› ›

Where does Bond go after Craig?

1…3637394142…691

Comments

  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited November 2020 Posts: 5,131
    Mallory wrote: »
    I would like to see the films continue as they are. I see no need or desire to try and "MCU" the whole thing and have spin-offs, tv shows, and a continuous narrative. Bond has survived as it has been for nearly 60 years and it will continue in that vein. It needs to remain true event cinema.

    As for Bond himself, I would like to see a return to a more cultured 007, one who takes pleasure in the finer things in life - drinks, foods etc and a return to a more darkly comedic tone a la Connery - cruel but darkly humorous.

    Craig Bond engages in drinks, food, fashion etc but its just there as window dressing, he doesn't comment on it or anything where as I do like it when Connery talks about the different cherry vintages in both DAF and Goldfinger. Likewise a return to the Bond "know it all isms" as seen in the earlier films.

    I'd also like Bond Number 7 to just be Bond, we have had all the "Bond Begins" elements in the Craig era, leave them there. They worked great there and there's no need to rehash them with a new Bond. I do like the current MI6 crew, and as tradition would like to see them continue.

    Brilliant post.

    The only part I disagree with, is with reference to the MI6 crew. The current Tanner and Q are totally miscast IMO.

    In terms of where the character of Bond should go.....spot on!
  • Agent_Zero_OneAgent_Zero_One Ireland
    Posts: 554
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Mallory wrote: »
    I would like to see the films continue as they are. I see no need or desire to try and "MCU" the whole thing and have spin-offs, tv shows, and a continuous narrative. Bond has survived as it has been for nearly 60 years and it will continue in that vein. It needs to remain true event cinema.

    As for Bond himself, I would like to see a return to a more cultured 007, one who takes pleasure in the finer things in life - drinks, foods etc and a return to a more darkly comedic tone a la Connery - cruel but darkly humorous.

    Craig Bond engages in drinks, food, fashion etc but its just there as window dressing, he doesn't comment on it or anything where as I do like it when Connery talks about the different cherry vintages in both DAF and Goldfinger. Likewise a return to the Bond "know it all isms" as seen in the earlier films.

    I'd also like Bond Number 7 to just be Bond, we have had all the "Bond Begins" elements in the Craig era, leave them there. They worked great there and there's no need to rehash them with a new Bond. I do like the current MI6 crew, and as tradition would like to see them continue.

    Brilliant post.

    The only part I disagree with, is with reference to the MI6 crew. The current Tanner and Q are totally miscast IMO.

    In terms of where the character of Bond should go.....spot on!
    I get that Kinnear's Tanner isn't popular on this board, but what's wrong with Wishaw's Q?
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,617
    @Mallory Spot on with those comments - I'd like to see Bond in a top Tailor being measured for a suit with clear knowledge re exactly what he wants and (a cliche) the tailor recognising Bond as a regular. A metaphor for the new actor "suiting up" for the role. Even better, Bond exiting the changing room from behind the curtain as "the reveal" for the new actor.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited November 2020 Posts: 16,572
    ImpertinentGoon wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    ImpertinentGoon wrote: »
    Herr_Stockmann wrote: »
    Personally, what would interest me in a period piece is a serious treatment of the tackled era, meaning no pastiche of the Connery era, in particular everything associated with it (no hidden base in a volcano for example). The ambition would be to use both the esthetic and political backdrop of the 1950s-1960s, without falling into a nostalgic and fantasized idealization of this period, thus allowing to detach from what X-Men: First Class and The Man from UNCLE were.

    I am, however, certain that if the series became a period piece, it would not be this path that would be chosen and on the contrary we would have something light, much more eyeing towards a "Cold War Chic" atmosphere. It would be a sort of pastiche of the Connery era and I'm not sure that would be good for the series or can be helpful in the long term, even if the idea could be attractive at first.

    I think you are correct in everything you have said here. A good period film with Bond as the main character could be made; it is unlikely that Eon would do it that way.

    I think this would be a project one of the big streaming TV companies would jump at the second Bond is in the public domain. But I don't really understand (US) copyright law enough for when and how that could happen. And who knows if these companies still exist then or if the nostalgia for that era we have at the moment is still the same then.

    Ian Fleming s books are copyright protected through 2034. From 2035, they are in the public domain unless the rules should change before then.

    ‘James Bond 007’ is a trademark of Danjaq. Even if the books went out of copyright you couldn’t use James Bond in an adaptation of them.

