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
And maybe this time there'll be a long-term plan. Eon might want to ask Waller-Bridge and/or Fukunaga to bring some of their TV arc planning skills to the next set of films.
Even a vague plan--say, setting a goal in Bond 26 to do the TMWTGG opening for Bond 29 (or Bond 30, if the actor stays on) would be preferable to Eon just making things up as they go along.
Well that’s not an ‘or’: that’s exactly what I said: audiences are smarter than some give them credit for.
I think he was just agreeing with you by offering another example.
I was.
True, to a point; Judi Dench did play M but it is not the same character that she played in CR.
I still contend that , while muddy because of returning actors, Dalton was the beginning of a “ universe “ separate from that of Connery, Lazenby and Moore.
Bond films are always set in the present, because of age Dalton’s Bond could not be the same as his predecessors. Sean, George and Roger are the same Bond. Timothy and Pierce are the next, then Daniel.
For the next I want a complete clean slate with a clear vision of where they want to go.
A clean slate would make much more sense and Elba would make an amazing M.
https://www.dynamite.com/htmlfiles/viewProduct.html?PRO=C72513026476301011
Elba is still in his leading man years. He’s charismatic and very physical and in top shape. I can’t see him taking a role like M, unless M was more in the center of the action.
What's the Bond-M. age gap in the books? Didn't they both serve in the war? Elba and a young 30-something would work great over a tenure.
Perhaps— that’s why I mentioned a more action-oriented M. That’s the only way I see Elba ever playing M at this point in his career. He is a leading man, and has his own production company (Green Door), that seeks out interesting leading man roles for him.
I don’t know what EoN will do for the new Mi6 team, but do they want an action-heavy M? …
Task Force M.
I'm okay with that.
https://variety.com/2020/film/news/idris-elba-simon-kinberg-apple-spy-romance-film-1234735319/
But to me, I could care less so long as the film is good.
Are you sure Elba is still attached? Is this still happening?
(I hope it is since Kinberg is a great story teller (not necessarily as a director, but as a writer he’s tops))
No, I'm not sure that it is: the article is from two years ago. With the all of chatter about Idris being "in the conversation" for Bond, I would think casting him in a similar role would be a natural.
Except with the older films they all ended the same way, with the status quo being maintained. So it was easy just to carry over the actors because continuity wasn’t really a thing,
Had NTTD ended with Bond still in the service, I could see the supporting cast returning for future films. But because Bond died and we last see them together in the office offering a toast to a lost comrade, it’s just gonna feel awkward (IMO) to see them return and act like it’s just business as usual. Besides, I don’t expect Whishaw and Fiennes to keep playing their roles until they suddenly drop dead like Desmond Llewelyn and Bernard Lee.
I like Fiennes as an actor but I do not think he was a good M., though it was mostly the material. In Skyfall he's the affable jerk for canning Judi Dench and not being able to read the room, in SPECTRE he's hapless to stop... a political vote that leads to global terrorist action and has that awful "C." quote. In NTTD he's more of a villain than Safin and literally is directly responsible for the missiles that blow our hero up.
I would like a new M. but I reserve all my issues with the writing, not Fiennes.
I don't think there is any way EON would turn down Whishaw if he deigned to reprise his role as Q, but that is the issue. If it happens, I would hope that he'd begin his next chapter as the seasoned gruff veteran, a la Llewelyn circa '63.
Another reason why Purvis and Wade should go, and Ralph should stay. I give Ralph credit for fighting against Sam Mendes and John Logan for not making Mallory a villain.
Wishaw's Q was starting to go the trad crouchy route in NTTD - 'Pay attention', 'Don't touch that', etc. It would've been amusing watching him develop his inner Desmond!
No, no, no
M is the boss, not an agent. His job is to strategise, manage and deploy his resources into the field in compliance with government policy. Not to join them. Same with Q - he is the quartermaster in charge of equipment, a very important busy job designing and providing equipment - not to use them himself. If any of the HQ team had to venture out into the field, it could Tanner.
007 should be a lone wolf. Linking up with other nation’s agents maybe, but not part of a team. If he must have an assistant, let him have a trainee 00.
007 should be part of the government machine. Following orders, deploying his wide range of skills to best complete his mission. To me, what makes Connery Bond scary is the thought of a shadowy government department sending out assassins to ‘seek and destroy’, with discretion to kill as necessary. Not part of a small gang of vigilantes making it up as they go along.
I really hope Fiennes comes back too.
Clean slate.