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
I am not the best with titles so I tried to just use Fleming and thanks... Like I said multiple time (and so did Cubby back in the day) if you ever wonder what to do with James bond in the next film ALWAYS GO BACK TO FLEMING.
My issue with Lazenby is I did watch his second performance as 007 in Diamonds Aren't Forever (the 1989 episode of Hitchcock presents) and man if you thought Moore was the king of eyebrow raises and comedy... hell Lazenby plays it so broad he makes Peter Sellers look like freaking Sean Connery!!!
Like I said one is good enough from him Moore in my opinion was the saving grace and why 007 is still around today.
Personally, I would like to see the full reboot, with young Commander Bond being recruited out of the navy by Admiral M of MI-6.
But on the other hand, a melange of creatives (Danny Boyle/Edgar Wright/Guy Ritchie) each working on their own idiosyncratic visions--with absolutely no continuity between them (including different lead actors)--would also be a thing of beauty. And I like the idea of an animated series: "Into the Bondverse" should become a reality!
My idea is they commit to stand-alone IMAX short features released between their full-length missions. Lends to a different kind of storytelling for ideas that won't fit into big movies. Manageable productions. Keeps public interest in the franchise, potentially lures more into anticipation for the next film. Serves as a training ground for young talent potentially, or keeps their established team working.
Then they roll it up into DVD/Blu-ray releases.
Lets try another what if from the past! As it's been well documented that Sean Connery grew to resent James Bond and the role as he approached YOLT. He decided to leave the series. Many have said this was due to money for the role and for the lack of creative input in the series. In a James Bond and Friends podcast it was stated that Connery had talked to Dean Martin about the Matt Helm series and Dean shared his salary and his creative input and this sent Connery down the path of leaving the series.
For my what if, lets try this scenario. What if when Connery approached Saltzman and Broccoli for more creative control and salary they said yes to both requests. Connery stays on and continues to play Bond. Lets not get into the Connery in OHMSS. Lets take a more high level approach. How long do you think Connery could have played Bond believably? Do you think by getting more money and creative control he would have stayed? Or would he have found another reason to leave the series? What impact positive or negative does Connery staying have on the series?
What say you Mi6? What if Connery received more money and creative control and stayed on as James Bond for more films. What would the impact be?
But, believability aside, I think Connery was done. I think he would have come up with an excuse. He wasn't keen on the media attention the part brought and in particular didn't enjoy making YOLT because of it. What that could have been, I'm not sure.
The long term impact? Well, I guess we possibly wouldn't have twenty five films now. Audiences loved Connery and keeping him longer would likely have made it even more difficult for his image to be separated from Bond's, considering he was the first one in the part. Any successor's attempt would have been even harder to accept.
I regard as Moore's best Bond film. Solitaire was done correctly and mirrored Fleming's novel. The undersea diving finale and keel hauling scene should have taken from Fleming's book though. Basically a more faithful adaption would have improved the plot.
The films might have stuck closer to the books to a degree and lost some of the "hardware".
However, we would have missed out on the Roger Nod, and the iconic, legendary Roger OOOOORRRHHHHHHH!!!!!
I don't know whose theory it is but someone has a theory about Bond's age with AVTAK and it has heightened my enjoyment of the film and added a layer. ;)
I honestly think Connery would have still walked at some point. I think he'd have another reason for leaving the role. But it's kind of a cool what if scenario if only to see a Bond from 1962 to 1983 in the same continuity.
If Connery had been EONs Bond in 1983, I wonder who McClory would get for the part. Roger Moore, perhaps?
I think the impact on the series would have been significant. First off, I am pretty sure we wouldn't have got 25 films. Connery was hugely difficult to replace as it was, in the eyes of the casual viewer even more so.
Had Sean done, say 10 Bond films, It truly would have been 'his' role. I think it would have been almost impossible to recast the part for several years.
As much as he is beloved, and rightly so, he had declined physically by DAF, and essentially looked like a lounge lizard in that. The animal magnetism was slipping into a disinterested swagger. If he had known he was continuing in the role, he may have made more effort, but that's up for debate.
I can't actually believe I'm saying this, but all things considered, I think it would have hurt the series had Sean continued, and he bowed out at the right time.
Great post. Connery also hated being typecast as Bond, and the paparazzi.
As great, as defining, as he was as Bond, Connery was a complainer and a bit of a drama queen. He left at the right time.
Absolutely. I think Connery's departure was a necessary pill to swallow. Had he stayed, though, I wonder how many more films we would have gotten in theory before it became a less viable property without him? 3? 4?
Absolutely, 3 at the most. I must offer my apologies, too. I see you covered a lot of the same things as me in an earlier post.
