Where does Bond go after Craig?

1604605607609610697

Comments

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,256
    As someone who professionally spends a lot of time with the younger Gen Z'ers, let me tell you what I fear. Many of my enthusiastic younglings can barely look at the same scene without losing focus. Many of them hardly find anything worth their time anymore unless it's an endless succession of swipeable TikTok videos. With the exception of the really big tween-pleasing series like F&F, Avatar, Jurassic Park and some Disney crap, they hardly care about films anymore. Stuff about psychos, homicidal maniac and such is a big hit too, especially when they are told how "real" it all is. But that's pretty much it.

    When I was 18, I had consumed and discussed dozens if not hundreds of films made years to decades before I was born. Most of my students haven't even heard of The Matrix, The Terminator, Dirty Harry, ... Teaching with scenes from Bond films is easy for me, since most of my students haven't seen a Bond film before NTTD.

    I just don't think they are the target audience yet.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,452
    007HallY wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    @007HallY
    If EON is smart, they should maybe cater more to the generation Z audience in the next one, much like the Aliens franchise has done with their newest. One thing that can make me restore faith in the franchise, is if I see 13 year-old kids excited about a new Bond movie again (and buying their tickets themselves instead of being dragged along by their dads). One way of doing it:
    The next films need to be fun escapism

    Well, most of us are in our 20s to be honest...

    I think they just need to make the best modern Bond film they can with a strong lead (who will inevitably be younger even if compared to the previous Bond anyway). Try to make sure the film is relevant for today as others have said, and get the best people they can to make and star in it. I don't really know what specifically they can do to 'cater' to Gen Z, and making a film 'fun escapism' means absolutely nothing without specifics (truth is it's something I can imagine a well meaning but slightly out of touch middle aged advertising executive saying).

    Every bond film exists somewhere on the spectrum between hardboiled, dark and serious on the one hand, and light, campy, spectacle on the other. After the death of Bond followed by a long absence during which the world has changed drastically (remember, Bond 25 wrapped in late 2019), they need to come back on a strong, triumphant note with another Spy Who Loved Me, Octopussy, Goldeneye type adventure. Ofcourse they can massage in some characterisation and depth as most bond films manage to, but the broad strokes need to recapture that essential magic of the series for a new generation. The old Bond films are now so old that young people will find it hard to go back and watch, but the tone and style of those films is absolutely worth bringing into the modern era.
  • Posts: 4,300
    Perhaps EON can hire some sort of Social Media intern to create some Bond memes... that'll resonate with da kids.
    007HallY wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    @007HallY
    If EON is smart, they should maybe cater more to the generation Z audience in the next one, much like the Aliens franchise has done with their newest. One thing that can make me restore faith in the franchise, is if I see 13 year-old kids excited about a new Bond movie again (and buying their tickets themselves instead of being dragged along by their dads). One way of doing it:
    The next films need to be fun escapism

    Well, most of us are in our 20s to be honest...

    I think they just need to make the best modern Bond film they can with a strong lead (who will inevitably be younger even if compared to the previous Bond anyway). Try to make sure the film is relevant for today as others have said, and get the best people they can to make and star in it. I don't really know what specifically they can do to 'cater' to Gen Z, and making a film 'fun escapism' means absolutely nothing without specifics (truth is it's something I can imagine a well meaning but slightly out of touch middle aged advertising executive saying).

    Every bond film exists somewhere on the spectrum between hardboiled, dark and serious on the one hand, and light, campy, spectacle on the other. After the death of Bond followed by a long absence during which the world has changed drastically (remember, Bond 25 wrapped in late 2019), they need to come back on a strong, triumphant note with another Spy Who Loved Me, Octopussy, Goldeneye type adventure. Ofcourse they can massage in some characterisation and depth as most bond films manage to, but the broad strokes need to recapture that essential magic of the series for a new generation. The old Bond films are now so old that young people will find it hard to go back and watch, but the tone and style of those films is absolutely worth bringing into the modern era.

    I agree that Bond exists between hardboiled and light (really like that description).

