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
Paloma would be the most likely candidate.
I'm picturing him to Nomi, either in the Jamaican club or at his retirement house
My money would be on Paloma as well
DAD was an attempt at making an outlandish Bond film. It was such a huge gamble. But at least it doesn't alter anything about Bond's history.if one is watching movies like YOLT now you can't help but think bond & blofeld are foster brothers.
Sure it needed that. Am sure Mendes deep down would be regretting why he returned to direct SP. He would have been happier with jst SF as his masterpiece. One can only wish Christopher Nolan Directed SP.
I feel like this might be a you thing; I've watched Spectre dozens of times and just recently been watching old Connery films and "brothergate" doesn't enter my mind even once one Blofeld is on screen during the classics.
Yeah, it could be me....but am jst saying it might get into one's head once in a while. Even if YOLT, OHMSS, DAF have nothing to do with the foster brother thing.
Agreed. As dumb and unnecessary as it is, it doesn’t get to me like it does for many others. It just feels like an afterthought in the film. I’d wager it won’t be brought up in NTTD.
My main concern would be, how to keep Bond relevant in a world where M:I exists, and how to coexist successfully with M:I which IMO is doing better in the film world than Bond has been lately (Spectre vs. Rogue Nation and the follow up Fallout for example), than making Bond more like M:I and competing directly with it.
They both need to have their own, unique places in the spy film world so they can both exist and be successful.
Yeah, I think Bond needs his Gadgets back & his somewhat Sci-Fi elements back without making the plot weak. ....these were the things about bond that marvelled the world in the first place. Movies like GF started that all.
But DAD ended that, I believe.
Still, Bond can lighten up a bit without going back to the sky-is-the-limit '60s. It's all about finding the right balance.
What’s different? Buying some suits and a posh car? You think that takes three extra years? :)
He’d never do it out of loyalty to MI, but I’d love that too. No one else seems to have such talent for structuring a blockbuster movie at the moment: they just work so well.
Exactly....not OTT, but the right balance....The Living Daylights had Dalton in serious mode.but the movie still had a few optional extras. And Timothy Dalton was even the one who started the gritty bond thing. Only he was jst ahead of his time.
But great Scotch ;)
They both need to have their own, unique places in the spy film world so they can both exist and be successful.
[/quote]
Yeah, I think Bond needs his Gadgets back & his somewhat Sci-Fi elements back without making the plot weak. ....these were the things about bond that marvelled the world in the first place. Movies like GF started that all. [/quote]
But DAD ended that, I believe.
Still, Bond can lighten up a bit without going back to the sky-is-the-limit '60s. It's all about finding the right balance.[/quote]
Exactly....not OTT, but the right balance....The Living Daylights had Dalton in serious mode.but the movie still had a few optional extras. And Timothy Dalton was even the one who started the gritty bond thing. Only he was jst ahead of his time. [/quote]
**************************************
Craig can be light in conversations with other characters excluding M but he shouldn’t be cracking jokes during action scenes.
But none that you’re actually able to name when asked ;)
Again, if one big action film can do it then another should be able to. Because you see some aesthetic differences onscreen does not mean they follow different rules behind the scenes. They all get made by people doing the same jobs.
That does remind me of that bit in QoS which, although not actually a joke, just really didn’t work: when he jumps down on the baddie’s jeep and yells “you and I had a mutual friend!” before he shoots the guy. It was just so unnatural and weird to talk like that.
I think a way to freshen Bond up would be to take it to the past. Bring it back to the 60s, even the 50s. Bring in some sci-fi elements with the gadgets that would fit the Cold War era. And perhaps even take it to the next level and just make Bond rated R. There is surely a market for it. It isn't tweeners and high schoolers will be the ones at the front of the line of a Bond movie.
I think some see this more than others, possibly if there was some action set pieces that were thrilling and full of suspense. Even the PTS isn't as good as the previous films.
After that each set piece is as limp as the next, the relationship between Bond and Swann is just not convincing and the foster brother angle aside Waltz is just not that exciting as Oberhauser and his reveal as ESB just doesn't register at all.
Both of those end set pieces, the base one is tension less and the London one is yawn inducing. Skyfall wasn't loaded with action, although its PTS leaves SP's standing and the Scotland climax is explosive and thrilling.
It seems that NTTD is going to follow on from SP, if it makes sense of SP that will be an achievement in itself and if Waltz gets to deliver in his appearance the performance we expected from the 2 time Oscar winner. Maybe it will make the bitter pill that is SPECTRE that much easier to swallow.
I never want to see Daniel Craig shoehorned into a film that would have better suited Pierce, that also might be another a reason why I feel the way about it I do.
When I watched Knives Out yesterday there was a mini doc on 1917 with Mendes talking about the technique that they used and you could see he was very proud of it. If only he'd employed some element of that to SPECTRE, there clearly was a film that he would have gladly walked away from if he could have, he even said that he didn't think he had another one in him, if only he'd stuck with that thought.
I think he feared his reputation would have been damaged by it, whatever idea he and Logan had cooked up was nixed and whatever it was P&W cobbled together did not fire him up. It says it all that the trailer for 1917 says from the director of Skyfall and not SPECTRE.
If only they'd done what they'd done with NTTD we might well have got a film worthy of its title, I think the delays for NTTD are going to show it was worth the wait. Unlike SP which stank of a rush job which Craig clearly wasn't happy with, hence the infamous comment that has dogged him ever since.
I think a good few have come accept it for what it is and enjoy it on that basis but some of us expected much better I guess. I just wasn't expecting just another entry after the way Skyfall ended.
NTTD looks like something very special.
More weird than Ethan talking to a helicopter in fallout or smashing the two helicopters to get detonator.
You occasionally slip in a double post. Please avoid that by making use of our edit button. Thank you.
I think doing Bond period is probably just going to cost too much money, or they have to reduce the scale quite a lot: something like Man From Uncle isn’t as big in scope as a Bond.
Rated R I don’t love the idea of: I think parents should be able to take their kids to a Bond.
Yeah much weirder. It was such a clunky sentence and he had to rush it out, despite it being something you’d say in a much calmer way- it just didn’t fit there.
I have just merged your next double post. See last post on previous page. I must once again urge you to avoid double posting by making use of the edit button.