Can you imagine how difficult things would have been had Sean gone to the mid 70's as Bond, then bowed out. We may not have had another Bond film, until, say GE. I don't think Moore, Lazenby, Dalton or any of the others would have been accepted as Bond by then. It all worked out for the best.
No apologies needed, @Roadphill. Your post was far more eloquent than mine.
As for the rest, I think you're right. It certainly would have hurt the series creatively had he stayed. The full blown reboot-era would have dawned on Bond a lot earlier, possibly.
I think so, and as much as Connery is beloved, there are a whole legion of Bond fans who grew up in an era of the lead actor changing, and it being easy to accept.
@thedove this is one of your most interesting 'what if's', yet.
Absolutely. One of the most enduring things about the series, and its fanbase, is that a huge chunk of them have "their Bond" - the very concept of that invites creative discussion, agreements and disagreements, and that always helps keep the series alive.
Indeed. While I think if most where being objective, it would be hard to argue against Sean being the best Bond, it doesn't mean he is everyone's favourite.
Roger Moore was 'my' Bond, and to have lost his contribution, as well as others would be intolerable.
Good one!
Thanks @Roadphill I enjoy providing the scenarios and appreciate the help that some have offered over the last few months. In fact a while back @MaxCasino sent me a few and I have neglected to use them all.
Over the years we have had a rather spotty history of a gaming double-o7. We have seen some great editions with GE for Nintendo 64 to name the one most sighted as the best Bond video game. Then we have the bizarre of 007 Legends where Daniel Craig is suddenly in OHMSS, MR and other Bond films. I say bizarre cause EON would have us believe his 007 is removed from the Connery, Moore and others. Max proposed a what if where we talked about a scenario where the gaming licence was more consistent and tied into the series in terms of continuity.
So Mi6 what say you? What if James Bond video games were more aligned with the movie 007? What would a gaming Bond do for the movie series? What would the movie series gain from having a consistent quality gaming Bond? Is there untapped potential with the video game Bond?
What if James Bond had a consistent and quality video game presence? What would you like to see games based on the movie series? (GE and QOS) Games that respected what was occurring in the movies but not tied as tightly (Nightfire, Agent Underfire, etc.) or novelty Bond video games? (FRWL the video game, Legends, etc.)
Other than that, I prefer 007 games to be an original idea(Goldeneye 64 not withstanding).
The problem with trying to tie a game into a new film, is invariably they get rushed out to tie in with film marketing, and generally have a 'straight off the production line' feel, and lack any flair. QOS as a game was a prime example of this.
Things like Nightcore, EON and Blood Stone, while far than being perfect, are preferable to me. Or doing a game based on a classic film, as I stated at the start.
Funny thing is that both GE and TND came out two years after their film counterparts. TWINE would come one whole year later. When EA was ready to begin work on their CR, apparently it wouldn't have come in on time like EON wanted which is why their contract was terminated and then when Activision got the gig they actually got to meet the deadline of having the game available right when the film was out. Of course, it felt rushed, and turned out all they did was make a CALL OF DUTY game but with Bond.
I do feel GE as great as it was in its day was inadvertently the worst thing to happen to Bond games. Bond shouldn't be a first person shooter, but that game's shadow loomed so large. Bond would dabble with third person shooters but they always seemed to be exceptions before reverting back to making FPS games. I do think the hiatus may be a good thing for Bond games, because when the time comes hopefully chasing GE is less of a thing. I remember when a promotional video showed a focus group asking if they would be excited about "a new GoldenEye game", as if that was the brand name rather than James Bond. That's how absurd it got. I never played the Wii remake, because it just seemed so bizarre.
It's too bad. I remember when Activision first got the license and Daniel Craig was enthusiastic in participating in the development because he's a big gamer. Seemed like a lot of promise. Then the games weren't really above average, and Craig's enthusiasm shot down the further they churned out less than stellar games. Not that they were bad games, just unremarkable.
Maybe when the new actor takes over EON will give the license again to a developer and hopefully they do something refreshing with he brand.
I remember Nightfall with some fondness and would like to see stand-alone adventures. Who knows it might provide EON with some story material for a future film? LOL!
NSNA is not part of the official canon. It was done without any of the "Bond family" at eon. Most of the call outs with this film centre on the score of the film. Michel Legrand while an accomplished musician and scorer of films was perhaps a misstep in this film. What if McClory had paid Barry enough to coax him to score this film? Would it had improved the film? Or does the fact that this Bond film couldn't use the "James Bond theme" handicap it enough that it would make no difference who scored the film? How would a Barry score impact NSNA?
What if John Barry had scored NSNA? What say you Mi6?
Bill Conti may have returned for OP, AVTAK and TLD.