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
Edited title so obvious questions like these don't need to be asked.
I think it's already been confirmed that Bond 23 will be a stand alone adventure - much in the way Goldfinger was stand alone after DN and FRWL...
I get tired of trilogies these days - everything needs to be a god forsaken trilogy..... it's taxing...
let them build up and legitimize QUANTUM into a force that Bond must face in future films - and not kill it prematurely.... we are in the middle of the closest that the series has come to feeling like the Connery era Bond films - with an aggressive no nonsense Bond vs a secret evil organization... the last thing i want to see, is it end before it even has a chance to get started..
With the exception of Dalton's two films, Daniel Craig's tenure in the role has been the most exciting time for the franchise since Connery was in the role, and I'd be disappointed if they decided to cut the Quantum arc short by fitting it into a trilogy rather than having Bond face that particular enemy for a few more films.
We already have the reboot continuity in place, so a younger actor will fit perfectly. Maybe then we can even do what some folks on the IMDb forums are suggesting—bring in Timmy Dalton as M or a villain. That would be exquisite.
To me Craig can not communicate any humour at all, there are a few attempts in CR, but they fail miserably. Bond needs humour, without it the whole fictional character fails miserably because they try to make it too serious. A too serious Bond=a caricature of himself (I'm not talking about silly jokes here, but great oneliners, just look at Connery)
The Bond films need consistency now and Craig has been accepted very very well,and if Bond 23 is going to be as good as i hope it will be then long may he continue.
As for the trilogy idea, I would guess Quantum will either be featured at bit or a lot in all of Craig's films, so the 'standalone' element is allowed to come through but Quantum always has a presence.
If the films make money and Craig is happy then it will be upwards and onwards until his knees give out. Or I hope so.
They let Connery bow out..
Lazenby just F'd up by listening to his managers..
They brought back Connery (as a last resort), and let him bow out again..
Moore they let go until he was 58 - until he found it right to retire the 00 status..
Dalton quit after production (on what would be Goldeneye) was taking forever..
and Brosnan walked away from the role...
i don't recall the producers ever firing their current Bond actor.. so, it's all Mr Craig's call - it's his job for as long as he wants it..
how i remember it going down, was the producers were happy with the money Die Another Day made, but weren't too keen on the direction that the series has taken - and the really wanted to scale the next film back.... meanwhile, they just recently attained the rights to film Casino Royale, which they would use in a reboot - something that going back to the 80s had been an idea of Cubby's to do with Dalton replacing Moore.... so they were anxious to get that going... and Pierce had even expressed interest in doing a more character driven Bond movie
meanwhile, Pierce is being bombarded with question after question about "are you going to retire?" "have you been fired?" - for a few months... and rather than listen to it any longer, he came right out and said something along the lines of "Yes, I am walking away from the role, I feel like it's the right time to do so.." - now, either to save face or at the producers wish, he never mentioned anything about being forced to retire or being fired.... Pierce only started raising a fuss after the fact, when they were going ahead with a more character driven plot with what would be the reboot Casino Royale - something that he really wanted to do.... then came his accusations of being fired.... which i chalked up to sour grapes - since he didn't get what he wanted..
As far as Dalton in concerned, no he was not fired by EON, but John Calley, CEO of MGM at the time refused to greenlight GE if Dalton was attached. Dalton left the role so MGW and BB could get GE made. So really, Dalton was shown the door by MGM.
I'm not saying that we should just forget about Quantum or a backstory, but simply that it shouldn't play a major role in Bond 23. Let's just try and make it the best standalone film that we can:)