    See, that's what I mean. This stuff is so stupendously complicated. Or just stupid.
    How can the books be public domain, but the name of the main character is not?

    It's a trademark, like any company has trademarks. I don't think it's stupid.
    talos7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    I know some hate the idea of a period piece set in the Cold War 60s but I love it. Done properly, not tongue in cheek, it could be successful
    https://screenrant.com/james-bond-craig-reboot-1960s-setting-reason/

    It feels like giving up to me. Like ‘we can’t think of how to make it work anymore so let’s make more Connery movies‘.
    Plus the gadgets get less inventive, the scale has to get smaller, savings from product placements won’t be available... I dunno, it’s just boring. Imagine if Roger had never had his groovy Lotus because they were still setting the films in 1962 when he was making his films... it’s just a bit dull.

    Giving up, not in the least, simply a creative decision.
    Even if only for a three film arc it would make the transition to another actor in a contemporary setting less jarring.

    We've managed to survive that several times before though, I don't know why it would be jarring this time. And I think it would be a creative decision to try and fall back on nostalgia for the old films, it wouldn't be very innovative. And fans would complain it's not faithful enough to Fleming/the Connery films, no matter how they did it.
    Agent_Zero_One wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Mallory wrote: »
    I would like to see the films continue as they are. I see no need or desire to try and "MCU" the whole thing and have spin-offs, tv shows, and a continuous narrative. Bond has survived as it has been for nearly 60 years and it will continue in that vein. It needs to remain true event cinema.

    As for Bond himself, I would like to see a return to a more cultured 007, one who takes pleasure in the finer things in life - drinks, foods etc and a return to a more darkly comedic tone a la Connery - cruel but darkly humorous.

    Craig Bond engages in drinks, food, fashion etc but its just there as window dressing, he doesn't comment on it or anything where as I do like it when Connery talks about the different cherry vintages in both DAF and Goldfinger. Likewise a return to the Bond "know it all isms" as seen in the earlier films.

    I'd also like Bond Number 7 to just be Bond, we have had all the "Bond Begins" elements in the Craig era, leave them there. They worked great there and there's no need to rehash them with a new Bond. I do like the current MI6 crew, and as tradition would like to see them continue.

    Brilliant post.

    The only part I disagree with, is with reference to the MI6 crew. The current Tanner and Q are totally miscast IMO.

    In terms of where the character of Bond should go.....spot on!
    I get that Kinnear's Tanner isn't popular on this board, but what's wrong with Wishaw's Q?

    I can't see the problem with either at all to be honest. I think they both do a fine job.
    I can't see how Whishaw in particular even can be miscast- he has created that character.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    mtm wrote: »
    ImpertinentGoon wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    ImpertinentGoon wrote: »
    Herr_Stockmann wrote: »
    Personally, what would interest me in a period piece is a serious treatment of the tackled era, meaning no pastiche of the Connery era, in particular everything associated with it (no hidden base in a volcano for example). The ambition would be to use both the esthetic and political backdrop of the 1950s-1960s, without falling into a nostalgic and fantasized idealization of this period, thus allowing to detach from what X-Men: First Class and The Man from UNCLE were.

    I am, however, certain that if the series became a period piece, it would not be this path that would be chosen and on the contrary we would have something light, much more eyeing towards a "Cold War Chic" atmosphere. It would be a sort of pastiche of the Connery era and I'm not sure that would be good for the series or can be helpful in the long term, even if the idea could be attractive at first.

    I think you are correct in everything you have said here. A good period film with Bond as the main character could be made; it is unlikely that Eon would do it that way.

    I think this would be a project one of the big streaming TV companies would jump at the second Bond is in the public domain. But I don't really understand (US) copyright law enough for when and how that could happen. And who knows if these companies still exist then or if the nostalgia for that era we have at the moment is still the same then.

    Ian Fleming s books are copyright protected through 2034. From 2035, they are in the public domain unless the rules should change before then.

    ‘James Bond 007’ is a trademark of Danjaq. Even if the books went out of copyright you couldn’t use James Bond in an adaptation of them.

    See, that's what I mean. This stuff is so stupendously complicated. Or just stupid.
    How can the books be public domain, but the name of the main character is not?

    It's a trademark, like any company has trademarks. I don't think it's stupid.

