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 suppose Bond's past being visited would depend on its execution but no, I personally don't want to see such bacground exposition put on film. I'm happy with the young Bond novels for that stuff. The movies should focus on the present and taking things forward.
That being said, I'm almost convinced that whatever Bond's past makes it into SF will not be substantial.
The dialogue between Bond and Vesper in the train was good enough. But no verbal mention of Bond´s past should ever be more explicit than that.
TSHLM had this nice moment when Tanya rattles down Bond´s dossier, and Bond turns cold all of a sudden. That was also nice.
I agree is no much as I would not like to see a prolonged flashback to a teenaged Bond living with his Aunt in Kent, but I see no harm in a brief flashback to Bond as a boy standing in front of his parents grave in the rain before flashing back to him standing there in present day.
That's sorta what I had in mind. The thing is if a extended flashback is needed by the plot, we get a long flashback. The bit that has been nagging me is Silverfin and By Royal Command. For obvious reasons the Young Bond Books are one of the most sort after in Hollywood, and proberbly more so after the hunger games. The two books I mentioned earlier NEED that extended flashback and those books with a likely chance of hitting the big screen and showing the origins. So after or just before that what would be wrong of doing it as the mysterious orign has all ready been told.
2004: Its reported by variety that Miramax has brought the film rights to Book 1 (SilverFin) and Book 2 (Bloodfever). Vairty also guesses there will be five books before the official announcement.
[url]http://commanderbond.net/2433/miramax-buys-rights-to-first-two-young-james-bond-novels.html
[/url]
2005: Harry Potter Rumored For Role and the project is described in "early Years".
http://au.movies.ign.com/articles/648/648736p1.html
2005: Higson mentions the film rights to the LA times.
2006: Higson says Not now. BUT NOT NO: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/5031094.stm
2009: The Herald Hints at the films.
http://www.mi6-hq.com/news/index.php?itemid=7768&catid=108&t=qos&s=qos
Ps.
@doubleoego. All the books made the top 50 on release and they are James Bond Books. I Mean what Hollywood big-wig wouldn't want to get their hands on the biggest franchise ever!
Touching on the subject might be good. I always liked how they did it in GE with the passing mention of Bond's parents but to have his family become part of the story itself like they did in 24 season 6? No.
Then again I may be suprised with SF so I'm prepared to change my view come November.
I'd like to hear it discussed a little but not really in a flashback, merely through dialogue. I can't understand why people are so against finding out a little of Bond's background history like in Fleming's YOLT obituary.
"...but I see no harm in a brief flashback to Bond as a boy standing in front of his parents grave in the rain before flashing back to him standing there in present day."
I'm not sure about that, it seems a little cliched. I guess if the teenage Bond stood in the shadows instead of plain sight it would be better. One flashback I would like to see is Bond's parents in their climbing accident. It should be played out how John Pearson described it in the Bond biography. There was an argument at first if I remember, then Bond's father went chasing after his mother up the mountain. It need only be short.
Agree 100%. Who are Babs, MGW or any of us to disagree with Cubby? OK he made a few duff calls in his time but overall his gut instinct was always right.
Especially seeing as now the timeline has been f**ked around with what we would get would be totally different to Fleming and Pearsons definitive versions. I dont want to end up with a situation like Batman where we have multiple versions of origin stories.
I never agreed with all of Cubby's views.
Totally agree. I don't mind subtle references to his past but the audience doesn't need a "Who Do You Think You Are?" episode in a Bond movie. This is the thing that worries me the most about Skyfall.
But i don't whant see Bond his back ground like Voldemort in Harry Potter 6 or before the age of 32. At the moment i think it is fine to have actors who be in there 30,40-50's. I whant a Bond who work for Mi6 (or sometimes CIA) and not more. No young Bond.
As said before i don't mind Judi Dench's M get a Spinoff. This is also to get started again with Bond 24 and Bond 25 it going to be the Mi6 worldwide adventure /commander Bond Bond. Also if Dench M die or return later this is something i think Bond need now.
As far as Cubby, he was human and makes mistakes like everyone else. One particular 1970's film that gets way too far away from reality comes to mind @-)
I presume your talking about MR, but to be fair to Cubby it made more money than any previous Bond film so financially, if not artistically, it can hardly be called a mistake from a producers point of view.
Call me a purist. ;-)
I agree that if the box office was Cubby's primary concern, it was very successful. I always hope every EON Bond movie makes money. Artistically, that's another story for me. The novel was and is one of my favorites and I would have liked to see them give us more of that and less Star Wars.
But Bond and Trevelyan already were on the edge of soap opera ground.
Bruce Wayne´s backstory in BB was done in an excellent fashion, the first 20min of that film are a masterpiece (well, the rest is too). But for Bond the opportunity would have been CR, after that it doesn´t quite make sense.