    I'd say every Bond film tries to capture that Bond magic, and I'd say every film has done it. But getting it right this time for a new era will be important. I don't know about an OP style adventure (I'm not sure if the more absurd fourth wall breaking humour like the Tarzan yell will resonate today, much as I love it) or even a TSWLM type one (it's very much a grandiose Bond film that I think an era needs to build up to a bit). Anyway, them and GE are all different films.

    I guess for me it simply depends on what exactly they're going to do.
  • Posts: 3,278
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    As someone who professionally spends a lot of time with the younger Gen Z'ers, let me tell you what I fear. Many of my enthusiastic younglings can barely look at the same scene without losing focus. Many of them hardly find anything worth their time anymore unless it's an endless succession of swipeable TikTok videos.
    Oh, so you are a teacher, too? That's my day you are describing, right there. But I just find them clueless. If I throw on Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade everyone is glued to the screen for two hours. Likewise they actually like music from Louis Armstrong, Queen etc. But someone has to introduce them to cultural gold. It's hardly found on TikTok. And their parents are busy being glued to their own screens.
  • Posts: 1,650
    This issue is broad. Teachers observe - for elementary school-age children, not just teenagers - a lack of ability to focus, to complete a sentence, a lack of care about paying attention...ugh
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,256
    Zekidk wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    As someone who professionally spends a lot of time with the younger Gen Z'ers, let me tell you what I fear. Many of my enthusiastic younglings can barely look at the same scene without losing focus. Many of them hardly find anything worth their time anymore unless it's an endless succession of swipeable TikTok videos.
    Oh, so you are a teacher, too? That's my day you are describing, right there. But I just find them clueless. If I throw on Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade everyone is glued to the screen for two hours. Likewise they actually like music from Louis Armstrong, Queen etc. But someone has to introduce them to cultural gold. It's hardly found on TikTok. And their parents are busy being glued to their own screens.

    I agree. We can still introduce them to good material. I wish parents would throw in a few efforts towards cultural enlightenment as well. ;-)
    Since62 wrote: »
    This issue is broad. Teachers observe - for elementary school-age children, not just teenagers - a lack of ability to focus, to complete a sentence, a lack of care about paying attention...ugh

    And that is why a traditional Bond film, despite its many thrills, may not be thrilling enough unless it's all condensed to 90 minutes, a suggestion I've actually read in this forum.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited August 20 Posts: 8,452
    Think about it. Alien romulus is a success because it took a style, presentation and tone of a 45 year old movie, and made it feel accessible and fresh for a young person today (meaning late teens/20's). That's what Bond should be looking to do next time, take its cultural legacy and make it accessible to a new audience. There really is no need to think too much outside the box, because the freshness of setting things in a modern context, as apposed to the 80's films cracking jokes about the price of eggs and such, will suffice.

    To put it simply, if it ain't broke don't fix it. B-)
  • edited August 20 Posts: 4,300
    It's a weird age being 13-14. I must admit, I wasn't great at most classes at school at that age, and I can imagine being talked about like this by certain teachers (I didn't actually read for pleasure until I was 15 which is a habit I'm glad I got into subsequently but unfortunately didn't stem from school, and beyond Bond films I didn't exactly have much film knowledge. Except in the one or two classes I was good at I'm sure my concentration left a lot to be desired).

    Like I said, I have cousins in their late teens, and from about 13/14 they were pretty clued up on older films, books, music etc, and it's very much to do with the internet/easy access nowadays. A lot of their friends that age are really into 80s media for some reason, which is kinda cool.
  • edited August 20 Posts: 399
    There's been more ghostbusters films in the past decade than Bond films.

    Let that sink in.

    And the GB films are far less successful. Doesn’t this just prove quality over quantity?
    There's been more ghostbusters films in the past decade than Bond films.

    Let that sink in.

    It's not that hard. They made 4 John Wick movies since SF.

    I’m assuming you’ve never actually made a film or participated in a film’s production.

    Mod edit: double post merged. Please use the edit button.
  • Posts: 1,870
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    As someone who professionally spends a lot of time with the younger Gen Z'ers, let me tell you what I fear. Many of my enthusiastic younglings can barely look at the same scene without losing focus. Many of them hardly find anything worth their time anymore unless it's an endless succession of swipeable TikTok videos. With the exception of the really big tween-pleasing series like F&F, Avatar, Jurassic Park and some Disney crap, they hardly care about films anymore. Stuff about psychos, homicidal maniac and such is a big hit too, especially when they are told how "real" it all is. But that's pretty much it.

