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
An incarcerated Bond, for a significant amount of the film, just doesnt feel Bond. And presumably we would be flashing back and forward between the two. Not typically a Bond style.
Who knows, it may have been amazing. Gut feeling is, it would have been pretty messy.
That's new to me, I didn't know that. Sounds like an interesting idea; just because he's locked up somewhere doesn't mean he's not doing anything or the plot isn't moving forward.
Not sure where I read it. Thought it was on here somewhere. Of course I could be way off, but I thought that was a plot element. Either way, it might've been interesting.
Not sure if that's spin, though.
It would most certainly have met its release date of 25 October 2019 before the global pandemic and everybody would've seen it by now. 8-X
in
It's very thin, but I think this movie would have been quit divisive. Expressed this way, it feels like it would have been a mix of classic elements and some new to the series. Plus the political subtext with the modern cold war theme. It also reminds me a bit of William Boyd's Solo which has itself polarized critics. However, I think it would have been a financial success since there were no big releases at this time of the year. Thus, the Craig era would have been over sooner. In this context, the pandemic could have served as a time for Eon to think about the future of the series and Bond 26 pre-production could have started much earlier than expected. A 2023 release date would have seemed plausible to me.
Sorry to resurrect this and the Casino Royale 1980's but i want to discuss all 3 of the what if's as this one passed me by completely
But to Start with Boyle... I dont think it would of happened from what I hear Craig was so angry with the script he said either he goes or Boyle... now assuming Craig and boyle could of worked together what we know about his film likely would off been changed. Possibly Garden of Death of course as i have said multiple times this year if we got Garden of Death in 2019 we would be wondering if we would ever see another bond film rather then if we will ever see the 25th film. I could imagine if there was no covid and bond 25 came out in 2019 I could see No Time to Die (with perhaps a different script) coming in 2021 November with Craig..
now lets go back to Casino Royale in the 80's
2 points I want to make
1. Why didn't Mclory try and pursue Casino Royale. Again in theory we could of had an unoffical bond duology of
Casino Royale 1983 (with Connery as 007)
Never say Never Again 1985 (with Connery as 007)
(or maybe with Sam Neil in both films)
2. if it was with Dalton I think he would of pushed for the film to be as close to the book as always
as for Video games there are two thing I always wanted
1. the post Fleming novels to be adapted into video games... it doesn't matter which bond they used but it would of been great for someone like Ubisoft and develop the post Fleming novels in a similar style to the way the films handled the Fleming novels
2. I also loved all of the games even the bad ones are better then having nothing at all... I wish we had video games every year
even years First person games based on the previous films
odd years 3rd person games based on the post fleming novels
that would of been fantastic!
Exactly. There is too little confirmed information to build conclusions with.
Regarding your first point, McClory actually tried to as he teamed up with Sony in 1997 with the hope to produce a rival Bond franchise, based on the two novels that were at their disposal, Casino Royale and Thunderball. Strange as it may sound, Columbia never seemed interested in the prospect of adapting CR again, and only McClory's canvassing in the late '90s was about to change their minds. This is why it does not seem so improbable to me that MGM or United Artists could have obtained the rights of the novel some years before.
That's an interesting thought. I do think Boyle would have done something pretty different so you may be right.
That's a good point; when was it due out? Would it have been the end of 2019 or earlier?
Now that's a really good point. Who had Casino Royale at that time?
That's fun but I guess it's like Eon's logic: why spend money getting the rights to a novel when you can just write your own anyway?
Knowing that their main writers are why the results have been mixed in the last couple of entries, it won’t hurt to let new writers’ adapt the continuation novels into movies.
I don't know; you're constraining your writers then. And I'm not sure any of the continuation novels have really come up with any really striking, must-have ideas. The last two movies have really been more original in terms of plot ideas, even if they didn't quite come together in Spectre's case.
Some of the books have probably had better titles, I'll give them that. Devil May Care and Carte Blanche are proper top notch Bond titles in my book.
Yes indeed. I'd say that maybe Colonel Sun has a slightly special place, perhaps because of its proximity to Fleming in terms of time of release, and it feels more authentic than most of the other continuations. But then most of the good stuff from that has been harvested already anyway.
It was set to be released in November 2019. The only major movie at that time was, it seems to me, Joker which was released early in October and was still at this time a cultural phenomenon. Other major releases include Terminator: Dark Fate and Frozen 2 but I don't think either of the two would have competed with Bond 25: the first one was a commercial failure and the second was aiming for a younger audience. Thus, even if the movie would have been divisive and therefore not gross as much as Skyfall, the landscape of the time would have been favorable for it to be a financial success.
Columbia had held the rights to the novel since the 1960s but never used them after the Feldman's movie. The studio itself was then acquired in the late 80s by Sony that had not been against forming a partnership with McClory in the second half of the 90s. What stopped the project, aside from threats of legal action from Eon, was that MGM traded its share in the rights to adapt Spider-Man on the big screen. Sony was ultimately more interested in the prospect of launching the Spider-Man film series and gave up the rights to Casino Royale.
The only good thing about Carte Blanche was its title. The rest was painful.
I would say the same about Devil May Care!
Yes it would have smashed it, wouldn't it?
Can't blame them: there was always more prospect of sequels and merch from Spidey than there was from a one-off Bond film.
As I say though: great titles! :)
"Before he left the film, Boyle had a different vision. His script involved a retired Bond returning after MI6 agents including M were targeted with a poisonous chemical.
He would return but suffer from depression and alcoholism in his years in isolation. This element is said to still be in the final film.
The whole scheme to poison individuals was led by a Russian oligarch. The leading lady was to be his trapped wife. The character of a young 00 who Bond is forced to team up with was always in NTTD.
The film would be all about Bond getting his groove back. The villain would capture him and he'd spend a lot of time trying to escape prison.
The end of the film was contested and eventually led to Boyle leaving. Boyle had Bond retire and the final scene was him getting knighted by the Queen.
Boyle's film was said to be cheerier and brighter, than what they expected. It had less onus on action. No Time to Die is said to contain many of the same aspects but is based on a new script."
This seems credible to me. Lots of good ideas, especially the ending with the Queen.
Yeah that doesn't sound so awful. No idea if it's true but it sounds fine.
It also sounds quite credible- not completely formulaic like a fan would make up, but also not completely crazy like someone would invent to say how awful it was.
I agree there, I don't see him accepting it, but maybe the film would have sold it to us; maybe the change in character it took Bond on ending in him accepting it is what turned them off the script.