› ›

Would you rather run into Fields at the airport OR Paloma at a bar?

1…4344464849…148

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,311
    Spectre is a bit too renta-mob for me: I'd rather see a baddie with one specific aim.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,460
    Individual, especially after how they botched it with Craig’s era. Maybe after the next actor again, but only if a solid plan is in place next time instead of shoehorning SPECTRE just for the sake of it.
  • 00Beast00Beast
    Posts: 4,762
    Individual villain and plot specifically because I thought Spectre botched the SPECTRE reboot- honestly hated bringing them back in the first place. I thought it created a lack of continuity and was just frankly annoying. SPECTRE was good as they were in the '60s movies and didn't need a comeback.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,210
    00Beast wrote: »
    Individual villain and plot specifically because I thought Spectre botched the SPECTRE reboot- honestly hated bringing them back in the first place. I thought it created a lack of continuity and was just frankly annoying. SPECTRE was good as they were in the '60s movies and didn't need a comeback.

    Agree. Either that or they should've left the organisation in QoS nameless. But anyway, please, please, please a stand alone mission.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,097
    I'm going to be in a minority here and go for SPECTRE. I'd rather have a recurring and resilient threat. I actually wished the Brosnan era had a recurring adversary for some movies.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,757
    It makes sense to back that against the actor in Bond role.

    Or not. Both can be very well done.

  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,592
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I'm going to be in a minority here and go for SPECTRE. I'd rather have a recurring and resilient threat. I actually wished the Brosnan era had a recurring adversary for some movies.

    Me too.
  • delfloriadelfloria
    Posts: 1,858
    An individual villain....................carrying out a SPECTRE assignment, who Bond must defeat. Dr. No or Largo type would work.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,969
    SPECTRE is a poor business model. Everything they build gets blown up. They need new management, new name, and a new logo.
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I'm going to be in a minority here and go for SPECTRE. I'd rather have a recurring and resilient threat. I actually wished the Brosnan era had a recurring adversary for some movies.

    Me too.

    Me three. They've had individual villains in GF and every 007 adventure made between 1973 and 2002 so there's no lack of Bond films with individual villains for the viewer to watch. However, I'd only want a SPECTRE return as a recurring adversarial agency if it were done well just as I would only want an individual villain Bond film if it were done well.

  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,394
    Seems like we are itching for a return to stand alone adventures against an enemy with no links to any organizations.

    Ok lets wade into some waters that recently got stirred up by rumors. The rumor was that Chris Nolan was in talks to direct multi-Bond pictures. But that wasn't the part that caught my eye. It was that these were to be period piece films taking Bond, presumably, back to the 60's.

    This has been mentioned by some fans as being what they want. Course the most recent continuation author, in fact all the continuation authors save one, have done this as well. Bond back in the 50's and 60's.

    So lets see how we feel about this one!

    Would you rather the next Bond picture(s) be period pieces OR keep them as contemporary adventures?
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    edited October 2023 Posts: 1,092
    thedove wrote: »
    Seems like we are itching for a return to stand alone adventures against an enemy with no links to any organizations.

    Ok lets wade into some waters that recently got stirred up by rumors. The rumor was that Chris Nolan was in talks to direct multi-Bond pictures. But that wasn't the part that caught my eye. It was that these were to be period piece films taking Bond, presumably, back to the 60's.

    This has been mentioned by some fans as being what they want. Course the most recent continuation author, in fact all the continuation authors save one, have done this as well. Bond back in the 50's and 60's.

    So lets see how we feel about this one!

    Would you rather the next Bond picture(s) be period pieces OR keep them as contemporary adventures?

    While i think they should remain contemporary, i wouldn't mind seeing a period Bond, just to see how they would flesh it out...

    ...AND FAIL MISERABLY! MWAHAHAHAHAHAH!

