Would you rather current Mi6 staff return OR recast all Mi6 staff for the new Bond?

TheSkyfallen06

CrabKey wrote: »

I have no interest in seeing these characters changed. I realize this is a theoretical, but were this to occur, why? What would it achieve? I would like to think this wouldn't be someone's idea of being creative.

I'd suppose it'd work as another way to differentiate "Sevond"'s tenure from Craig's.
However, the way i see it it could also bring up another wave of people on the internet pairing them like they did throughout the Craig era, and i'm not really keen on that.

thedove

Interesting thoughts on the subject. In a world where we have seen established characters gender swapped I posed the question to see the thoughts of the community. I am not sure that either gender change would make for more interesting stories or serve a point, other than to signal this is a different character. I think Q being female would perhaps be a more interesting story choice. I love how @007HallY mentioned Shuri from Black Panther. I could see that being an interesting story choice.

007HallY

I don't think gender changes in themselves make for more interesting spins on characters (again, I don't think a male Moneypenny would fundamentally work to the point it'd be a different character at that point). But that's not to say it can't work either.

There are many things you can do with a female Q. I said in another thread that Llewelyn's Q went from a grumpy schoolmaster type into an eccentric tinkerer. Wishaw's Q was younger than Bond, much more geeky and strait-laced, but someone who ultimately would come round to helping Bond 'off the books' if needed. It's a slightly different spin on the character, but not a fundamental change.

It just depends on what they want to do. I'm not sure if the 'grumpy schoolteacher' route is something we're going to go fully back to (it slowly began to fade by the late Connery era honestly). I think what sticks most with Wishaw and Llewelyn's portrayals of the character is that sense of eccentricity/technical genius, so I think that'll remain. I mentioned Shuri from Black Panther (apart from her being a Q-type character) because her relationship with Tchalla is an older brother/younger sister one, with him teasing her on occasion and her biting back. Again, it's all very playful, and there's that mutual respect/affection between the two. You can do that with a female Q and Bond. With a younger Bond they might well be the same age roughly, which could also strengthen that dynamic.

echo

Bond keeps pace with the times.

We're unlikely to see a Maxwell-like or even Samantha Bond-like relationship between Bond and Moneypenny again. It feels retro.

007HallY

echo wrote: »

Bond keeps pace with the times.

We're unlikely to see a Maxwell-like or even Samantha Bond-like relationship between Bond and Moneypenny again. It feels retro.

I dunno, I think everything's still there in the Craig films (like I said, the chemistry between them is arguably even more pronounced with the shaving scene. Later on they come off more as friends who have a thing of verbally sparring or flirting).

I agree that I don't think we'll get something quite as repetitive/episodic as we got with Maxwell. I think the only major difference will be she'll be more hands on/serve a purpose. She'll probably end up being more akin to an assistant than a simple secretary. She doesn't have to do anything major incidentally. Can be as simple as a scene or two of her giving Bond some sort of information for his mission, or perhaps something like her brief but important roles in OHMSS and LTK. With the usual dash of flirting/banter of course.

Denbigh

That's the key, I mentioned this in my previous post but the dynamic between Moneypenny and Bond doesn't have to change, there can still be that flirty, sexual tension but it's just that they need to make sure she serves a purpose beyond that just as @007HallY has said above.

CraigMooreOHMSS

Wishaw's Q was a nice inversion on the uncle/nephew dynamic that Desmond had with his various Bonds. So I'd be quite happy to see a female Q in Desmond's vein again, where the dynamic is that of an agony aunt. That would be fun.

A male Moneypenny is just Bill Tanner, just less dull. Not really sure what the point of that would be.

thedove

Excellent stuff! It shall be interesting to see if the producers tweak the casting of the Mi6 team.

To that end lets beat a dead horse and pose this one:

Would you rather the current Mi6 staff come back for the new fella OR a complete recast?

Sure there is a whole thread to this but lets give our two cents on this topic for fun. Notice the wording, either you run back the entire Mi6 team OR you recast them all.

In pervious Bonds. Especially the Connery, Lazenby, Moore and Dalton eras there was less tinkering with the Mi6 team. They were our continuity between the different actors playing Bond. With Brosnan we saw a willingness to recast and by the time of Craig the whole team was eventually recast. Only M stayed the same, but one could argue that Dench was playing a different M with Craig.

In this era of continuity. One would suppose that a whole new cast of Mi6 staff would be required for the new guy to set up his own, I am growing to loathe this word, universe. Maybe they do with them what happened with Craig, the gang slowly reappear as the films move on?

Either way I am curious what would you rather, not what you think will happen.

j_w_pepper

This is really rehashing the discussion from a current thread dedicated to this issue ("Should we get a new M / Q / Moneypenny for BOND 26 and beyond ?"). Complete recast is my unequivocal answer. No carry-overs from the previous instalments. It must be entirely clear that the new James Bond is not the same as before, and he mustn't have the same actors playing superiors, allies, friends or colleagues as the last guy did.

Venutius

If it's all or none, I'd have to go none. I do think that Fiennes could've been a classic M and deserves to have played the role in more than three films, but it doesn't work to have all of them back. Clean slate, then.