The Bond Wishlist Thread

124678

Comments

  • For now, all I want is a Trailer with a narration, like those from the Brosnan era.

    "Some men want to rule the world. Some women, ask for the world. Some believe, the world is theirs for the taking. But for one man...The World Is Not Enough!!!"

    The trailers for The World Is Not Enough were very good. The narrated trailer is a lost art.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    A narrated film would be even better.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,767
    Be careful what you wish for. Some of us lived through a first-person narrated Bond film.
    An important part of the On Her Majesty's Secret Service failure myth.

    the007dossier.com/007dossier/post/2013/06/18/OHMSS-The-1976-ABC-TV-Version

    Witness he (video recreation by Blofeld's Cat):
    http://www.the007dossier.com/007dossier/media/Ohmss-abc-cut-Recreation.mp4
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    For now, all I want is a Trailer with a narration, like those from the Brosnan era.

    "Some men want to rule the world. Some women, ask for the world. Some believe, the world is theirs for the taking. But for one man...The World Is Not Enough!!!"

    I think goldeneye is the only good brosnan trailer, the rest have a weird uncomfortable man talking who doesn’t belong there.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited December 2017 Posts: 13,767
    For now, all I want is a Trailer with a narration, like those from the Brosnan era.[/i]
    I don't like. Those movie trailers. Where a narrator speaks. Between snippets of. Wild action. Or slower activity. Or funny lines. To tell the viewer. What he or she. Should be thinking.

    Previous Bonds excepted, I do enjoy Brosnan's reveal in the GoldenEye trailer and Connery's narrated Christmas gift Diamonds Are Forever trailer and others. But they're also a part of the times and likely can't be easily recreated in good taste.

    What the franchise has been superb at from 2006 is its teaser trailers and trailers.
    Excellent sound and vision. Telling a mini-story in a compelling way.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited December 2017 Posts: 15,423
    I love all of the Brosnan era trailers, and the only good trailer the Craig era had was both the teaser and theatrical full trailers for Royale. Others are just pisspoor bandwagon imitators of the late 2000s to present era dreadfully constructed trailers that don't entice my excitement at all.

    Looking back at The World Is Not Enough trailer, I long for something like that to pop up, again. The pacing, the editing, the music, the scenes that were put all together are all perfect. It lets me know I'm watching a James Bond film. I also rather like Don LaFontaine's narrating voice.

  • For now, all I want is a Trailer with a narration, like those from the Brosnan era.

    "Some men want to rule the world. Some women, ask for the world. Some believe, the world is theirs for the taking. But for one man...The World Is Not Enough!!!"

    I think goldeneye is the only good brosnan trailer, the rest have a weird uncomfortable man talking who doesn’t belong there.

    I'm tired of people speaking ill of Brosnan already!

    ;)
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Be careful what you wish for. Some of us lived through a first-person narrated Bond film.
    An important part of the On Her Majesty's Secret Service failure myth.

    the007dossier.com/007dossier/post/2013/06/18/OHMSS-The-1976-ABC-TV-Version

    Witness he (video recreation by Blofeld's Cat):
    http://www.the007dossier.com/007dossier/media/Ohmss-abc-cut-Recreation.mp4

    I know, and no thanks.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited December 2017 Posts: 4,512
    3 versions with a Twist on Goldeneye, VHS James Bond trailer and Goldeneye teaser.

    When the world is the target and treat is close. Do you stil think one direction. Dit not think so.

    When the world is the target and treat is close. Can you stil depend on one man. Dit not think so.

    When the treat is real and the world is the target. Do you expecting somebody eles. Think so.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited December 2017 Posts: 7,546
    I love all of the Brosnan era trailers, and the only good trailer the Craig era had was both the teaser and theatrical full trailers for Royale. Others are just pisspoor bandwagon imitators of the late 2000s to present era dreadfully constructed trailers that don't entice my excitement at all.

    Looking back at The World Is Not Enough trailer, I long for something like that to pop up, again. The pacing, the editing, the music, the scenes that were put all together are all perfect. It lets me know I'm watching a James Bond film. I also rather like Don LaFontaine's narrating voice.


