Where does Bond go after Craig?

1567568570572573698

Comments

  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited June 13 Posts: 9,511
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Nothing personal. Though you are both referencing different things, the comments posted close together amused me.

    My reply was also supposed to be amusing. Guess that landed with a dull thud. Oh well, lol

    @Mendes4Lyfe and @DEKE_RIVERS ... I hope you're not comparing Bond to a spin-off Mad Max prequel.

    If so, apples and oranges, 😂
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 951
    With Furiosa I think the studio hoped the critical praise and DVD/Blu-ray sales that Fury Road generated post-release would translate into cinemagoers for the next instalment, and that didn't happen. It might be that a female-led action movie which puts your handsome male co-star in tatters and a fake nose was just the wrong combination, with a large percentage of male action-film fans not sufficiently interested in a female lead, and a female audience not interested in a world where everyone looks like ****?

    Or it might be simply that post-Covid a movie has to be both good AND hit the cultural zeitgeist, which will be a problem for everybody.

    Barbie, like Bond, is an old brand with a high level of cultural penetration. Bond might be immune to the problems that films like The Fall Guy are suffering. I'm guessing Barbara Broccoli and Eon are discussing how cutting the budget for a Bond film will look bearing in mind that in the Craig era they have really sold the franchise as a prestige, money-on-the-screen film series. Can the new film turn a profit if they hire top-name people in front of and behind the camera? If they go for a smaller film with less famous names, will it hurt the perception of the brand? For that matter, are the big brands that pay the Bond franchise money for product placement still willing to pay out in this current box-office environment, especially without Daniel Craig as the star?

    I'm glad I don't have to make those sort of decisions, I have no idea which way I'd jump. Big, expensive, spectacular or smaller, tighter and less spectacle driven?
  • edited June 13 Posts: 1,462
    John Wick 4 budget was $100 million. It looks cheaper than a regular Bond movie but It's OK if they want a more gritty approach.

    The new Bond will be cheaper than Craig too, so It is not impossible to lower the budget.

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited June 13 Posts: 8,455
    170 million is a good mark for Bond 26, I think. Same budget as Top Gun Maverick, enough to feel grand and cinematic, but not too bloated like SPECTRE with ridiculous 300 million.
  • Posts: 4,310
    The interest just wasn’t there for Furiosa. Even Fury Road wasn’t a big financial hit (it’s worth saying that even with the first three Mad Max films they had to make adjustments in order to sell it in America/abroad - dubbing over Australian slang in the first one, changing the title of the second to Road Warrior in America to avoid sequel bias etc).

    Bond of course is a different beast, but yes, they’ll have to think about where to go creatively. And like I said there’s really no inherently ‘obvious’ choices this time round (we certainly don’t have something like Bourne/a rival series which is outshining Bond by filling a creative gap).
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,691
    To keep a tighter budget, the art department could just redress some Doctor Who props. 😅
  • Posts: 2,171
    The next Bond actor wont be paid $25m, unlike Craig for NTTD, so that will help.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,264
    When The Force Awakens released they benefitted from there only being 3 STAR WARS films (4 if you count CLONE WARS) in the past 30 years, and the film was a runaway success. Do you think Bond 26 could benefit and become more successful because there's only been 5 new Bond films since 2003?

    I think in some respects time is relative. We don't see a new Bond film for 4 years, and it feels like something is wrong, but then it's been 4 years since the last Bad Boys movie, and that feels almost like they came out back to back.

    I think we have fewer movies because they are more successful.


    I think it's a double-edged sword.

    Furiosa flopped. Nobody cared after 9 years.

    Good point.

    And then there's Avatar 2. Once again, stop trying to find patterns where there are none. These discussions are becoming sillier by the day.
  • Posts: 4,310
    There could well be a ‘back to basics’ approach that might mean a slightly smaller budget. I’d be up for that dependent on what they want to do with the story.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,393
    170 million is a good mark for Bond 26, I think. Same budget as Top Gun Maverick, enough to feel grand and cinematic, but not too bloated like SPECTRE with ridiculous 300 million.