    When I was 18, I had consumed and discussed dozens if not hundreds of films made years to decades before I was born. Most of my students haven't even heard of The Matrix, The Terminator, Dirty Harry, ... Teaching with scenes from Bond films is easy for me, since most of my students haven't seen a Bond film before NTTD.

    I just don't think they are the target audience yet.

    I brought up generational divides a few months ago and got push back that it really was not a thing. The simple existence of this forum, used primarily by younger viewers, is itself a generational divider. We don't hear a lot from the 50-80 year old fans here. It would seem to me that that, reading the above, generational division will be EON's toughest adversary in finding just the right tone for the new Bond. I wonder if the fans brought up on the Craig era will feel as displaced as the fans brought up in Connery era sometimes feel if EON misses the mark.
  • Posts: 4,300
    delfloria wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    As someone who professionally spends a lot of time with the younger Gen Z'ers, let me tell you what I fear. Many of my enthusiastic younglings can barely look at the same scene without losing focus. Many of them hardly find anything worth their time anymore unless it's an endless succession of swipeable TikTok videos. With the exception of the really big tween-pleasing series like F&F, Avatar, Jurassic Park and some Disney crap, they hardly care about films anymore. Stuff about psychos, homicidal maniac and such is a big hit too, especially when they are told how "real" it all is. But that's pretty much it.

    When I was 18, I had consumed and discussed dozens if not hundreds of films made years to decades before I was born. Most of my students haven't even heard of The Matrix, The Terminator, Dirty Harry, ... Teaching with scenes from Bond films is easy for me, since most of my students haven't seen a Bond film before NTTD.

    I just don't think they are the target audience yet.

    I brought up generational divides a few months ago and got push back that it really was not a thing. The simple existence of this forum, used primarily by younger viewers, is itself a generational divider. We don't hear a lot from the 50-80 year old fans here. It would seem to me that that, reading the above, generational division will be EON's toughest adversary in finding just the right tone for the new Bond. I wonder if the fans brought up on the Craig era will feel as displaced as the fans brought up in Connery era sometimes feel if EON misses the mark.

    I'm not sure if it's something you can avoid really. It's a series which has been around for so long and in many different iterations (even the films within a single actor's tenure can be different from each other/have its divides with fans). Like I said, I'm sure in the 70s/80s there were fans who were in their late teens when they watched the 60s films and may well have felt the Moore/Dalton films weren't Bond movies as they knew them.

    It's generally a minority from what I can tell though. I think people on the whole are excited by a new Bond movie and will want to enjoy it.
  • Posts: 3,278
    delfloria wrote: »
    We don't hear a lot from the 50-80 year old fans here.
    I am 54, so I guess I belong to a minority group here.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited August 20 Posts: 24,256
    I wouldn't be so sure, @Zekidk. When @delfloria joined us, the forum (KTBEU) was over ten years old. This community is steadily approaching its 25th birthday. At least some "originals" are still here; and if they were--say--in their late 20s or older then, they are (close to) 50+ now. I know for a fact that several of our members are in their 50s (and older).
  • Posts: 1,870
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I wouldn't be so sure, @Zekidk. When @delfloria joined us, the forum (KTBEU) was over ten years old. This community is steadily approaching its 25th birthday. At least some "originals" are still here; and if they were--say--in their late 20s or older then, they are (close to) 50+ now. I know for a fact that several of our members are in their 50s (and older).

    This poses yet another possible conundrum I had not thought of. Are Bond forums actually atrophying and aging out themselves because the new generation of filmgoers are not seeking out and joining Bond forums like this one?
  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    edited August 20 Posts: 556
    delfloria wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I wouldn't be so sure, @Zekidk. When @delfloria joined us, the forum (KTBEU) was over ten years old. This community is steadily approaching its 25th birthday. At least some "originals" are still here; and if they were--say--in their late 20s or older then, they are (close to) 50+ now. I know for a fact that several of our members are in their 50s (and older).

    This poses yet another possible conundrum I had not thought of. Are Bond forums actually atrophying and aging out themselves because the new generation of filmgoers are not seeking out and joining Bond forums like this one?