    (No offense).
  • Colonel_VenusColonel_Venus
    edited October 2023 Posts: 577
    My preference in this order:

    1. Bond 26 set in the present directed by Nolan (as long as he himself wants to set it in the present)
    2. Bond 26 set in the past directed by Nolan
    [big gap]
    3. Bond 26 set in the present directed by someone else
    4. Bond 26 set in the past directed by someone else

    Geneally, I prefer present day set Bond films. But I REALLY want Nolan to write and direct Bond 26 and I completely trust him. If he wants to set Bond 26 in the past, then that's what I want because it then means that he has a great idea that involves the movie being set in the past.
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,709
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    My preference in this order:

    1. Bond 26 set in the present directed by Nolan (as long as he himself wants to set it in the present)
    2. Bond 26 set in the past directed by Nolan
    [big gap]
    3. Bond 26 set in the present directed by someone else
    4. Bond 26 set in the past directed by someone else

    Geneally, I prefer present day set Bond films. But I REALLY want Nolan to write and direct Bond 26 and I completely trust him. If he want to set Bond 26 in the past, then that's what I want because it then means that he has a great idea that involves the movie being set in the past.

    I feel the same. I'd add a big gap between 3 and 4, actually. Maybe I wouldn't even consider number 4.
  • Risico007Risico007
    edited October 2023 Posts: 9,842
    Present day period for both novels and films

    Games i wouod be fine with some period stuff but beyond that no
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    Contemporary
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,147
    Contemporary.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    There’s no value added to making Bond period, and in fact could be seen as taking a step back.
    Contemporary all the way.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,097
    PrinceKamalKhan wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I'm going to be in a minority here and go for SPECTRE. I'd rather have a recurring and resilient threat. I actually wished the Brosnan era had a recurring adversary for some movies.

    Me too.

    Me three. They've had individual villains in GF and every 007 adventure made between 1973 and 2002 so there's no lack of Bond films with individual villains for the viewer to watch. However, I'd only want a SPECTRE return as a recurring adversarial agency if it were done well just as I would only want an individual villain Bond film if it were done well.

    Well this goes without saying. Nobody wants a Bond film done badly. I would argue though that there are higher risks for some things to be done badly and for some others it can't be done well (robots or invisible cars, for instance).
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,210
    peter wrote: »
    There’s no value added to making Bond period, and in fact could be seen as taking a step back.
    Contemporary all the way.

    hear hear
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,311
    peter wrote: »
    There’s no value added to making Bond period, and in fact could be seen as taking a step back.
    Contemporary all the way.

    Yup, this one. Contemporary all the way.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,009
    I don't care for value added (for the producers), but I'd still love to see a period-piece movie version of all the original Fleming novels. I don't mind if they also continue with a contemporary Bond series, which I'd be dying to watch without a thought. But the period-pieces are what intrigues me far more.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited October 2023 Posts: 4,592
    peter wrote: »
    There’s no value added to making Bond period, and in fact could be seen as taking a step back.
    Contemporary all the way.

    Agreed. Out of all times IFP went back to Fleming’s timeline, it was a mixed bag. The only author who got it right was Anthony Horowitz. And that worked best for his first two novels. Based on his storylines, honestly. Say what you want about Jeffery Deaver and Carte Blanche, at least he tried to push it forward.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,787
    Contemporary, I've voiced out my reasons against the period pieces in the other thread many times.

    I could see period pieces as a separate spin off or series, but not in films.

    Leave the films as contemporary.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,097
    Contemporary as well. I think making it a period piece would open a whole new can of worms: risks of anachronisms, risks of whitewashing, risks of self parody or caricature. Overall, I think a period piece would lack authenticity.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,394
    Very interesting! I am for the contemporary angle as well. Taking him back to the 60's or 50's is to me backwards and will paint them into a corner down the road. Plus how would that work with the existing films?

    Lets focus on another question for our esteemed community.

    Would you rather ski with Tracy or Electra?

    Might be an unfair question but in OHMSS and TWINE Bond skis with a female. In one case it was a chase and they were escaping the baddies, the other it was for a bit of pleasure when suddenly the baddies appeared.

    In both cases an avalanche took them out. However in one case they were both left to die but Bond and his gadgets saved the day.

    Who are you heading to the slopes with?

  • Scaramanga1974Scaramanga1974
    Posts: 711
    I'd rather ski with Electra and not bother rescuing her knowing she's a villainess
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,210
    I'd much rather ski with Tracy, as she's the far more interesting person of the two. Elektra was too arrogant, selfish. Tracy is honest and adventurous.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,957
    They're both gorgeous but I'll pick the one who isn't looking to torture me to death in a medieval chair.
  • JustJamesJustJames London
    Posts: 216
    King.
    Though frankly, I am not one for skiing.
Sign In or Register to comment.