    Sounds like they were using Surrender by kd lang from TND in this trailer :P around 1:21, and a brassy bit before that as well, maybe I'm just hearing things?

    Also I've always found the trailer for Goldeneye to be absolutely bonkers, in a really good way. Made the film seem so exciting (and it was, I loved it and still do).
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I love all of the Brosnan era trailers, and the only good trailer the Craig era had was both the teaser and theatrical full trailers for Royale. Others are just pisspoor bandwagon imitators of the late 2000s to present era dreadfully constructed trailers that don't entice my excitement at all.

    Looking back at The World Is Not Enough trailer, I long for something like that to pop up, again. The pacing, the editing, the music, the scenes that were put all together are all perfect. It lets me know I'm watching a James Bond film. I also rather like Don LaFontaine's narrating voice.


    Sounds like they were using Surrender by kd lang from TND in this trailer :P around 1:21, and a brassy bit before that as well, maybe I'm just hearing things?

    Also I've always found the trailer for Goldeneye to be absolutely bonkers, in a really good way. Made the film seem so exciting (and it was, I loved it and still do).
    Yes and no, @NickTwentyTwo. They were actually using the Backseat Driver track from TND.
  • edited December 2017 Posts: 12,462
    Some of mine right now:

    -Title: The Property of a Lady or Risico.
    -Jeffrey Wright returns as Felix Leiter.
    -No Madeleine or Waltz Blofeld. Don't bring back Hinx either.
    -The actors of MI6 can remain, but they need a more behind-the-scenes approach. They were in the field too much in SP.
    -A perfect gunbarrel at the film's opening; close to SP, but have the barrel move and don't add any captions.
    -An original, one-off villain. With the exception of OHMSS, it seems like EON can never nail down Blofeld as a Bond film's main villain.
    -David Arnold returns.
    -Roger Deakins returns.
    -Sam Mendes does NOT return.
    -More stripped back like CR and QoS, less grand than SF and SP; I think a smaller scale and maybe a little less action is what the next film needs.
    -Tone similar to CR (gritty but still sometimes humorous), and approach similar to CR and SF in the sense it can work within Craig's series and also as a standalone.
    -Some kind of tribute to Roger Moore would be terrific.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Some of mine right now:

    -Title: The Property of a Lady or Risico.
    -Jeffrey Wright returns as Felix Leiter.
    -No Madeleine or Waltz Blofeld. Don't bring back Hinx either.
    -The actors of MI6 can remain, but they need a more behind-the-scenes approach. They were in the field too much in SP.
    -A perfect gunbarrel at the film's opening; close to SP, but have the barrel move and don't add any captions.
    -An original, one-off villain. With the exception of OHMSS, it seems like EON can never nail down Blofeld as a Bond film's main villain.
    -David Arnold returns.
    -Roger Deakins returns.
    -Sam Mendes does NOT return.
    -More stripped back like CR and QoS, less grand than SF and SP; I think a smaller scale and maybe a little less action is what the next film needs.
    -Tone similar to CR (gritty but still sometimes humorous), and approach similar to CR and SF in the sense it can work within Craig's series and also as a standalone.
    -Some kind of tribute to Roger Moore would be terrific.

    Everything here is great.
    And for me personally it would be set in the unexplored time that is after QOS but before Skyfall because I feel like skyfall and spectre are a withered bond whose nearing retirement and arguably retires at the end of spectre so I would rather it just end there.
  • Posts: 12,462
    Thanks. I agree in between QoS and SF could be really cool.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,583
    I will venture into an alternate reality on this one:

    Nolan directs a remake of Thunderball (cuz EON wants a non-McClory stamp on it) with Tom Hardy as Largo, Amy Adams as Fiona Volpe, and Anne Hatahway as Domino, with a short cameo from Gary Oldman as Blofeld.

    OK, back to our regularly scheduled program.
  • That would certainly be unorthodox: to present a new Bond film that fits chronologically between two earlier ones.

