published the rubbish (oh yeah, what happened to he’s signing by the end of the week, shot the gun barrel, suits were being measured and contracts of three to four films were being negotiated, 😂!).

    I don’t think we have to worry about the appetite of filmgoers.

    The issue is getting the right man, telling the right story, and let their marketing team do their job.

    Bond is fine.

    I couldn't agree more. Bond fever has no cure. It's always present. Also, there are a whole lot of things in a Bond film than any other film, that's why the interest never dies. People want to know the new Bond actor, the new gunbarrel design, the gunbarrel pose, the gunbarrel music, the title song artist, the title song, the composer, the new set of beautiful women... curiosity increases towards the women and villains, because the actors are not the usual faces they know, the new Bond gadget/car, the villain's look, the locales, etc.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited May 27 Posts: 9,511
    peter wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I don’t know if anyone is even thinking / caring about NTTD right now, or really has been for a couple years now. Whenever I hear James Bond brought up in day to day, non-cyber life, I don’t really see it singled out these days for better or for worse. If people bring up Craig, it’s always still CR or SF it seems like, and often more just about the older films or series in general. I think everyone’s just ready for whatever’s next, although I do wonder / worry just a little how big the appetite is with the general public for more Bond.

    We saw the media explode when the Sun fabricated their ATJ nonsense. People here wanted to believe it. People on the street thought it happened. Other media published the rubbish (oh yeah, what happened to he’s signing by the end of the week, shot the gun barrel, suits were being measured and contracts of three to four films were being negotiated, 😂!).

    I don’t think we have to worry about the appetite of filmgoers.

    The issue is getting the right man, telling the right story, and let their marketing team do their job.

    Bond is fine.

    I couldn't agree more. Bond fever has no cure. It's always present. Also, there are a whole lot of things in a Bond film than any other film, that's why the interest never dies. People want to know the new Bond actor, the new gunbarrel design, the gunbarrel pose, the gunbarrel music, the title song artist, the title song, the composer, the new set of beautiful women... curiosity increases towards the women and villains, because the actors are not the usual faces they know, the new Bond gadget/car, the villain's look, the locales, etc.

    I’m with you @SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ … when a Fast and Furious Film is released or a DC film, or a Marvel flick, it’s the same old, same old. Plenty of CG and green screens and loud noises.

    A James Bond film offers an exclusive ride with many different elements to enjoy outside of the man himself. There is humour. There’s Q-branch and gadgets. The cars. The in-camera stunt work. The theme song and artist and a rich soundtrack. Costumes and locales and a script that is likely to be far more intelligent than the average popcorn flick.

    Bond is fine.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,179
    peter wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I don’t know if anyone is even thinking / caring about NTTD right now, or really has been for a couple years now. Whenever I hear James Bond brought up in day to day, non-cyber life, I don’t really see it singled out these days for better or for worse. If people bring up Craig, it’s always still CR or SF it seems like, and often more just about the older films or series in general. I think everyone’s just ready for whatever’s next, although I do wonder / worry just a little how big the appetite is with the general public for more Bond.

    We saw the media explode when the Sun fabricated their ATJ nonsense. People here wanted to believe it. People on the street thought it happened. Other media published the rubbish (oh yeah, what happened to he’s signing by the end of the week, shot the gun barrel, suits were being measured and contracts of three to four films were being negotiated, 😂!).

    I don’t think we have to worry about the appetite of filmgoers.

    The issue is getting the right man, telling the right story, and let their marketing team do their job.

    Bond is fine.

    I couldn't agree more. Bond fever has no cure. It's always present. Also, there are a whole lot of things in a Bond film than any other film, that's why the interest never dies. People want to know the new Bond actor, the new gunbarrel design, the gunbarrel pose, the gunbarrel music, the title song artist, the title song, the composer, the new set of beautiful women... curiosity increases towards the women and villains, because the actors are not the usual faces they know, the new Bond gadget/car, the villain's look, the locales, etc.

    I’m with you @SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ … when a Fast and Furious Film is released or a DC film, or a Marvel flick, it’s the same old, same old. Plenty of CG and green screens and loud noises.

    A James Bond film offers an exclusive ride with many different elements to enjoy outside of the man himself. There is humour. There’s Q-branch and gadgets. The cars. The in-camera stunt work. The theme song and artist and a rich soundtrack. Costumes and locales and a script that is likely to be far more intelligent than the average popcorn flick.

    Bond is fine.

    Exactly! =D>
Sign In or Register to comment.