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
MGM has gone on record as to say they want a Bond film every two years starting with Bond 23... that would follow the same intervals of time that were part of the franchise from 1977 - 1989, and again from 1995 - 1999
very true... i am not saying that that is what is going to happen - only what MGM wants to happen..
... but i don't think EON would be opposed to that either.... lets not forget, they originally wanted QOS out the following year after CR, but that didn't work out - and before the MGM financial crisis, the reason they wanted a 3 year break between QOS and BOND 23, is because they had been working nonstop almost from 2005 through 2008, 3 straight years...
I'm sure EON wants to get back to some consistency as well too.... but we'll see..
after Bond 23. I'd like to see EON fully explore where they can take the Bond
character while they've got an actor of Daniel Craig's quality in the role.
Fully AGREE!!!
I hope he does five, that way he surpasses Brosnan in every possible way.
But yes, a film every other year would work, or even 2012, 2014, 2017, 2020 if it had to be. Craig would be 52 then.
I agree with the fact that after having waited for so long Brosnan, lasting only 7 years is very annoying. He should have least got another film, ideally two - Brosnan wanted to do 6 anyway.
They've got a good thing going. The reboot is still fresh. People still call himmthe new Bond. They're attracting top notch talent. It would be foolish to tamper with that now.
If Craig only did three he would be a blip on the Bondar. I want a legacy.
This sounds like a contradiction, but the arc for me is less about destroying quantum in 3 films, rather it is about re-establishing Bond's character and motives, and setting up Quantum as a threat. At the end of the trilogy, you can still have more Craig and more Quantum.
Look at the Connery films. You establish SPECTRE in DN, in FRWL you have a plot based on a personal vendetta, and in TB you have a full scale global threat. YOLT is the pay-off, where we reveal Blofeld, but we don't get any closure until the weak Bath-o-sub in DAF. FRWL,TB and YOLT can be looked at as a trilogy in terms of story arc. I don't see why we can't do the same for Craig.