    I got into Bond around the time of Skyfall and I'm in my twenties now. So theres that.

    But on the topic of Bond in the cultural zeitgeist, I think there was a return of sort to the Bondmania on the level that it was in the 60s back in, oh, '11-'16.

    I think Skyfall and the 50th anniversary, Olympics and the like got a lot of people in Bond fever and that continued for a while, but after Spectre I think it waned a bit and i feel like a bit of malaise set in and increasingly so after NTTD.

    I think some people were turned off by both Sp and Nttd but in different ways. I hope the next one can get us back on track.


  • Posts: 1,870
    delfloria wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I wouldn't be so sure, @Zekidk. When @delfloria joined us, the forum (KTBEU) was over ten years old. This community is steadily approaching its 25th birthday. At least some "originals" are still here; and if they were--say--in their late 20s or older then, they are (close to) 50+ now. I know for a fact that several of our members are in their 50s (and older).

    This poses yet another possible conundrum I had not thought of. Are Bond forums actually atrophying and aging out themselves because the new generation of filmgoers are not seeking out and joining Bond forums like this one?

    I got into Bond around the time of Skyfall and I'm in my twenties now. So theres that.

    But on the topic of Bond in the cultural zeitgeist, I think there was a return of sort to the Bondmania on the level that it was in the 60s back in, oh, '11-'16.

    I think Skyfall and the 50th anniversary, Olympics and the like got a lot of people in Bond fever and that continued for a while, but after Spectre I think it waned a bit and i feel like a bit of malaise set in and increasingly so after NTTD.


    There is always a natural quiet downturn between films.

    The success of SF definitely encouraged a slew of spy films in the following couple of year which include Spy, U.N.C.L.E. and the next MI.

    Believe me, there has never been ANYTHING close to the spy craze of the mid '60s. The entire world's pop culture changed and was gripped by Bondmania and it's spin offs. Nobody had ever seen anything like Bond.
  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    Posts: 556
    delfloria wrote: »
    delfloria wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I wouldn't be so sure, @Zekidk. When @delfloria joined us, the forum (KTBEU) was over ten years old. This community is steadily approaching its 25th birthday. At least some "originals" are still here; and if they were--say--in their late 20s or older then, they are (close to) 50+ now. I know for a fact that several of our members are in their 50s (and older).

    This poses yet another possible conundrum I had not thought of. Are Bond forums actually atrophying and aging out themselves because the new generation of filmgoers are not seeking out and joining Bond forums like this one?

    I got into Bond around the time of Skyfall and I'm in my twenties now. So theres that.

    But on the topic of Bond in the cultural zeitgeist, I think there was a return of sort to the Bondmania on the level that it was in the 60s back in, oh, '11-'16.

    I think Skyfall and the 50th anniversary, Olympics and the like got a lot of people in Bond fever and that continued for a while, but after Spectre I think it waned a bit and i feel like a bit of malaise set in and increasingly so after NTTD.


    There is always a natural quiet downturn between films.

    The success of SF definitely encouraged a slew of spy films in the following couple of year which include Spy, U.N.C.L.E. and the next MI.

    Believe me, there has never been ANYTHING close to the spy craze of the mid '60s. The entire world's pop culture changed and was gripped by Bondmania and it's spin offs. Nobody had ever seen anything like Bond.

    The difference is Skyfall got people excited about Bond so much that Barbara wanted to make a new film for '14 and Spectre and No Time To Die both left the general audience and the producers with a dodo feeling.
  • Posts: 2,026
    @007HallY - I meant Gen Z as a whole (I only said us because I'm in that age bracket). I suppose the youngest are still in their teens, but most are in their 20s. Think the oldest is something like 27/28. It's a wide demographic. I'm not sure what specifically the strategy is to 'cater' to it.

    That's a question I've asked numerous times without an adequate response. What does the next Bond look like that appeals to your generation? Is it merely a younger Bond? What will connect you more to the new Bond as opposed to previous Bonds?
  • Posts: 1,870
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @007HallY - I meant Gen Z as a whole (I only said us because I'm in that age bracket). I suppose the youngest are still in their teens, but most are in their 20s. Think the oldest is something like 27/28. It's a wide demographic. I'm not sure what specifically the strategy is to 'cater' to it.

