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
Yep, which means there couldn't be a 007 to begin with unless a new agent was given a new number; thus, according to the books, when an agent replaces another one they're not given their predecessor's number, otherwise we'd only know 001, 002 and 003.
Now, I was not using this as an argument to fuel another "only Bond should be 007" discussion; I honestly and sincerely don't want that since that would lead to pretty much nothing (except arguing for the sake of it). I was just pointing out that it is not so obvious that the 007 title would be given to someone else. Possible, but not obvious.
Ah, damnit. I'm not a fan of the "police chases good guy" scenes.
Like @Denbigh said, in the end the execution is what really matters. But even if they’d be able to handle this concept in a great manner, going this route it will always seem (at least to me, but I feel a lot of people would agree) like throwing a bone to all the “black Bond, female Bond” narrative. It’s good for the franchise to reflect times, like it always did, it’s good to be ahead of the curve, but as a fan I’m worried about how natural and seamless within the narrative those strong choices will feel.
And I’m afraid @matt_u, that’s a product of the business. It’s always hard to know why someone was cast or why a certain character has been written into a script. For example, have people started using more representation for black people in their films because they can see it’s been a genuine problem in the past and want our films to reflect the times, or because they want to capitalise on Black Panther’s success financially and critically? Who can say? But what we can do is give them a chance and see what they have to offer because it’s only then we’ll be able to see which one they were going for.
What I'm disputing is the decision of putting her as the 007 at the end of the film especially if they decide to kill Bond, only to reboot the franchise with Bond as 007 the next film. I don't think it's a great one.
But James Bond 007 will remain trademarked, so good luck making a Fleming film without him! :)
If it wasn’t then I can’t see any point in your post :)
For example, the whole brother thing from Spectre was well disliked by a lot of us here, including myself, but we must admit that the idea could've possibly worked with a different script, different actors, or better direction? It's hard to say, but it's also hard to say whether NTTD will be the time that the ideas/concepts you've mentioned @JamesCraig don't work. Again, all bets are off :)
That's why i honestly don't believe they will go for that.
Also it's just one possible option out of countless others, of how this movie could end. Why are we getting so fixated on this one scenario? "Nomi taking over"?
We still have no idea about the context of the film.
The whole notion of "Nomi taking over the 007 designation" or "Nomi taking over the film" or in this case Nomi taking over the ending of the film, without any context given to her character so far (outside of tabloid crap) rather shows me that there is a real concern among fans that this film will have some sort of Pandering in it. That she might be some sort of feminist symbolism to be shoved in Bond's face (and ours), because some movies have attempted something similar in the past, or a lot actually.
I think we should call it what it is, because i don't like beating around the bush. But my opinion still stands:
When it comes to depicting feminism (feminine is the word i prefer, and really the only one that should be used here) and and progressive female characters in films WITHOUT pandering or making it painfully obvious, there is really no one who can outsmart Barbara Broccoli and her team imo. Best example is Goldeneye, and every movie after that, with CR being another high point. Women and sexappeal are really the lifeblood of these films, as far as i'm concerned. And Bond has to remain a certain way to make it all work. He will always be in control of any situation.
What pisses me of the most in this discussion is that people, especially on Youtube, actually believe that NTTD might stoop to sewer level garbage like Ghostbusters (2016) and Terminator Dark Fate pandering, even though EoN has already assembled a team for NTTD that all the other productions could only dream of. I know everyone around here is edgy and doesn't care about oscars, but the track record of this team speaks for itself. Even down to the oscar winning film editor (I actually watched a couple of his films because i was so intrigued). These are quality filmmakers, i am not really worried that they will provide a quality film with substance and proper context.
My only worry is that this discussion keeps spiraling out of control to the point where people won't listen to reason anymore. I just hope the trailer will shut everybody up lol.
Well they’re already making a film where PWB’s James Bond is not 007...
Kidding :D
This just feels right, they know they have to knock it out the park after SPECTRE.
The pedigree as @00Agent says above speaks for itself. Cary is going to deliver and then some and I think Daniel has given it is all and we don't even have a hint of what Malek has done.
Exciting hardly covers it, the anticipation for the trailer alone is at fever pitch.
They'll be those that will never be satisfied till Craig is gone but I think for the most part the majority of us are in for a real treat.
Nobody does it better.
...and @Shardlake, it is funny seeing every post made on the 007 Twitter being replied with "Where's the trailer?" and "So about that trailer?" :D
They typically don't. They just get quiet and move onto complaining about something else in order to pander to MRA subscribers. What's funny to me is that after they were hyping up James Cameron as the true author of strong women with the film ALITA just a few months ago, they then complain about him doing it in DARK FATE.
@Denbigh That wouldn't surprise me actually (there was even one guy wanting people to boycott the film a while back, I think…). But if they're proven wrong they will just end up looking stupid, while the rest of us can enjoy yet another entry of the series.
Good point; there's always something for them to complain about.
What were the complaints about Dark Fate?
Basically they didn't like the feminism featured in the film, that the men were "emasculated" and so on. That kind of silly nonsense.
I also suspect that it's also because there were also more women heroes in the cast than there used to be in past Terminator films (three women, and one man who's really a cyborg). Contrast that to a few months ago when they were championing ALITA, which happened to only have one female role and a lot of men who basically guide her to becoming a hero.
If I have anything critical to say about the film, I do think the feminist themes in DARK FATE were a little more hamfisted than in previous Cameron productions. Otherwise, it's a pretty decent film, but nothing really reaches the original two films.
Totally. I usually don't like to use that word but I don't know how else you can describe Dark Fate.
As far as skin color and immigration, it’s got nothing to do with it.
We have had a “woke” Bond for over 24 years now. (Plus, the Mail article confirms there is an erection joke, surely we can rest assured the Roger Moore-isms haven’t gone either)