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
Fair enough. You still fail to explain why it is probable though. Have you had a butchers at the script already?
Bond not completely totalling his car
No mi6 traitors or revenge plots
A better showcase if luxury, glamor and oppulance
Lengthier brutal fist fights akin to CR and QoS
The action movies coming out in 2014 and 2015 seem to involve a villain who has some former association with the hero.
A girl, even the main girl if that can happen, in a bikini wouldn't go a miss. We haven't had that since Casino Royale and then, only briefly.
Thats as thin as Bulgarian prison soup.
Maybe for once, Bond won't follow the current trend to a tee. Just a thought...
Right Wiz?
I agree with Wiz. That's possibly the flimsiest assumption I've seen in forum history.
He is obviously just extrapolating from the last three Bond Movies (BB/Bourne - Bourne - TDK/TDKR) blending it with the lost Art of irony.
You never know mate, perhaps Bond will buddy up with a crackshot, talking Racoon?
What film is that? That sounds strangely interesting to me.
I think you'd like that to be the case, but In the league table of Irony-proponents, I think Perdogg might be languishing towards the bottom. If he offered a reasonable argument it might be of some merit, but given the tenuous nature of his assumption, I'd argue it's merely a case of someone wanting Bond 24 to be shit, if only to validate their narrow-minded outlook on the era.
Guardians of the Galaxy. Bradley Cooper will be voicing 'Rocket Racoon'.
:)) Good one!
@Perdogg, you've been saying that SF was too dependent on other movies and trends, right? So why automatically assume EON and Logan are incapable of coming up with something different? EON still has QUANTUM left to explore and the chance to improve on what was done in the past, they can give us a more compelling villain than Greene as a member this time out if not the head of the organization period. They can also give us a new megalomaniac type independent of QUANTUM or anyone else. There doesn't have to be a prior connection to Bond/MI6 that needs to happen just because the trend says so. Parts of SF were simply lazy writing from P&W, with them gone I think it's more prudent not to assume anything until we hear more about the plot, as this is all a guessing game and people just stating what they want to see, not what we're going to see. If you are going to say probably, you'll need a more convincing argument than "this is the trend" and some insider knowledge to go out on that limb this far away.
They all had very different backgrounds and only two were the main antagonist, as for Vesper she had very different motivations and her treason was caused by blackmail.
That said yes, they should have something different for Bond 24.
The problem is studio are no longer willing to go out on a limb. It has been proven in a number of trade publications and news journals such as Slate. The cost of making movies is going up, box office receipts are down, and after a summer of bombs, Hollywood is no mood to take chances. You have a lot of scripts that are being tailored around successful movies. That's the state of the business today.
I have been arguing that the scriptwriters CAN come up with something different and want them to do so, but the scriptwriters are not paying for the movie the producers are.
The history of the Bond franchise is rife with script changes to suit the director and, of course, the owner.
I am not sure why anyone believes that EON is any different. Clearly Skyfall was influenced by Chris Nolan, it is no secret.
And how does that relate to the smaller budget of Skyfall with the much bigger success when compared to the last Bonds? 'Hollywood' I like to think, isn't EON.
Yes, the success of Skyfall is the future Bond model:
1. Lower cost.
2. Fewer films (which will keep people from getting Bond Fatigued like they did in the 80s) - Less overhead and greater return per film.
3. Familiar Formula for box-office success, e.g Batmann-Chris Nolanesque.
Just like a broken clock shows the right time twice a day, if you wait around long enough Perdogg will finally speak some sense.
I think his 'theory' (if that word even applies to something so flimsy) is based on QOS being heavily Bourne influenced and SF being heavily Nolan Batman trilogy influenced. So one might think Bond 24 would try and attach itself to the current trend. But to go from that vague notion to state that the plot will 'probably' be along certain lines has more gaps in logic and common sense than the bible.
I'm sure they'll get the films out as quick as they can whilst still keeping up a consistent quality and as for a slightly lower cast - last time at least - what's wrong with that?
You've gone from "The cost of making movies is going up, box office receipts are down, and after a summer of bombs, Hollywood is no mood to take chances." to "smaller budget/bigger success and follow a formula."
Make up your damn mind!
Thank you! That's why guessing is just that. MGM doesn't tell EON what kind of Bond movie to make. Yes EON does do market research and look at the trends and they make their own decisions in this area, but going with QUANTUM or a megalomaniac is not going to be "trend following".
If the argument is that the major studios are unimaginative, fine, here's the solution to those of you with this dilemma- support indie films and stop putting money into the big studio's pockets. A new Bond film is supposed to be a joyful experience, meant to be enjoyed for the spirit of "this is our hero back in a new adventure", when it gets dissected to the point that one gets jaded about the whole experience, conveniently overlooks the FRWL/NBNW example while doing so, starts making assumptions without the proper evidence, then what is the point of being a fan anymore? Complaining ad nauseum about something just for the sake of it doesn't solve the problem. No one here has a crystal ball to see into the future.
And we're still overlooking the fact that P&W, the main contributors to trend following, aren't involved. That's reason enough to give Logan a chance and not make any assumptions otherwise.
[-( Sam I can't take anymore of this today. I refuse to let the nega-Normans ruin my enjoyment of these films or my anticipation for the next one. Over and out.
Perdogg knows.
Stop arguing SirHenry and take heed of the soothsayer in our midst. You might just learn something!!
I do think Bond and other movies do follow some sort of trend, but they have been doing so since the beginning of cinema, heck the beginning of fiction. That does not mean they have replace the creative process by cloning. Many movie franchises now have recurring or semi-recurring adversaries (the Joker being introduced in BB, then the League of Shadows reappearing in TDKR), some sort of continuity, but this is something Bond did before, in the early Connery Bonds, and I am all in favor of seeing it again in the franchise.
You're right Wiz, I should probably be bitch slapped for thinking otherwise ;)
Oh hail the mighty Perdogg, seer of all things to come ^:)^