    But it would sort of make amends for skipping from Bond Begins straight to Old Man Bond in Craig's run.
  • I don't really see the need to do a stated prequel. Just do a standalone Bond film that makes no reference to his age.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    CountJohn wrote: »
    I don't really see the need to do a stated prequel. Just do a standalone Bond film that makes no reference to his age.
    +1
  • Posts: 12,462
    If the rumors are true about a script by Nolan being considered to replace the one by P+W, then they're probably deciding between if they want to have Craig do a standalone with Nolan's idea or go with the original script that could be more connected to Craig's previous films. They're probably considering if they want to rework Nolan's idea to go with Craig or save it for Bond 26 if Nolan wants to wait.
  • Advantages would be: no need to reference Blofeld, SPECTRE, or Swann; Judi could play M again (if you see that as an advantage over Fiennes); and MI6 HQ would be non-destroyed.

    Disadvantages: None, really? Fiennes isn't M, I guess. And you don't have Q or Moneypenny. It's just Bond doing his thing. But at this point, given feedback on this board, would anyone really consider that a bad thing? Would free up a s***-ton of screen time for Tanner. Okay, I guess that's a disadvantage.
  • Posts: 12,462
    Advantages would be: no need to reference Blofeld, SPECTRE, or Swann; Judi could play M again (if you see that as an advantage over Fiennes); and MI6 HQ would be non-destroyed.

    Disadvantages: None, really? Fiennes isn't M, I guess. And you don't have Q or Moneypenny. It's just Bond doing his thing. But at this point, given feedback on this board, would anyone really consider that a bad thing? Would free up a s***-ton of screen time for Tanner. Okay, I guess that's a disadvantage.

    The prequel idea of going in-between QoS and SF is appealing to me. They don't need to worry about picking up from the messy ending of SP and can do whatever kind of movie they want. Tanner I definitely want to see less of; truly a useless character. I'm so interested to see what direction they go in for Bond 25. You'd think it has to be more original and exciting than SP. I found SP to be fine entertainment, but it lacks the punch of Craig's first 3; the stakes just never feel that high for some reason.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Bond wouldn't look right for that "prequel" thing and they'd never do that to begin with. Craig's age is showing (just look at the wrinkles around his eyes, and the eyes themselves are slightly narrower than they were 10 years ago) so he wouldn't pass for a 41. So, it's a no go.

    And besides, it would really screw up the timeline. Knowing Eon and their recent three films, they'll shoehorn a shedload of things that will feel forced. Forward is always the best option in almost everything, including life itself. That's one of the reasons I don't like prequels in general.
  • Posts: 12,462
    Bond wouldn't look right for that "prequel" thing and they'd never do that to begin with. Craig's age is showing (just look at the wrinkles around his eyes, and the eyes themselves are slightly narrower than they were 10 years ago) so he wouldn't pass for a 41. So, it's a no go.

    And besides, it would really screw up the timeline. Knowing Eon and their recent three films, they'll shoehorn a shedload of things that will feel forced. Forward is always the best option in almost everything, including life itself. That's one of the reasons I don't like prequels in general.

    Would you rather them continue directly from SP with the entire cast returning, or have the prequel?
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Bond wouldn't look right for that "prequel" thing and they'd never do that to begin with. Craig's age is showing (just look at the wrinkles around his eyes, and the eyes themselves are slightly narrower than they were 10 years ago) so he wouldn't pass for a 41. So, it's a no go.

    And besides, it would really screw up the timeline. Knowing Eon and their recent three films, they'll shoehorn a shedload of things that will feel forced. Forward is always the best option in almost everything, including life itself. That's one of the reasons I don't like prequels in general.

    Would you rather them continue directly from SP with the entire cast returning, or have the prequel?
    There's no indication as to whether the entire cast will be returning. And sure, I'd prefer the story to take place after the events of SP, with Q, Tanner and MP's roles completely reduced to two-minute screen-time max and Madeleine completely discarded or briefly mentioned as something that "didn't work out."
  • Posts: 12,462
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Bond wouldn't look right for that "prequel" thing and they'd never do that to begin with. Craig's age is showing (just look at the wrinkles around his eyes, and the eyes themselves are slightly narrower than they were 10 years ago) so he wouldn't pass for a 41. So, it's a no go.

    And besides, it would really screw up the timeline. Knowing Eon and their recent three films, they'll shoehorn a shedload of things that will feel forced. Forward is always the best option in almost everything, including life itself. That's one of the reasons I don't like prequels in general.

