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
Why? Soccer and Bond have nothing in common.
Bond and the Olympics have nothing in common also. ;)
Agreed. Yet the opportunity presented itself. But SF wasn't delayed especially for the Olympics, I think.
No, but if England wins in 2028 it will be worth it, trust me.
The England football team has existed for over 150 years, and in that time they won only 1 major trophy, the world cup in 1966 at Wembley Stadium in England.
If they reach the final, it will take place in the same arena, Wembley, and if they win there will be the biggest outpouring of patriotism in England since WW2. It will be huge, and if there is a Bond film lined up to open in November, you can bet it will benefit from the celebrations.
Massive if though. They don't have a new coach yet and 4 years is a long time in football. By that time other teams could have easily eclipsed England (who to be honest weren't very impressive in the last tourney).
Word is Pep Guardiola could be interested. His contract ends at Manchester City in 2025. England are definitely closer than they've been for a long time.
But the English do. Being assured of 100+ million in the bank BEFORE America, China or Europe factor in is a major deal.
The Euros are a bit of fun (I'm not a big football guy myself though) but speaking as a Scot, I wouldn't say we have any allusions about winning beyond a certain point. Perhaps the English do but lets be honest they're always disappointed every time.
I suppose NTTD had the villain wanting to destroy the world aspect to it. Maybe something like DN would be cool too - something where Bond is sent on something seemingly routine but as he gets deeper he figures out the villain is wanting to do something really destructive by the end.
I think we've got just the man for the job...
Brosnan in a rival one off needs to happen
Eon got the rights to TB in 2013, hence the return of Blofeld and SPECTRE. As far as I'm aware Eon have everything. Even if someone else was able to do it, it would be such a complicated legal minefield I doubt anyone would even attempt it.
So, if Bond 26 is not coming till 2028, just over 3 years away, then why are so many people jumping up and down because of the lack of Bond news?
What sort of pressure does this put on the England football team for the next Euros?
If you win, the next Bond film will be a hit, if you lose then one of the most beloved film series in history could end.
That's an awful lot of planets that have to line up for this to succeed.
Could in the unlikely scenario that this doesn't happen have a negative effect on how the film performs?
Bond 26, set for release in 2028. The Euros are played, England claim a 2-1 win over Germany at Wembley. The country goes mad in celebration, every man and his dog go to see the new Bond film at least 3 times. But what if this turns the rest of Europe off of anything English, Bond included!
What if Bond is blacklisted in Europe and is a flop. Could the chain reaction continue around the globe?
I think we let EON set all their pieces up in an order in which they're happy with.
Give the series a chance to re-generate and hopefully make an appealing new era for the next Bond.
As has been said in here and in other threads, part of the success of Bond is now having less is more. Sure, in days of old we had films every year, every other year and every few years. Now there is no real cycle to when the films come out.
This isn't due to EON being lazy or un-inspired. It's because of the events in the World at that time. Be it the studio that released the film goes bankrupt, there is a writer's strike, or a global pandemic that shuts everything down.
Bond is an event film nowadays, the only mention of a Bond film will get the press clamoring for information. Just look at the press ATJ has got on some rumours he's the next James Bond. Bond has that power as a brand.
So, when Bond 26 does go into production, it will be something special, we just have to be patient in the meantime.
Great post. I'll just read, watch or play other Bond media while I wait. I have other things in life to worry about over a movie, that will happen eventually. And I never got sports appeal, for the most part. EON isn't stupid. They know what they're doing. I can't praise or criticize them. That's just the media business as a whole, in more ways than one.
The film Bond has always a man of his times. Connery used pay phones. Dalton used a portable phone the size of bread box, and Craig used a smartphone. If using current devices is what makes Bond modern, then I have been modern my entire life.
If it's more than that, then someone ought to be able say this is what makes Bond modern and appealing to the current and coming generations.
Or will it simply be a much younger actor playing Bond? And we'll call it good.
If the rumours are to be believed and Pep is the next England manager, I would fancy us to win the next World Cup in 2 years, to hell with the Euros in 4 years time.
We have the best squad in any world tournament now, we have the most experience of being in finals right now, the only thing missing is a decent manager who can tactically get the best out of this team. Stick the best manager in the world in charge, and England will be winning the next 2 tournaments.
Southgate did what he did, he made us believe again, but he was always going to be out of his depth when the big games came around. With Pep in charge that final weak link is gone.
Pep for England manager and the next Bond, I say. He'll just need to wear a wig.
I never thought I would see England win anything in my lifetime, but the odds are narrowing significantly. They are slowly evolving into what Spain did a few years back. A team that never won anything, then suddenly won everything.
England have the best squad in world football. They've appeared in 2 finals in recent tournaments, and if they now get the best manager in the world managing them, I wouldn't be surprised if we win the next World Cup and then the next Euros.
In effect, yes.
I don't think many people are "jumping up and down", not anymore at least. People were upset after the arduous 6 year wait for Bond 25, when it looked like they weren't going to hit the usual 3 - 4 year gap again, but by this point we already know we aren't getting a Bond film until 2027 at the earliest, so what's the harm in an extra year? It's like going 6/7ths the way on a journey and not bothering with the extra 1/7th to make your effort truly worth it.
Not really, it's only one planet, England have to win. Not that unreasonable considering they reached the last two finals in Euros, they have the best squad in the world, home field advantage means over 70 percent of the crowd will be on their side, plus they now have the opportunity to hire a really top elite manager next year. Its not so unlikely.
Not really because as someone else has already pointed out, tournaments are forgotten quickly by the teams that lose, but live long in the memories of the supporters that win it. We English hold the 1966 final as a seminal day sporting history, yet a lot of germany fans don't even know they played a final that year, it's irrelevant to them.
