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 guess we should hope for the best and see what happens.
I'm partial to Connery and Moore, and prefer Cubby's Bond films so, yes, I loved both of their performances in their final respective films.
In regards to Craig, I personally wouldn't have given him the option of 'NTTD,' simply because he's had a lot of leverage at EON due to the success of 'SF,' and to me, he didn't creatively contribute to make 'SPECTRE' a respectable entry in his series of Bond films. That being said, I don't think he should have been given the chance to "make things right" because it looks like he's beating a dead horse. I mean, just look at the trailer for 'NTTD' for goodness sake: "everyone has secrets, we just didn't get to yours yet." Come on, it's like reopening a casket. It makes me cringe to think of that final scene from 'SPECTRE' where he has this phony smug smile and the camera cheesily shifts, revealing Madeleine in the passenger seat, followed by the driving off into the sunset, yet, it's not really over! The only way anyone can agree to make a sequel to the END OF A STORY is by agreeing to 25 million.
At least with Connery and Moore's final outings, we knew what we were getting from the Cubby produced Bond films as the actors bowed out with dignity. There wasn't this unnecessary unpredictability and insistence on sequels because the producers can't let go of their beloved lead.
Again, this is why I would have recast and restructured after 'SF': https://screenrant.com/spectre-james-bond-movie-bad-problems-reasons/
What should/could EON/Universal apologize for? For the Covid19 pandemic? You can blame EON and Universal for many things, for sure, but clearly, Covid19 is not their fault, we can't blame them for it, they cannot apologogize for it. That bloody thing - pardon my French - just happened and did not ask for permission to do so. And even if the movie would have been released for Valentine's Day, Covic alreday was around, only that people believed, that it is just one of these flus, which won't last long and won't harm too many people. Means, people who went to watch the movies, alreday being infected by the virus (but did not know, as the incubation for it is between 2-14 days) could have infected other peple, becoming one of these super spreaders. the hotspots in Europe were Italy and Austria. Who knows, even if the movie would have opened in November 19 (with Boyle still being at the helm), this could have started a pandemic. We have to wait and see, and hope, that we will get medication and vaccination as soonj as possible, but that would be spring 2021 the earliest. Maybe Boris Johnson should apologise, because we underdstimated the pandemic, telling veryone, that he shook hands with alle the people he had met recently. Or Trump claiming it to be fake news, triggered by the Democrats. Or the Brazilian lunatic of a president.
Maybe this was funny, when it began, but now it becomes dull and boring.
Actually, it might make som sense to fire Tamahori as dierctor of DAD. But then that would be 18 years to late. But maybe...
Abnd Boris Johnson. And Trump. Angela Merkel, Pope Francis. Richard Gloucester... now hang on ....
I can’t say for certain, since I don’t know what goes on behind the scenes, but I get the impression they at least kind of / sort of wanted a more serialized approach at the beginning, since CR ends on a big cliffhanger and the first sequel, QOS, is a fairly direct sequel. I think perhaps the lukewarm reception to QOS made them decide to try a more standalone approach with SF, and also the fact they didn’t have their beloved SPECTRE organization back yet.
Of course, when the rights were won, the serial approach was jumped back on with SP, but handled a bit shoddily. The connections to the past were very forced. I’m hopeful with NTTD, the serial format will at least be handled a lot better and more naturally. Part of me really wishes they had just waited to use SPECTRE and a continuous story until the next actor + era. Even watching all 4 again now, SF still feels super standalone, and CR works too since it kicks the whole thing off, despite the cliffhanger ending.
CR's ending wasn't really a cliffhanger at the time it came out. That was an actual ending, with Craig having become the fully formed Bond we knew in the last 20 films. It was only with QOS that the filmmakers decided to literally pick up from that scene. Craig even went onto say that the second film was never originally meant to be as much of a direct sequel as it ended up being.
I envy you, because I definitely did. Why would the return of Blofeld be executed so pathetically with him crawling like a decrepit dying animal on Vauxhall bridge? I believe that it was so because they weren't sure of Craig's return. It was like throwing all of the remaining ingredients into the punch. If they were going for a more traditional ending, Swann wouldn't have returned in 'NTTD' and if she had, she would have been another Sylvia Trench kind of fling; however, let's not forget that even flings have now become rather taboo, and Madeleine "had to have had depth."