    That's a question I've asked numerous times without an adequate response. What does the next Bond look like that appeals to your generation? Is it merely a younger Bond? What will connect you more to the new Bond as opposed to previous Bonds?

    I would like to know as well.
  • Posts: 2,026
    @Daltonforyou - The difference is Skyfall got people excited about Bond so much that Barbara wanted to make a new film for '14 and Spectre and No Time To Die both left the general audience and the producers with a dodo feeling.

    What is a dodo feeling?

    I don't discount what you say about SF, but I had no sense of that at all. I have no gauge for the excitement you say audiences felt. Whereas, as delfloria notes, the Bond craze of the 60s was a phenomenon.

    I hope the next Bond era is successful, but I do worry that there really isn't any place to go. I am not talking about physical locations or the myriad of story possibilities. I don't want the series to become a tech heavy, CGI inflated, Bond version of Fast and Furious or a film that seems like a video game.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,694
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @Daltonforyou - The difference is Skyfall got people excited about Bond so much that Barbara wanted to make a new film for '14 and Spectre and No Time To Die both left the general audience and the producers with a dodo feeling.

    What is a dodo feeling?

    I don't discount what you say about SF, but I had no sense of that at all. I have no gauge for the excitement you say audiences felt. Whereas, as delfloria notes, the Bond craze of the 60s was a phenomenon.

    I hope the next Bond era is successful, but I do worry that there really isn't any place to go. I am not talking about physical locations or the myriad of story possibilities. I don't want the series to become a tech heavy, CGI inflated, Bond version of Fast and Furious or a film that seems like a video game.

    Ironically, Die Another Day feels like a video game in more than one area, lol.
  • Posts: 2,026
    I read a lot here about success, especially when it comes to comparing one Bond era to another. Whether a Bond film was a success with the critics, or a giant money maker, or won a slew of awards, I don't care. My least favorite era, the RM years, did much better than my favorite era, the SC years. Success is my view. How I feel. That a film broke all kinds of records doesn't convince me it was a good film if I personally didn't care for it. Unless one is comparing box office numbers, the financial success of a film is a weak argument.
  • Posts: 1,650
    CrabKey wrote: »
    For those of us first introduced to Bond via Sean Connery, there has never been nor will there be another Bond in our lifetimes who can match the original. We accepted that a long time ago. My hope is the next Bond will have some of the qualities the original Bond had. Mostly it's about what I've posted often, does the actor own the role, or is he merely playing a part. Connery owned the role. Moore played the part. In other words, one was entirely convincing, the other was not. I would enjoy seeing a young actor who seems born to play the role.

    This would include: a deep enough voice. If all the folks on here who keep showing enthusiasm for Aaron Taylor Johnson would listen, their enthusiasm would evaporate.
  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Being chauffeured by Tibbett
    Posts: 701
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @007HallY - I meant Gen Z as a whole (I only said us because I'm in that age bracket). I suppose the youngest are still in their teens, but most are in their 20s. Think the oldest is something like 27/28. It's a wide demographic. I'm not sure what specifically the strategy is to 'cater' to it.

    That's a question I've asked numerous times without an adequate response. What does the next Bond look like that appeals to your generation? Is it merely a younger Bond? What will connect you more to the new Bond as opposed to previous Bonds?

    Because none of us know. It's entirely dependent on the type of films they want to make and the actor they decide to go with. For the moment it's impossible to say.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,452
    Are we seriously saying we don't know what appealing to people under 30 means anymore?
  • edited August 21 Posts: 3,327
    Venutius wrote: »
    With the success of the Bourne films, there was an element of 'Bond is your dad's spy movie' in the early and mid-'00s too - but Craig wiped that out completely with one film and brought in a lot of younger fans for whom he was 'their' Bond. If the new guy can do the same, we'll be fine for another run. EON know this, so it'll probably be a priority for them. I'm not that worried about an ageing audience, tbh.

    Yes I agree. Bond always reinvents slightly for the next generation, which usually works. Most kids born in the 50's and 60's have Connery as their Bond, Moore in the 70's and 80's, Brosnan for the 90's and Craig for the 00's.