    Filming in Italy is expensive. ;) ;) ;)
  • meshypushymeshypushy Ireland
    Posts: 146
    John Wick 4 budget was $100 million. It looks cheaper than a regular Bond movie but It's OK if they want a more gritty approach.

    The new Bond will be cheaper than Craig too, so It is not impossible to lower the budget.
    I had no idea Wick 4 was made for such a low budget. They did an excellent job making that stretch!
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    Posts: 1,676
    meshypushy wrote: »
    John Wick 4 budget was $100 million. It looks cheaper than a regular Bond movie but It's OK if they want a more gritty approach.

    The new Bond will be cheaper than Craig too, so It is not impossible to lower the budget.
    I had no idea Wick 4 was made for such a low budget. They did an excellent job making that stretch!

    And keep in mind that's also with inflated salaries of returning actors and also bringing in major new talent with Donnie Yen. With all that in mind, JW4 does not look cheap at all. Could look way more... bright and show off locations a little better in some scenarios, but that's not what the JW franchise is.
  • meshypushymeshypushy Ireland
    Posts: 146
    LucknFate wrote: »
    meshypushy wrote: »
    John Wick 4 budget was $100 million. It looks cheaper than a regular Bond movie but It's OK if they want a more gritty approach.

    The new Bond will be cheaper than Craig too, so It is not impossible to lower the budget.
    I had no idea Wick 4 was made for such a low budget. They did an excellent job making that stretch!

    And keep in mind that's also with inflated salaries of returning actors and also bringing in major new talent with Donnie Yen. With all that in mind, JW4 does not look cheap at all. Could look way more... bright and show off locations a little better in some scenarios, but that's not what the JW franchise is.
    Absolutely - it certainly looks like a movie where every dollar spent ended up on the screen.

    Of all the recent franchise releases, I enjoyed JW4 the most and it’s certainly a great example of how to execute a successful movie of that style on a smaller budget.

    It does feel like JW is to Bond what Bourne was 20 years ago, considering that MI almost feels too similar to the Bond formula to be something that could inspire a major change in direction (not assuming that EON will feel the need to respond to competition, in the way they clearly did with CR).

    I think I need a rewatch of JW4 - I am genuinely amazed that the budget for that was so low.
  • Posts: 4,310
    I wouldn’t say JW is the equivalent of Bourne back in ‘05. If anything I get the sense that SF had a little bit of influence on the first JW in minor ways (the lighting and camerawork of the club shootout always reminded me of the Shanghai fight in that film anyway). I suppose we get the long staircase take in NTTD (though it reminds me more of Atomic Blonde) with some of the camerawork bearing similarities to later Wick films, so there’s a bit of stylistic back and forth there, however intentional. Then again of course the ending of both JW4 and NTTD have their similarities too (I don’t think Wick was influenced by Bond in this regard necessarily, just to clarify. I’m just saying they’re not dissimilar thematically). The takeaway though is I don’t think JW was filling a gap that Bond was lacking. I think John Wick is a great series by the way.

    MI certainly isn’t an existential threat to Bond either now, agreed. The only thing I can think of that might have an influence over Bond 26 is Reeve’s Batman series (it’s obviously a film which reboots a younger version of an iconic character and his world so it makes sense that they may end up having creative similarities, similar to how CR and Batman Begins shared a reboot concept despite being very different films in many other ways).
  • Posts: 1,462
    007HallY wrote: »
    I wouldn’t say JW is the equivalent of Bourne back in ‘05. If anything I get the sense that SF had a little bit of influence on the first JW in minor ways (the lighting and camerawork of the club shootout always reminded me of the Shanghai fight in that film anyway). I suppose we get the long staircase take in NTTD (though it reminds me more of Atomic Blonde) with some of the camerawork bearing similarities to later Wick films, so there’s a bit of stylistic back and forth there, however intentional. Then again of course the ending of both JW4 and NTTD have their similarities too (I don’t think Wick was influenced by Bond in this regard necessarily, just to clarify. I’m just saying they’re not dissimilar thematically). The takeaway though is I don’t think JW was filling a gap that Bond was lacking. I think John Wick is a great series by the way.