    Would you rather them continue directly from SP with the entire cast returning, or have the prequel?
    There's no indication as to whether the entire cast will be returning. And sure, I'd prefer the story to take place after the events of SP, with Q, Tanner and MP's roles completely reduced to two-minute screen-time max and Madeleine completely discarded or briefly mentioned as something that "didn't work out."

    I was just testing to see if you had to, if you'd rather take everything about SP for another go or try a prequel. I agree it could work if they try something standalone after SP. They will just have to work the story cleverly to make it not awkward.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    FoxRox wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Bond wouldn't look right for that "prequel" thing and they'd never do that to begin with. Craig's age is showing (just look at the wrinkles around his eyes, and the eyes themselves are slightly narrower than they were 10 years ago) so he wouldn't pass for a 41. So, it's a no go.

    And besides, it would really screw up the timeline. Knowing Eon and their recent three films, they'll shoehorn a shedload of things that will feel forced. Forward is always the best option in almost everything, including life itself. That's one of the reasons I don't like prequels in general.

    Would you rather them continue directly from SP with the entire cast returning, or have the prequel?
    There's no indication as to whether the entire cast will be returning. And sure, I'd prefer the story to take place after the events of SP, with Q, Tanner and MP's roles completely reduced to two-minute screen-time max and Madeleine completely discarded or briefly mentioned as something that "didn't work out."

    I was just testing to see if you had to, if you'd rather take everything about SP for another go or try a prequel. I agree it could work if they try something standalone after SP. They will just have to work the story cleverly to make it not awkward.
    Indeed. Given two years as of now, as well as one more year to construct hell of a screenplay, they're going to have to come up with a clever storyline. Otherwise, I'll completely lose faith in Eon. If Whishaw, Harris and Kinnear won't accept minor roles, then I'd definitely be content with a full recast of the three. I want a recast anyway. Fiennes is the only one that stands out for me, and I wouldn't mind his M to be more involved every once in a while. I'd also rather they don't go Logan with the next Bond film as that would bore me out. Give us a spy thriller with Bond in the middle, going after a notorious villain, and I'll be satisfied.
  • Posts: 12,462
    FoxRox wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Bond wouldn't look right for that "prequel" thing and they'd never do that to begin with. Craig's age is showing (just look at the wrinkles around his eyes, and the eyes themselves are slightly narrower than they were 10 years ago) so he wouldn't pass for a 41. So, it's a no go.

    And besides, it would really screw up the timeline. Knowing Eon and their recent three films, they'll shoehorn a shedload of things that will feel forced. Forward is always the best option in almost everything, including life itself. That's one of the reasons I don't like prequels in general.

    Would you rather them continue directly from SP with the entire cast returning, or have the prequel?
    There's no indication as to whether the entire cast will be returning. And sure, I'd prefer the story to take place after the events of SP, with Q, Tanner and MP's roles completely reduced to two-minute screen-time max and Madeleine completely discarded or briefly mentioned as something that "didn't work out."

    I was just testing to see if you had to, if you'd rather take everything about SP for another go or try a prequel. I agree it could work if they try something standalone after SP. They will just have to work the story cleverly to make it not awkward.
    Indeed. Given two years as of now, as well as one more year to construct hell of a screenplay, they're going to have to come up with a clever storyline. Otherwise, I'll completely lose faith in Eon. If Whishaw, Harris and Kinnear won't accept minor roles, then I'd definitely be content with a full recast of the three. I want a recast anyway. Fiennes is the only one that stands out for me, and I wouldn't mind his M to be more involved every once in a while. I'd also rather they don't go Logan with the next Bond film as that would bore me out. Give us a spy thriller with Bond in the middle, going after a notorious villain, and I'll be satisfied.

    I wish Tanner wasn't there at all, but that probably won't happen. I think Whishaw is a good Q and Harris is a good Moneypenny, but they definitely should have smaller roles. Ideally the cast would be kept of those two, Craig, and Fiennes as M (he does well), but handled differently. I don't particularly want to see Seydoux or Waltz return, even though I don't think they were the problem with their characters; we just need a fresh start for a Bond girl and villain I think. Regardless of if Bond 25 is a hit or not, it might be for the best for EON to sell it if they feel they are running out of ideas and want to do other things. If they're losing interest in Bond they need to give it to someone else. Unfortunately I occasionally got that vibe in SP with the times it falls back on tropes and plays it too safe.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    FoxRox wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Bond wouldn't look right for that "prequel" thing and they'd never do that to begin with. Craig's age is showing (just look at the wrinkles around his eyes, and the eyes themselves are slightly narrower than they were 10 years ago) so he wouldn't pass for a 41. So, it's a no go.