    The next Bond will be no different. It will still cater for the old farts like me, but will also introduce newer elements to keep Gen Z or whatever the new kids are called happy too.

    I don't think EON do a bad job of reinventing/modernising Bond at all. It's why the franchise has lasted so long.

    If Cruise can create a BO hit with Top Gun 2, a throwback 80's style sequel to a film made back in the mid 80's, and Nolan can create a BO hit from a rather slow movie about a guy who invented the atom bomb back in the 30's and 40's, it shouldn't be too hard to bring Gen Z on board for the next Bond film.
  • Posts: 1,870
    Venutius wrote: »
    With the success of the Bourne films, there was an element of 'Bond is your dad's spy movie' in the early and mid-'00s too - but Craig wiped that out completely with one film and brought in a lot of younger fans for whom he was 'their' Bond. If the new guy can do the same, we'll be fine for another run. EON know this, so it'll probably be a priority for them. I'm not that worried about an ageing audience, tbh.

    Yes I agree. Bond always reinvents slightly for the next generation, which usually works. Most kids born in the 50's and 60's have Connery as their Bond, Moore in the 70's and 80's, Brosnan for the 90's and Craig for the 00's.

    The next Bond will be no different. It will still cater for the old farts like me, but will also introduce newer elements to keep Gen Z or whatever the new kids are called happy too.

    I don't think EON do a bad job of reinventing/modernising Bond at all. It's why the franchise has lasted so long.

    If Cruise can create a BO hit with Top Gun 2, a throwback 80's style sequel to a film made back in the mid 80's, and Nolan can create a BO hit from a rather slow movie about a guy who invented the atom bomb back in the 30's and 40's, it shouldn't be too hard to bring Gen Z on board for the next Bond film.

    By the time the next Bond heads into production will it be Gen. Alpha that it will be reinvented for? I'd like to think it would just be a regular old amazing Bond adventure and let the audience experience the ride and either hate or fall in love with 007.
  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Being chauffeured by Tibbett
    Posts: 701
    Are we seriously saying we don't know what appealing to people under 30 means anymore?

    Well what does it mean to you @Mendes4Lyfe? Because I don't think making films specifically to try and appeal to the under 30 crowd is something Eon would ever do. The films have always managed to find an audience by moving with the times while staying true to the core of the Bond character, not by trying to win favour with a youthful demographic.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited August 21 Posts: 8,452
    delfloria wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    With the success of the Bourne films, there was an element of 'Bond is your dad's spy movie' in the early and mid-'00s too - but Craig wiped that out completely with one film and brought in a lot of younger fans for whom he was 'their' Bond. If the new guy can do the same, we'll be fine for another run. EON know this, so it'll probably be a priority for them. I'm not that worried about an ageing audience, tbh.

    Yes I agree. Bond always reinvents slightly for the next generation, which usually works. Most kids born in the 50's and 60's have Connery as their Bond, Moore in the 70's and 80's, Brosnan for the 90's and Craig for the 00's.

    The next Bond will be no different. It will still cater for the old farts like me, but will also introduce newer elements to keep Gen Z or whatever the new kids are called happy too.

    I don't think EON do a bad job of reinventing/modernising Bond at all. It's why the franchise has lasted so long.

    If Cruise can create a BO hit with Top Gun 2, a throwback 80's style sequel to a film made back in the mid 80's, and Nolan can create a BO hit from a rather slow movie about a guy who invented the atom bomb back in the 30's and 40's, it shouldn't be too hard to bring Gen Z on board for the next Bond film.

    By the time the next Bond heads into production will it be Gen. Alpha that it will be reinvented for? I'd like to think it would just be a regular old amazing Bond adventure and let the audience experience the ride and either hate or fall in love with 007.

    That's all that's needed tbh.
  • Posts: 1,448
    Are we seriously saying we don't know what appealing to people under 30 means anymore?

    Well what does it mean to you @Mendes4Lyfe? Because I don't think making films specifically to try and appeal to the under 30 crowd is something Eon would ever do. The films have always managed to find an audience by moving with the times while staying true to the core of the Bond character, not by trying to win favour with a youthful demographic.

    Well, OP and Moonraker were kids movies.
Sign In or Register to comment.