    MI certainly isn’t an existential threat to Bond either now, agreed. The only thing I can think of that might have an influence over Bond 26 is Reeve’s Batman series (it’s obviously a film which reboots a younger version of an iconic character and his world so it makes sense that they may end up having creative similarities, similar to how CR and Batman Begins shared a reboot concept despite being very different films in many other ways).

    Reeve's Batman is boring as hell.

    That movie makes NTTD look like Octopussy
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited June 13 Posts: 2,187
    Gosh! Furiosa's flop was shocking. But then again, I don't think people really wanted another Mad Max film. It looks like Will Smith & Martin Lawrence are here to save the box office, though.
    As for Bond, I've never had any box office doubt towards 007. It's always an event with 007. There's always frenzy whenever Bond is at the cinemas.
  • edited June 13 Posts: 4,310
    007HallY wrote: »
    I wouldn’t say JW is the equivalent of Bourne back in ‘05. If anything I get the sense that SF had a little bit of influence on the first JW in minor ways (the lighting and camerawork of the club shootout always reminded me of the Shanghai fight in that film anyway). I suppose we get the long staircase take in NTTD (though it reminds me more of Atomic Blonde) with some of the camerawork bearing similarities to later Wick films, so there’s a bit of stylistic back and forth there, however intentional. Then again of course the ending of both JW4 and NTTD have their similarities too (I don’t think Wick was influenced by Bond in this regard necessarily, just to clarify. I’m just saying they’re not dissimilar thematically). The takeaway though is I don’t think JW was filling a gap that Bond was lacking. I think John Wick is a great series by the way.

    MI certainly isn’t an existential threat to Bond either now, agreed. The only thing I can think of that might have an influence over Bond 26 is Reeve’s Batman series (it’s obviously a film which reboots a younger version of an iconic character and his world so it makes sense that they may end up having creative similarities, similar to how CR and Batman Begins shared a reboot concept despite being very different films in many other ways).

    Reeve's Batman is boring as hell.

    That movie makes NTTD look like Octopussy

    In your opinion. I loved it personally.

    And the point still stands 🤷 I can’t think of any other rival franchise film that’s likely to have any sort of creative similarity to the next Bond. We’ll see though.
    Gosh! Furiosa's flop was shocking. But then again, I don't think people really wanted another Mad Max film. It looks like Will Smith & Martin Lawrence are here to save the box office, though.
    As for Bond, I've never had any box office doubt towards 007. It's always an event with 007. There's always frenzy whenever Bond is at the cinemas.

    I’m honestly surprised Furiosa even got made. I know Fury Road had a great word of mouth/audience and critical reception, but even pre Covid I don’t think this would have been a massive success.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,255
    007HallY wrote: »
    I wouldn’t say JW is the equivalent of Bourne back in ‘05. If anything I get the sense that SF had a little bit of influence on the first JW in minor ways (the lighting and camerawork of the club shootout always reminded me of the Shanghai fight in that film anyway). I suppose we get the long staircase take in NTTD (though it reminds me more of Atomic Blonde) with some of the camerawork bearing similarities to later Wick films, so there’s a bit of stylistic back and forth there, however intentional. Then again of course the ending of both JW4 and NTTD have their similarities too (I don’t think Wick was influenced by Bond in this regard necessarily, just to clarify. I’m just saying they’re not dissimilar thematically). The takeaway though is I don’t think JW was filling a gap that Bond was lacking. I think John Wick is a great series by the way.