    I think I've said before that I seem to lack an understanding for these types of things, but having a trademark for the name of a main character of a series of books that is (or will be in the future) in the public domain seems ridiculous to me.

    I can't go and invent a product, call it "Beowulf", trademark it and then prevent everybody else from using the name Beowulf when doing an adaption of the Beowulf myth. Or even make a Beowulf movie series and then stop anybody else from doing likewise.

    I understand, that there are loads of movie-specific things that remain copyrighted even if the book series is public domain. I couldn't just produce a movie that f.e. specifically and explicitly fills the gap between QOS and SF. But telling a story about a British secret agent called James Bond who has a Licence to Kill and the codename 007 should be on the table. Danjaq didn't invent those things, Ian Fleming did.
  • 007InAction007InAction Australia
    Posts: 2,579
    Barbara Broccoli on james bond casting: “he doesn’t need to be a white man. Not as far as I’m concerned.”

    https://collider.com/james-bond-cary-fukunaga-return-director/
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited November 2020 Posts: 16,572
    ImpertinentGoon wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    ImpertinentGoon wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    ImpertinentGoon wrote: »
    Herr_Stockmann wrote: »
    Personally, what would interest me in a period piece is a serious treatment of the tackled era, meaning no pastiche of the Connery era, in particular everything associated with it (no hidden base in a volcano for example). The ambition would be to use both the esthetic and political backdrop of the 1950s-1960s, without falling into a nostalgic and fantasized idealization of this period, thus allowing to detach from what X-Men: First Class and The Man from UNCLE were.

    I am, however, certain that if the series became a period piece, it would not be this path that would be chosen and on the contrary we would have something light, much more eyeing towards a "Cold War Chic" atmosphere. It would be a sort of pastiche of the Connery era and I'm not sure that would be good for the series or can be helpful in the long term, even if the idea could be attractive at first.

    I think you are correct in everything you have said here. A good period film with Bond as the main character could be made; it is unlikely that Eon would do it that way.

    I think this would be a project one of the big streaming TV companies would jump at the second Bond is in the public domain. But I don't really understand (US) copyright law enough for when and how that could happen. And who knows if these companies still exist then or if the nostalgia for that era we have at the moment is still the same then.

    Ian Fleming s books are copyright protected through 2034. From 2035, they are in the public domain unless the rules should change before then.

    ‘James Bond 007’ is a trademark of Danjaq. Even if the books went out of copyright you couldn’t use James Bond in an adaptation of them.

    See, that's what I mean. This stuff is so stupendously complicated. Or just stupid.
    How can the books be public domain, but the name of the main character is not?

    It's a trademark, like any company has trademarks. I don't think it's stupid.

    I think I've said before that I seem to lack an understanding for these types of things, but having a trademark for the name of a main character of a series of books that is (or will be in the future) in the public domain seems ridiculous to me.

    I can't go and invent a product, call it "Beowulf", trademark it and then prevent everybody else from using the name Beowulf when doing an adaption of the Beowulf myth. Or even make a Beowulf movie series and then stop anybody else from doing likewise.

    Beowulf was trademarked in the UK by Paramount:
    https://trademarks.ipo.gov.uk/ipo-tmcase/page/Results/4/EU005312046
    ImpertinentGoon wrote: »
    I understand, that there are loads of movie-specific things that remain copyrighted even if the book series is public domain. I couldn't just produce a movie that f.e. specifically and explicitly fills the gap between QOS and SF. But telling a story about a British secret agent called James Bond who has a Licence to Kill and the codename 007 should be on the table. Danjaq didn't invent those things, Ian Fleming did.

    And they paid him for it. And made it wildly more popular than he could ever have done through their own hard work.
  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    edited November 2020 Posts: 3,327
    007InAction wrote: »
    Barbara Broccoli on james bond casting: “he doesn’t need to be a white man. Not as far as I’m concerned.”

    https://collider.com/james-bond-cary-fukunaga-return-director/

    She is either saying that for the full PC correctness badge, making all the right noises to keep the Twitter trolls happy, yet secretly knows Bond needs to be a white male if it is still keeping faithful to the original 1950's character that Fleming wrote, and keeping her fathers legacy intact too.

    Or...

    She no longer cares about keeping in tact the original character that Fleming wrote about, and is accepting a modern Bond which is a modern day spy in a suit, which bears no resemblance to the character it was once based on. I appreciate for many this won't be an issue, particularly those who are not huge fans of the novels, so it will still get bums on seats in the cinemas.