As a matter of fact, if Craig was to return for one last go, it should have been a standalone feature that only referenced the past in regards to his iteration of the character. I would have even respected the idea of Blofeld being rebooted as just another villain, while not carrying the same weight of the classic villain we all know and love. I myself wouldn't have treaded on those waters. It would have at least made more sense to bring back Blofeld with Spectre in the next reboot.
In regards to Craig being a "favorite for many," I can assure you that many have not read Ian Fleming's novels. And while the predecessors may not have been Fleming's ideal, aside from perhaps Dalton, at least they were closer in physical appearance and debonair demeanor than someone like Craig. To me, Craig could have been one of the greatest Bond villains or even a lead in a competing series, like M:I. I still ask myself, why Bond?
Yeah, they were so much in a hurry to use SPECTRE....almost as if they felt Blofeld was the key to unlocking the best of Craig's era. Sure CR and SF are Craig's Standalone Bond films, although I really like QoS. What I would have wanted was, for Craig's Bond to remain rogue, maybe boldly not feature Moneypenny and Q in his era and allow him to fully explore Bond's darker side, which he(Craig) wanted from the start. I think CR and QoS still have the truest reflection of Craig's Bond, which is him being taciturn and ultra-aggresive. SF and SP, even if his performance was still very good, was a bit different from the Bond we were introduced to.
I also really like QOS, and Craig's performance in it. I think all of Craig's first 3 are very strong Bond entries. In tone, CR and QOS play to Craig's strengths the best. Personally, I think SF did a pretty great job balancing the more serious tone of Craig's films while giving it a bit of a more light/classic touch, while not going too far. SP, on the other, suffered not only from the retconning and rushed use of SPECTRE, but a jarring, lighter tone from Craig's previous entries. SP was the dud and misstep of the era for me. If NTTD can manage to even be a mid-tier entry, not as good as the first 3 but significantly better than SP, I'd consider Craig's era a huge success.
The filmmakers were probably interested in seeing one of Bond's flings dissipate rather than just have it occur off screen as traditionally done. For a series as long as Bond, I think it's fine to want to explore that and do something different. There's 24 films at this point, and as Craig's run has proven there's no harm in shaking things up. The closest we got to Bond meeting up with a past fling was in TND, which I thought was underwhelmingly handled. Here instead of the being relegated to the sacrificial lamb the past fling will be the leading lady.
I can't say whether I think Craig's last go should be standalone or not, because I haven't seen NTTD. So I'll reserve judgement.
So, because most audiences have never read the books, Craig being a favorite for those fans doesn't count?
I didn't say it didn't count, but it's a disservice to the fans who do know about the original character.
Yeah, sure. Craig's era is already a success, with NTTD aiming to be the icing on the cake. Part of me thinks the reason they bravely continued with SP's narrative in NTTD, is because they want to make SP relevant with the potential success of NTTD. So in retrospect, fans might appreciate SP.
You're right, it's a millennial thing.
I believe this is correct. Also, a random standalone Craig film after 4 connected films would just be awkward. Cary is on record several times saying he wanted to tie up loose ends/threads from Spectre and bring Bond full circle from CR.
There’s certainly plenty of half-assed narratives from SP that needed to be explored more (ie. flesh out Bond and Madeline’s relationship, the role/power of Blofeld in prison and his continued influence in Spectre organization, etc)
If Cary is able to pull it off, a perfect scenario would be to improve Spectre retroactively by making these narratives meaningful and bring Bond full circle from CR — all while introducing a new villain and plot. It’s a tough task, but Cary is a fantastic storyteller.
You could have just said “get off my lawn”. ;)
But seriously, I think it’s more accurate to say that Craig is the Gen X Bond. The next fellow will undoubtedly be a millennial. Perhaps that Bond will kill the franchise, given how often the media portrays millennials killing businesses.
If I read correctly, you mentioned once that you're in your 20s. I'm 30, so who am I to talk? Haha, but seriously though: no hate to people that enjoy Craig, it's just that I grew up watching the 5 predecessors, and I'm just more partial to nearly everything of the Cubby era.
Nice
Second Unit shooting the car chase in Matera. On the Triumph bike: stuntrider Alistair Whitton. In the DB5 replica: stuntdriver Mark Higgins, and maybe even Léa Seydoux's stuntdouble Jessica Hooker even if it hard to tell in this picture
Ah ok, sorry, my mistake. 'DAD' was my first Bond film in theater as well. I agree, it would be a strange feeling. To be honest, I think the character works the best for someone close to 40 or in his 40s. I know Lazenby was 29 in 'OHMSS,' but I guess since the times were different, he seemed quite a bit older.
Getting more interesting...