    MI certainly isn’t an existential threat to Bond either now, agreed. The only thing I can think of that might have an influence over Bond 26 is Reeve’s Batman series (it’s obviously a film which reboots a younger version of an iconic character and his world so it makes sense that they may end up having creative similarities, similar to how CR and Batman Begins shared a reboot concept despite being very different films in many other ways).

    Reeve's Batman is boring as hell.

    That movie makes NTTD look like Octopussy

    I have to say, I totally agree with you on this one: I found almost no enjoyment out of Reeves' Batman.
  • edited June 13 Posts: 4,310
    It’s not a film for everyone. Like I said I thought it was great (personally found it much more interesting than any of Nolan’s Batmans. Certainly better made on a filmmaking level than those last two efforts).

    More importantly though it seemed to have a good reaction amongst Batman fans. For the first instalment of this new series (and considering it’s in the style of a dark neo-noir) it did great financially. And it showed you could do something fresh even with another reboot of the character. Not saying the next Bond will be a dark, part grounded part impressionistic broody neo noir though!
  • meshypushymeshypushy Ireland
    Posts: 146
    007HallY wrote: »
    I wouldn’t say JW is the equivalent of Bourne back in ‘05. If anything I get the sense that SF had a little bit of influence on the first JW in minor ways (the lighting and camerawork of the club shootout always reminded me of the Shanghai fight in that film anyway). I suppose we get the long staircase take in NTTD (though it reminds me more of Atomic Blonde) with some of the camerawork bearing similarities to later Wick films, so there’s a bit of stylistic back and forth there, however intentional. Then again of course the ending of both JW4 and NTTD have their similarities too (I don’t think Wick was influenced by Bond in this regard necessarily, just to clarify. I’m just saying they’re not dissimilar thematically). The takeaway though is I don’t think JW was filling a gap that Bond was lacking. I think John Wick is a great series by the way.

    MI certainly isn’t an existential threat to Bond either now, agreed. The only thing I can think of that might have an influence over Bond 26 is Reeve’s Batman series (it’s obviously a film which reboots a younger version of an iconic character and his world so it makes sense that they may end up having creative similarities, similar to how CR and Batman Begins shared a reboot concept despite being very different films in many other ways).
    Fully agreed on Reeves’ Batman - for me, it feels like it’s coming from a similar place to Wick. Like Wick, it felt sufficiently ‘fresh’ and distinct enough from what came before to justify its existence.

    I had assumed that if EON were to be influenced by any contemporary ‘direction’, it would be in that domain (which I would not be opposed to).
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    Gosh! Furiosa's flop was shocking. But then again, I don't think people really wanted another Mad Max film. It looks like Will Smith & Martin Lawrence are here to save the box office, though.
    As for Bond, I've never had any box office doubt towards 007. It's always an event with 007. There's always frenzy whenever Bond is at the cinemas.

    I had a good feeling that if Fury Road was a box office disappointment, a prequel to it nine years on wasn't going to perform any better. I'm not sure what they were thinking on that one.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited June 13 Posts: 2,187
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Gosh! Furiosa's flop was shocking. But then again, I don't think people really wanted another Mad Max film. It looks like Will Smith & Martin Lawrence are here to save the box office, though.
    As for Bond, I've never had any box office doubt towards 007. It's always an event with 007. There's always frenzy whenever Bond is at the cinemas.

    I had a good feeling that if Fury Road was a box office disappointment, a prequel to it nine years on wasn't going to perform any better. I'm not sure what they were thinking on that one.

    Yeah. Plus, Mad Max isn't exactly a franchise that's universally loved. It showed in Fury Road's box office. Even with huge names like Theron & Hardy, it wasn't a huge hit.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Gosh! Furiosa's flop was shocking. But then again, I don't think people really wanted another Mad Max film. It looks like Will Smith & Martin Lawrence are here to save the box office, though.
    As for Bond, I've never had any box office doubt towards 007. It's always an event with 007. There's always frenzy whenever Bond is at the cinemas.