    If she chooses the latter route, that will be the final nail for me. One step too far. I've been accepting of all other changes to modernise Bond (Moneypenny, Felix Leiter, etc.), but I'll be done then with the film franchise, and will have a lot of films to look fondly back on, but won't ever be a fan of the films from that moment forward, as I've always been more a fan of the novels than the films.

    Once you erase all traces of the origins of the 50's Fleming character, this won't be Bond anymore. Not for me anyway.
  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,853
    straight into the loving arms of Tom hardy ;)
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,691
    https://theplaylist.net/saoirse-ronan-bond-villain-20201114/

    I would support this. Make her character bad from the start. Stop with the female villain plot twists. Saoirse Ronan is talented. Give her a chance! Diane Lane would also make a great villain.
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    Posts: 1,261
    As much as I would like to have Bond 26 in 2022, it seems very unlikely to happen. It's November 2020. And we know, that it takes almost about two years from having first story and screenplay drafts, testing and looking for a new Bond actor, considering possible directors, scouting locations, etc. Which means, they actually should start all this preparations or rather having started it. Maybe they have done so. But maybe they want to wait until NTTD finally and hopfully will get released next year. And rushed Bond movies tend to be weak(er) Bonds.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    DoctorKaufmann wrote: »
    As much as I would like to have Bond 26 in 2022, it seems very unlikely to happen. It's November 2020. And we know, that it takes almost about two years from having first story and screenplay drafts, testing and looking for a new Bond actor, considering possible directors, scouting locations, etc. Which means, they actually should start all this preparations or rather having started it. Maybe they have done so. But maybe they want to wait until NTTD finally and hopfully will get released next year. And rushed Bond movies tend to be weak(er) Bonds.

    Absolutely. I don't believe they have done any substantial prep yet, so 2022 is out of the question from my point of view (hell, it could still happen that NTTD gets pushed again...).

    I hope they seriously consider going the M:I-route (and loads of other franchises previously) and produce two movies with the same crew and an overlapping cast back-to-back. Of course, if you created one stinker, you can't really course correct for the second one (and it feels like this production team likes nothing more than to react to external trends and opinions), but I think it would be a good way of stepping up the pace while keeping production value high.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,204
    My hunch is the thought of B26 hasn't even remotely crossed Barbara or Michael's minds let alone done any prep.
    I'd say the earliest development might begin on another Bond film is 2023, but I still wouldn't hold my breath.
    I'd hope Eon entertains the possibility of doing 2 back to back movies at some point rather than letting years, even generations pass between films then trying to shoehorn a story arc from the most recent entry.
  • Since62Since62
    Posts: 1,650
    In producing two films at once -- a la Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter and others -- they would have to demonstrate some abilities heretofore not displayed. They've not been able to get a polished script done in time to film one film, much less two. I like the idea, too, and promoted it, particularly if they went with an actor on the upper end of the age range, such as Idris Elba. He looks great, including both for the dapper agent as well as for action-guy. Filming two closely together need not mean the stories are connected. They could be two charming action Bond separate stories, no more connected than were the films through most of the years, just filmed closely together. But, again -- they'd really need to get everything together very well before starting at all.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,356
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    My hunch is the thought of B26 hasn't even remotely crossed Barbara or Michael's minds let alone done any prep.
    I'd say the earliest development might begin on another Bond film is 2023, but I still wouldn't hold my breath.
    I'd hope Eon entertains the possibility of doing 2 back to back movies at some point rather than letting years, even generations pass between films then trying to shoehorn a story arc from the most recent entry.

    One issue is that they Eon loves to find contemporary plots for the villains, which is hard to do without a solid release date in mind.
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    Posts: 1,261
    EON always tended to follow popular trends in contemporary movies. LALD used the Blaxploitation, TMWTGG used the popluarity of the Kung Fu movies, and MR was EON's reaction towards STAR WARS. So that is not something new for EON.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited November 2020 Posts: 5,970
    I think EON should avoid back-to-back productions as it would create the concept of continuity within the story which was the Craig eras biggest issue. They should just focus on making one really good film.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited November 2020 Posts: 4,691
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think EON should avoid back-to-back productions as it would create the concept of continuity within the story which was the Craig eras biggest issue. They should just focus on making one really good film.