    And besides, it would really screw up the timeline. Knowing Eon and their recent three films, they'll shoehorn a shedload of things that will feel forced. Forward is always the best option in almost everything, including life itself. That's one of the reasons I don't like prequels in general.

    Would you rather them continue directly from SP with the entire cast returning, or have the prequel?
    There's no indication as to whether the entire cast will be returning. And sure, I'd prefer the story to take place after the events of SP, with Q, Tanner and MP's roles completely reduced to two-minute screen-time max and Madeleine completely discarded or briefly mentioned as something that "didn't work out."

    I was just testing to see if you had to, if you'd rather take everything about SP for another go or try a prequel. I agree it could work if they try something standalone after SP. They will just have to work the story cleverly to make it not awkward.
    Indeed. Given two years as of now, as well as one more year to construct hell of a screenplay, they're going to have to come up with a clever storyline. Otherwise, I'll completely lose faith in Eon. If Whishaw, Harris and Kinnear won't accept minor roles, then I'd definitely be content with a full recast of the three. I want a recast anyway. Fiennes is the only one that stands out for me, and I wouldn't mind his M to be more involved every once in a while. I'd also rather they don't go Logan with the next Bond film as that would bore me out. Give us a spy thriller with Bond in the middle, going after a notorious villain, and I'll be satisfied.

    I wish Tanner wasn't there at all, but that probably won't happen. I think Whishaw is a good Q and Harris is a good Moneypenny, but they definitely should have smaller roles. Ideally the cast would be kept of those two, Craig, and Fiennes as M (he does well), but handled differently. I don't particularly want to see Seydoux or Waltz return, even though I don't think they were the problem with their characters; we just need a fresh start for a Bond girl and villain I think. Regardless of if Bond 25 is a hit or not, it might be for the best for EON to sell it if they feel they are running out of ideas and want to do other things. If they're losing interest in Bond they need to give it to someone else. Unfortunately I occasionally got that vibe in SP with the times it falls back on tropes and plays it too safe.
    That's the trouble with the mishandling of the latest three. They enforce the roles of secondary characters too much into enlarged screen-time, people with delusions outside the Bond fandom are starting to embark onto pretentious discussions to encourage spin-offs, which is infuriating. Personally, I never found the appeal in Whishaw's nerdy geek Q nor warmed up to him since he ballsed up with the task to ensure the MI-6 security couldn't have been penetrated, Harris is completely miscast as Moneypenny as I see her more eligible as a field agent rather than a secretary, Tanner just speaks his lines for the sake of it without any point in any word he utters. That's why I prefer a whole recast of those three. At the end of Skyfall, Fiennes' M really did give Bernard Lee vibes and should have gone down that path. Regardless of his misuse in Spectre, I still want Fiennes to be the M he deserves as I highly believe - a spectacular actor that he is - he's worthy of that chance.

    I like Christoph Waltz and Lea Seydoux. But, both were terribly miscast and wasted due to awful writing. Waltz didn't leave up to his potential, and if anything, should've just stayed Franz Oberhauser. Madeleine is an underwritten character who really doesn't spark my interest in her, and neither does Lucia Sciarra. However, I'd welcome Monica Bellucci in the role once more if her character turns out to be rather useful. In my opinion, she should've been Bond's companion throughout the film, and not a shoehorned Madeleine Swann.
  • Posts: 12,462
    It was just so unnecessary to make Swann be a serious love interest. Should have been a deal where it was classic Bond girl - end up together at the end, but nothing too serious. For that matter it also wasn’t necessary to make SP seem so final-ish for Craig’s era. Even if he didn’t return, going that route wasn’t wise.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Agreed. Spectre feels like two films were forcefully compressed into one, which is why there's hardly for the story to properly narrate itself.
Sign In or Register to comment.