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
Yeah exactly; that’s what I mean when I say ‘a milder reboot’. I too think the chances of the next Bond having fallen in love with Vesper and gone off with Madeline etc. are pretty much zero, yeah.
Yes indeed: it's notable that this will be their third film and contracts for film series often come in threes don't they? I could imagine Whishaw not doing any more as he's at a high point in his career.
I think you are right...
Yeah I'm the same mate, I'm a little bit worried about that line.
Or I'm in two minds about it at least, like @00Agent said it's just an attempt to get the hype train moving, especially to an American audience that love hyperbole
Yet if that isn't the case, I do wonder what it can mean for the film? Possibly hinting at Nomi being 007? I hope that's the only thing personally, because Nomi being 007 in and of itself is huge shift for the series, let alone if there is anything else
@Pierce2Daniel you're brilliant on this forum for detective work and stalking accounts but honestly how could you be happy if Nomi ended the film as 007 and she returned for future adventures as the lead character?
Nothing against Miss Lynch herself but speaking for myself, I would never go and watch another "Bond" film again, that would be a disaster in my book
But now i can see her working very well in the film and people might get around to cheering for her.
I think her and Bond will have a very competitive relationship, as she's basically him from CR (as far as i can tell).
So i think Bond will end up being more aggressive and reckless because of her, as the trailers indicate. And that's a good thing obviously.
...and I didn't really click onto the idea that she would be "him from CR", that's a very interesting choice if proven correct, and really fits with Fukunaga seemingly wanted to achieve with this, which would make her character even more relevant cause that would also mean she's not just there to be "woke" as people have put it.
That's what they do ;)
In CR they went to great lenght to establish that Bond and his job are pretty messed up by their nature, so you would think to do that kind of job effectively you need to have 'flexible' morals, and some sort of recklessness (which Bond has in spades). This is not a BS bloodless Marvel franchise. In this world that job has consequences. And it comes all straight from Fleming.
As Bond said if you do this job long enough there won't be enough soul left to salvage...
And I want to see that those rules apply to her just as well... Same for Moneypenny who was pushed by M to shot Bond accidentaly and then resigned as she realized field work is not for her.
Nomi is obviously much tougher than that and will consequently have some moral flexibility of her own. She's a government contract Killer, not a hero.
Lol, yes, I'm a lone voice in the wild when it comes to this; I cannot accept that Dalton's Bond is the same as Connery, Moore and Lazenby. My theory is based on the age of the actors and the fact that the Bond films take place in their present day.
So I see Dalton as the first reboot, with he and Brosnan being the same Bond. As for all of the references made to incidents in previous films and the number of actors who carried over, that is just the same thing that they did with Dench and "M", but on steroids.
Oh that's a great point- I didn't think of that either. That makes it a very nice bookend for his time in the role.
Yes I've always seen it that way too, although of course Dalton has also married Tracy at some point.
Yes I've always seen it that way too, although of course Dalton has also married Tracy at some point.
Absolutely. The same events can exist in different timelines.
There's a lot of picking and choosing here. You mentioned tropes. A lot of those tropes are still there. The very core of the series is Bond. And Bond is still Bond. He is the core of the series. And as such, they haven't changed it.
Not yet, at least.
Ah, so you mean when Bond’s girlfriend returned in the second one and they did a slow reveal of Blofeld leading up to him finally meeting Bond in YOLT, that’s exactly the sort of things Bond films don’t do? That’s... confusing :)
No need to get personal. I don’t believe in the assertion so I’m putting the case against it. Saying that the Bond films should and have never done something which they clearly have done several times right from the start makes no sense to me: maybe it does to you. You’re welcome to explain why you think they haven’t if you believe the opposite.
I’m not going to have a go at your character: if you want to have a go at me personally please do so over the PMs, not on the open board. I don’t believe in questioning the person, just the opinion.
Not having a go at you at all. I enjoy reading your comments. I just think that you two were actually in agreement and we’re fighting for semantics.
Yes, Bond films have a formula and they also are always innovative one way or another.
Getting rid of the so called formula entirely and calling that innovation would be idiotic. That doesn’t mean innovation hasn’t been part of the films since the beginning.
And I suppose we all can agree on that.
And hey, if I said racing against Alain Prost was exhausting, I wouldn’t be criticising him negatively, would I. You could very well take my post as a compliment. I did say you liked to fence using logic and semantics. That is exhausting. But rarely in a bad way.
I’m not playing some sort of game: ‘twisting’ isn’t an allegation I see as positive. Yes I use logic to make my points: I’m hardly going to apologise for that!
I honestly have no idea what you’re trying to say here. Are you saying that continuity wasn’t part of the films’ ‘formula’ right from the start in 1962?
@Univex makes a good point and we all get yours. Just wind it in a bit.
True and a great illustration of the difference between the continuity of the Craig films versus the continuity of the Bond films at large. You can't take any Craig film out of context (except Skyfall) which is wholly unlike any other Bond film in the franchise.
Come to think of it this may be one improvement over the novels that the films have done, specifically with OHMSS and YOLT. But just typing that, nothing beats the YOLT novel, what a madhouse.
Yeah okay, I take your point there. QoS was indeed touted as the first true sequel in the series, which is true, but not something I ever recall anyone having an issue with. I’d be surprised if you’ve ever genuinely felt confused watching a Craig film though: they’re not exactly hugely heavy in obscure references back. Skyfall was full of references to Bond and M’s pasts which we hadn’t seen before on screen, and if that material about Hong Kong and Scotland isn’t confusing I’m not sure why it would be confusing that he once fell in love with a woman who died etc.
The idea that continuity is new I do refute though. And the idea that fans don’t like it (when we’re always debating stuff like whether Admiral Hargreaves became M etc.) is a very surprising one to me.
As ringfire replied to me I felt it was fine to reply back: I honestly can’t tell if you guys are interested in conversations or not.
Oh yeah absolutely: no arguments there. I don’t think you’ll find many folk who don’t think it was all a bit cack-handed the way Blofeld, in order to get revenge on James, was supposedly behind Silva’s mission to, er, get revenge...! :)
But creativity? I don’t see any reason why running a thread through several films would make them less creative, and I doubt the Craig films are going to be considered as less long-lived than the other films just because they were linked.