Anyway, I know this is pie in the sky thinking, it's more just an little theory about how they could position the next film to launch off the next era with the most hype possible. Not to be taken too seriously, but it'll be interesting to see in the coming months how things develop, and whether this could become a real possibility. It would certainly make for a massive comeback after Bond being killed off and the series going dormant for so long.
This is probably getting more into something a bit more philosophical (if you can call it that), but it’s usually said the major difference between Millennials and Gen Z is that the former were born into a world where there was more a sense of political/social optimism in the late 80s/90s, only for the post 9/11 and post 2008 years to shatter that. Gen Z were basically born into the latter eras and that’s the world they grew up/are growing up in.
If you apply that to some of the films we’ve been talking about the idea’s there. The Batman, for example, puts us in the centre of a dark, grimy version of Gotham where crime and evil is all around, and even our hero isn’t able to be truly virtuous within this world (to the point where he even indirectly influences some of these villains around him). The film of course is about him learning to truly inspire hope rather than follow vengeance. Heck, the idea of being born into a strange world where that’s all you know and ultimately changing it is even there in Barbie.
Bond 26 can channel that too. Craig’s Bond was a man who found himself in a more morally grey, post 9/11 world, but he actively went out of his way to do the right thing - he went against orders, disobeyed M etc. He was a blunt instrument in his methodology, but not a loyal foot soldier. The next Bond might be younger, but he may be more that loyal blunt instrument we know Bond to be traditionally, albeit in a certain context. He might be a man who has to carry out dirty jobs, assassinate people for King and Country etc. We might get more a sense of MI6’s moral greyness (perhaps not M’s directly, but those around him/in tandem with the mission Bond is sent on). Much like The Batman we might get a bit of optimism with Bond ultimately making a choice and doing something for a higher good by the end (ie. saving the day), even if it means choosing to go against an order or effectively do what Craig’s Bond was more willing to do.
You’d have to find the right story to express those ideas. To me it sounds a bit like TLD with Bond being enlisted by MI6 to carry out two assassinations, the latter of which seems highly questionable/tenuous insofar as it involves killing a well known official (and of course it unknowingly makes Bond a pawn in the villain’s plan). It’s of course Bond deciding not to kill Kara or Pushkin and take matters into his own hands which saves the day. So those ideas aren’t without precedent in Bond. Anyway, that’s a broad but timeless way you can make a Bond story that’s relevant. It’s more thematic than specific though and has nothing to do with tone, who to cast, or even how to do this.
Well @Mendes4Lyfe reckons he knows. Apparently it's a goofy sense of humour and something to do with football.
I am from the 'targeted demographic' and I can't think of anything unique about Generation Z that's relevant to Bond. But my own perspective is that people in the under 30s age range have enjoyed the Craig films, so I can't see why that enthusiasm wouldn't carry over into a new era.
Great analysis @007HallY!
You say that as if humour being the basis for an era of Bond is unheard of. Its happened before, and I would say that the 2020's are likely to echo the late 70's early 80's in some ways, just as Craig's Bond had echoes of Daltons harder edge.
These things go round in cycles, and I just happened to believe that Gen Z is more open to a lighter, more zany stylised approach than when the emphasis was on realism and groundedness during the 2000's, that's all.
A more youthful Bond, a gripping story, compelling moments and clips which can go viral on TikTok (I'm not kidding: social media advertising is essential), a title song artist who appeals to a large audience etc. ... all of these will help. When Bond is finally revived (and I think a rest probably isn't a terrible idea) then it could come back with a bigger bang than usual.
That's why I said echoes of, as in we'll be closer to that than we have been for decades. But if you remember at the time in the 2000's the Dalton era was considered a somewhat unforgotten period of Bond, and his films really weren't looked upon all that kindly generally speaking. It's only in the years since that a lot of people have gone back and reappraised his tenure, and been more favourable. I think we could see the same thing happen for the 70's/early 80's films, which have, I would argue, fallen out of favour in recent years in a similar way (especially the likes of MR, The Man With The Golden Gun, OP, even Spy to some extent). As @Mtm points out socail media is massive force in the marketing nowadays, compared to the start of Craigs tenure when it barely existed, and I think that also points in the direction of a more bold, heightened approach.
Well, like I said NTTD (and SP) had its share of lighter moments. More overtly so than the first two Craig films. It even effectively had a villain wanting to destroy the world. So in some ways we’re not a million miles away from some of those Bond films anyway.
The biggest differences I suppose are that the humour of some of those 70s films are much more ‘fourth wall breaking’, referential to wider culture, and often silly (ie. We tend to get things like Tarzan yells, pieces of stereotypical classical music over certain sequences/moments, a weirdly outdated reference to a dog trainer on British tv etc). I don’t think that’s in the cards right now, at least not to that level of outlandishness. The Craig era could be referential but mostly to past Bond movies and not always for humour. There’s a lot of overlap in terms of wit, one liners etc. but that’s pretty much Bond anyway. A lot of the humour from NTTD and SP comes from subverting typical expectations (ie. we expect Paloma to be a useless ditz, but she’s actually very competent. We expect Bond to press a button in his Aston Martin and activate a weapon but instead get 009’s music. We expect a smooth ‘Bond, James Bond’ in NTTD but are faced with the reality that the MI6 security guard doesn’t know who he is). Again, not a million miles away, but different, and there’s a far more serious tone overall to the later Craig films. I just don’t think there’s any appetite for the level of goofiness we got in some of those Moore films. I’m sure there is for something breezier, more fantastical, but with that willingness to embrace some darker themes. But again, without anything tangible it’s a bit vague.