    I had a good feeling that if Fury Road was a box office disappointment, a prequel to it nine years on wasn't going to perform any better. I'm not sure what they were thinking on that one.

    Yeah. Plus, Mad Max isn't exactly a franchise that's universally loved. It showed in Fury Road's box office. Even with huge names like Theron & Hardy, it wasn't a huge hit.

    Exactly. Big talent like that attached along with almost near universal glowing praise for it and it still couldn't deliver in a pre-pandemic box office. They should have at least doubled down with a tighter sequel, not taken almost a decade for a prequel that's more CGI heavy and doesn't have any of the same big names returning.
  • edited June 13 Posts: 4,310
    To be fair to Fury Road its audience and critical response were legitimately great. I think it had a bit of a second life after its release as well (I know people who would say it’s one of the best action films of all time, even though most didn’t go to see it in the cinema nor were they aware Mad Max was a franchise). So maybe that was the reason…

    Still though, it doesn’t make any sense considering Mad Max isn’t even in this one… so yeah I agree, I’m really not sure what they were expecting here, especially with its budget.
  • Posts: 1,871
    Personally, I would prefer a lower budgeted Bond film. Not that it should be $13 million like Godzilla but it proves that you can still make a great movie for WAY under $200 million. I do know, that from talking to some of the crew on the last few Bond films, that things do get out of hand and out of focus when you have too much money to throw at problems instead of figuring out hard won creative solutions.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,233
    Nobody outside of the Bond community thinks of the films in terms of overall scope but rather fragmented via actor. Causal audiences are not looking at the Barbara/Michael run from 1995 to present and thinking “good god, they didn’t make as many Bond films as their father!”

    So when the new Bond does arrive, they’re not gonna gripe about how it’s been too long, because this is a new Bond, not a continuation of the same actor.
  • Posts: 2,029
    After watching the British series Spooks/MI-5 (Yes, very late to this party), I am convinced more than ever I don't want the next Bond films to be about current world affairs. I can read about that stuff in the news. A little humor, a little whimsy, and a wee bit of the fantastical would be nice to see again. Perhaps that's what the writers were going for with Safin. Unfortunately he was so dreadfully boring, he was more lethal than the nanobots.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 951
    I liked Safin's look and the opening scene with him in, he just didn't get enough screen time to do much. NTTD had too much to do and I think he was a casualty.
  • Posts: 1,871
    I liked Safin's look and the opening scene with him in, he just didn't get enough screen time to do much. NTTD had too much to do and I think he was a casualty.

    His motivations and the attack on the island were a muddled mess of logic at best. What did he want? Why did he take Matilde just let her go a moment later? Couldn't the arriving cargo ships be stopped before or after they reached the island, etc? It was more than a lack of screen time.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,624
    delfloria wrote: »
    I liked Safin's look and the opening scene with him in, he just didn't get enough screen time to do much. NTTD had too much to do and I think he was a casualty.

    His motivations and the attack on the island were a muddled mess of logic at best. What did he want? Why did he take Matilde just let her go a moment later? Couldn't the arriving cargo ships be stopped before or after they reached the island, etc? It was more than a lack of screen time.

    I've never really had a problem with that stuff. I know 'he's mad' isn't very satisfying, but he wants people to die because he is very damaged. There's a bit of a hint that he's into eugenics with the 'I want the world to evolve!' stuff, but otherwise we know he just wants to kill people.
    He wants Matilde as a sort of trophy but when she turns trouble he just dumps her: he doesn't care about her either way.
    As for blowing up the boats, I guess M has enough of a diplomatic situation on his hands already what with firing on a Chinese island; when they don't know whose their boats are, when they might even belong to other foreign powers, then they avoid more possible wars by destroying the island before they get there.
Sign In or Register to comment.