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
Yum.
Yeah, it is like so many things we see so often as things fans of the books want to see in the films, that aren't practical for what the film's are nowadays. May is the other example we talk about all the time.
No Time To Diet
Quantum of Soy Sauce
The Waffle Is Not Enough
Never Say Noodles Again
Its called using your imagination , like i couldnt move the legs of my Battle Cat toy but still pretended i could
Diet Another Day ;)
True, but one scene would be very welcome for me. Like the one in FYEO when he has dinner with Kristatos.
Sure, that is quite nice; I'd be happy with something like that. Bond being fussy about the wine choice is fun.
It's quite brief of course, and Bond leaves before his plate is even taken away! :)
Yes these are the issues with food on screen. It's difficult to keep continuity and it's hard on the actors. A solution: do like sex and show before and after the meal. A bit like in CR, but let's actually see the food.
Come on! It can obviously not be "food porn" unless we see them in the act... ;) :P
This is one of those instances where the chimp part of my brain wants both MGM and EON to be sold to either Apple or Netflix and they blow out the franchise even more than Disney do. Fucking "The Wine Show - Bond Edition" with like Mads Mikkelsen, Eva Green and Giancarlo Giannini visiting London, Montenegro (or Prague), Lake Como and Venice? "The Trip" with all living Bond actors visiting shooting locations from their films, eating in local restaurants and talking shit? "The IT Crowd - MI6", Skyfall from the perspective of the IT department? Just give all of it to me!!
I'd watch that show, no doubt! ;))
I think NBC made that show a few years back! ;)
Care to elaborate on why you think this?
Because there's an ever increasing number of points of comparison with any new Bond actor cast and it becomes increasingly difficult to bring new perspective to the role.
I don't think so: no matter how bad something is there's always someone who likes it/them. We've already had a guy who isn't even an actor play Bond, and even he has his fans.
That is assuming the general audience would expect new actors to bring original perspectives to the role. I am not sure that is the case. Brosnan didn't do anything highly original with the character but was still quite universaly liked by the general audience. One could easily argue that Craig hasn't done anything particularly new with the character either, as his take is more or less a continuation of the direction Dalton had taken decades earlier.
That's why I said "almost". Even if Robbie Williams or Kevin Costner had been cast, they would have been the favourite Bonds of some people. But it's a possibility that there's one casting decision that will displease both fans and casual viewers AND that this will be confirmed upon watching the film.
I think Craig brought what Dalton offered, with what Dalton lacked, a certain ease to take Bond's legacy . Brosnan didn't bring much if anything new, but he was plebiscited into the role, something no new actor, not even Moore, ever got. I doubt any new Bond actor will have it so easy upon casting.
Well, you could cast a stuffed toy I guess and pretty much everyone would think it's a bad choice, but honestly I think if you look at realistic choices then you're pretty much never going to find one that almost everyone dislikes. You said you think this might happen, not just that it's a possibility- but I don't really see why you think that.
It's an interesting thought: Brosnan has even said himself that he basically mixed Roger and Sean to make his Bond, but I guess you could well say that Craig mixed Dalton's version with Connery's confidence and sex appeal.
I agree that Craig has the more classic "movie star" presence, but in a way that just emphasizes my point: The general audience primarily love him for his powerful charisma and presence. The fact that his take on Bond felt new and fresh compared to Brosnan's was not irrelevant, but of secondary importance. Every new Bond actor will always be compared to his predecessors and no actor will be approved by everyone, but that's how it's always been. I don't share your pessimistic view that this will get worse in the future. On the contrary it could be that the more Bond actors we get, the less unique and personal the reputation of the previous actors become and that this will ease the burden of living up to them or being compared to them. What is most important at the end of the day is that the new actor, whatever tone he chooses, does so with conviction and is supported in his vision by the studio and crew.
Yeah, my money’s on this. I know Brosnan, and even Craig to a much lesser extent, have got stick from some fans for not being original enough, but to be honest, I think there’s only so many different ways you can play Bond. And by the time we got to Dalton, most of it had been done. Connery set the standard, Lazenby bought more vulnerability to it, Moore emphasised the lighter side, Dalton the darker side.
It’s no surprise that Brosnan and Craig have stuff in common with earlier Bonds, because it’s not like Doctor Who where you can completely reinvent it every time. There’s source material, which means there’s always a general template the actors have to stick to. So, as time goes on, and we have more actors, I think we’ll see less and less criticism that negatively compares the actors to those who came first.
I personally don't want to see Bond reinvented. For me the actor bringing his own charisma and personality to the part is enough to differentiate and infuse Bond with his own flair. Both Pierce and Daniel have buckets of charm , yet are completely different personalities. Both are equally Bondian, IMO.
I remember an interview where Tim said that just by being a different man to Roger Moore or Connery his Bond would inevitably be different. He simply chose to base his interpretation on Fleming.
I'm not really pessimistic, I actually think the franchise will give us a lot of good moments in the future. I'm saying that casting will be increasingly difficult and that it's possible that in the future a Bond actor who will be disliked more than Dalton or Lazenby upon casting and that this first impression will last (unlike Lazenby and Dalton whose legacy have been reassessed).