    But they always try to rush out the Bond actor’s 2nd film. Filming back to back wouldn’t be the worst thing. Also continuity would be better planned with one director on both projects from the beginning.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,204
    I'm calling it right now: after Craig Bond goes on an indefinite hiatus.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited November 2020 Posts: 4,343
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I'm calling it right now: after Craig Bond goes on an indefinite hiatus.

    I don’t think so. Seems like they already offered Cary the job.

    “The reliable scooper added: “Even with the release date for No Time To Die in flux, the EARLIEST stages of work have begun on the next Bond film.

    “Everyone fell in love with Cary Fukunaga and they’ve publicly expressed that they hope to bring him back.

    “I’ve been told they have extended an offer to him to helm the next instalment.”

    https://www.google.it/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/1361637/Next-James-Bond-Timothee-Chalamet-No-Time-To-Die-Cary-Fukunaga-Daniel-Craig/amp
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    matt_u wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I'm calling it right now: after Craig Bond goes on an indefinite hiatus.

    I don’t think so. Seems like they already offered Cary the job.

    “The reliable scooper added: “Even with the release date for No Time To Die in flux, the EARLIEST stages of work have begun on the next Bond film.

    “Everyone fell in love with Cary Fukunaga and they’ve publicly expressed that they hope to bring him back.

    “I’ve been told they have extended an offer to him to helm the next instalment.”

    https://www.google.it/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/1361637/Next-James-Bond-Timothee-Chalamet-No-Time-To-Die-Cary-Fukunaga-Daniel-Craig/amp

    Isn't the same 'scooper' who says they might be going for Chalamet though? Doesn't seem that reliable a source from reading the article. Has it been confirmed that they have offered Cary the job elsewhere?

    Personally, I would be very happy if they started with Fukunaga asap. I am not even very impressed with what I see of NTTD, but at least it would signal confidence in their product, Fukunaga, and themselves, going forward. It would show a coherent vision, so let's hope it's true.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    Well this "scooper" says that one strong option they're considering is hiring a younger actor. Not Chalamet nor Pattinson, but someone 30/35 years old.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    matt_u wrote: »
    Well this "scooper" says that one strong option they're considering is hiring a younger actor. Not Chalamet nor Pattinson, but someone 30/35 years old.

    Ok, got ya.

  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    Yep, we'll see. After all the "Bond is obsolete" story points of the Craig era I would be happy to see a younger actor in the part.
  • 007InAction007InAction Australia
    edited November 2020 Posts: 2,579
    Where does Bond go after Craig?
    or
    Where does Craig go after Bond? : Obscurity ????
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    007InAction wrote: »
    Where does Bond go after Craig?
    or
    Where does Craig go after Bond? : Obscurity ????

    He will obviously continue playing characters with strange Southern-US accents in mid-level thriller-comedies.

    (But honestly, I wouldn't mind a Benoit Blanc series...)
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,204
    matt_u wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I'm calling it right now: after Craig Bond goes on an indefinite hiatus.

    I don’t think so. Seems like they already offered Cary the job.

    “The reliable scooper added: “Even with the release date for No Time To Die in flux, the EARLIEST stages of work have begun on the next Bond film.

    “Everyone fell in love with Cary Fukunaga and they’ve publicly expressed that they hope to bring him back.

    “I’ve been told they have extended an offer to him to helm the next instalment.”

    https://www.google.it/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/1361637/Next-James-Bond-Timothee-Chalamet-No-Time-To-Die-Cary-Fukunaga-Daniel-Craig/amp

    I hope you're right about Fukunaga (even though we have yet to see the final film). I, for one, wish Eon would go back to at least planning a regular schedule after Craig
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,356
    There's a good chance they will offer PWB the opportunity to write the script. This is what Eon tends to do with screenwriters, bring them on to fix one Bond film and then give them first crack at the next.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    Whatever they do, no more continuity or personal issues, PLEASE!!!!
  • DRush76DRush76
    Posts: 533
    I'll take a gifted actor like Wishaw over the buffoonery of Cleese's pale version of Q in DAD all the time . . .


    I have never regarded John Cleese' portrayal of Q in "Die Another Day" as silly. I thought his performance as Q's assistant in "The World Is Not Enough" was buffoonish. But his performance in "DAD"? No. I found Cleese's Q in the 2002 movie to be sarcastic, witty and very entertaining. It's only a pity he wasn't like this in the 1999 film.
Sign In or Register to comment.