Where does Bond go after Craig?

1565566568570571631

Comments

  • edited June 11 Posts: 1,132
    It's funny because Dalton was a period piece actor and they tried to make him a modern Bond.

    Even Craig had a retro style.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited June 11 Posts: 3,102
    Even Craig had a retro style.
    There's something in that, tbf. That's not a criticism in my book, though. One of the reasons Craig's Bond worked so well for me was because he seemed to carry an air of that old skool, solid, tough but decent and dependable British masculinity that hadn't really been seen since the early '60s. I thought it suited his Bond perfectly.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,000
    007HallY wrote: »
    Was there any particular reason Dalton didn't favour bespoke suits/clothes? Just seems a bit odd considering Fleming's Bond wore bespoke suits that were a bit more slim fitting for the time, and emulating the literary character was Dalton's thing.

    I can understand wanting a more minimal wardrobe, which is very in line with the novels, but otherwise I didn't always get a strong sense of Fleming's Bond from Dalton's clothing in the role.

    I know for TLD he was just cast too late to get the suits made (I think he even wore a dinner suit from his previous film in it). I thought sometimes he did seem quite Bondy- I know it was a bit late 80s baggy style, but his look in Key West with the deck shoes etc. feels quite Fleming to me.
  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Being chauffeured by Tibbett
    edited June 11 Posts: 633
    007HallY wrote: »
    Was there any particular reason Dalton didn't favour bespoke suits/clothes? Just seems a bit odd considering Fleming's Bond wore bespoke suits that were a bit more slim fitting for the time, and emulating the literary character was Dalton's thing.

    I can understand wanting a more minimal wardrobe, which is very in line with the novels, but otherwise I didn't always get a strong sense of Fleming's Bond from Dalton's clothing in the role.

    My impression is Dalton, much like Connery, wasn't very style conscious. But unlike Connery, he lacked a figure like Terence Young imparting his own sense of style onto the character.

    The suits in TLD are still classic and English, even though they lack the polish of proper bespoke garments. Unfortunately, for LTK, they hired an American costume designer who used Miami Vice as her inspiration. Still, we have Dalton to thank for rejecting her suggestion of pastels, so he had some sense of how Bond should dress.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    Venutius wrote: »
    Even Craig had a retro style.
    There's something in that, tbf. That's not a criticism in my book, though. One of the reasons Craig's Bond worked so well for me was because he seemed to carry an air of that old skool, solid, tough but decent and dependable British masculinity that hadn't really been seen since the early '60s. I thought it suited his Bond perfectly.

    Yep I agree with that completely mate, it felt perfectly in line with the character and his portrayal
  • meshypushymeshypushy Ireland
    Posts: 135
    mtm wrote: »
    I definitely can’t imagine Dalton wearing all that Brioni clothing, which I felt made Brosnan look more stuffy than sophisticated.
    I definitely can’t imagine Dalton wearing all that Brioni clothing, which I felt made Brosnan look more stuffy than sophisticated.

    Douglas Hayward was the tailor for Moore's last three films. Hayward cut a fairly soft and relaxed silhouette that probably would've suited Dalton as well, but for whatever reason, he didn't care for it.

    I'd not really thought about that, it's an interesting point. Brosnan used to say it was 'like putting the Batsuit on' in terms of him getting into character, and I guess when I think about it he did look a little stiff when he's all suited up: the Batsuit thing perhaps suggests he was a bit self-conscious in the suits. Makes me think about the stories about Terence Young making Connery sleep in his suit so it became second nature; I don't get that feeling from Pierce.
    Your point about Hayward is fascinating, I'll have to have another look. Certainly I think Roger always looked more at ease.
    I’ve often wondered (as a fan of Brosnan) about the impact of styling on audience’s perceptions of him as Bond. I appreciate it was the 90s but he looked like a teenage male model wearing his Italian uncle’s suits on many occasions. I’m not sure what would have worked on him at the time but part of me wonders whether he might have been received more favourably if he’d had a different look.
    Interesting point about Hayward, I just assumed that Roger just looked natural in a suit. Roger is probably the only Bond in my mind who could have made those Brioni suits work.
  • Posts: 2,197
    I always thought Pierce was one of the more stylish Bonds; none of his outfits have aged poorly the way some of the clothing decisions during the Moore/Dalton years have. In fact Pierce’s look is what sells him as Bond to me. He’s probably the most “dapper” of all the Bond actors.
  • Posts: 3,744
    007HallY wrote: »
    Was there any particular reason Dalton didn't favour bespoke suits/clothes? Just seems a bit odd considering Fleming's Bond wore bespoke suits that were a bit more slim fitting for the time, and emulating the literary character was Dalton's thing.

    I can understand wanting a more minimal wardrobe, which is very in line with the novels, but otherwise I didn't always get a strong sense of Fleming's Bond from Dalton's clothing in the role.

    My impression is Dalton, much like Connery, wasn't very style conscious. But unlike Connery, he lacked a figure like Terence Young imparting his own sense of style onto the character.

    The suits in TLD are still classic and English, even though they lack the polish of proper bespoke garments. Unfortunately, for LTK, they hired an American costume designer who used Miami Vice as her inspiration. Still, we have Dalton to thank for rejecting her suggestion of pastels, so he had some sense of how Bond should dress.

    Makes sense. Explains a lot about the clothing in LTK too.
    I always thought Pierce was one of the more stylish Bonds; none of his outfits have aged poorly the way some of the clothing decisions during the Moore/Dalton years have. In fact Pierce’s look is what sells him as Bond to me. He’s probably the most “dapper” of all the Bond actors.

    Yeah, I actually agree. I don't particularly see anything wrong with his outfits.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 869
    meshypushy wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I definitely can’t imagine Dalton wearing all that Brioni clothing, which I felt made Brosnan look more stuffy than sophisticated.
    I definitely can’t imagine Dalton wearing all that Brioni clothing, which I felt made Brosnan look more stuffy than sophisticated.

    Douglas Hayward was the tailor for Moore's last three films. Hayward cut a fairly soft and relaxed silhouette that probably would've suited Dalton as well, but for whatever reason, he didn't care for it.

    I'd not really thought about that, it's an interesting point. Brosnan used to say it was 'like putting the Batsuit on' in terms of him getting into character, and I guess when I think about it he did look a little stiff when he's all suited up: the Batsuit thing perhaps suggests he was a bit self-conscious in the suits. Makes me think about the stories about Terence Young making Connery sleep in his suit so it became second nature; I don't get that feeling from Pierce.
    Your point about Hayward is fascinating, I'll have to have another look. Certainly I think Roger always looked more at ease.
    I’ve often wondered (as a fan of Brosnan) about the impact of styling on audience’s perceptions of him as Bond. I appreciate it was the 90s but he looked like a teenage male model wearing his Italian uncle’s suits on many occasions. I’m not sure what would have worked on him at the time but part of me wonders whether he might have been received more favourably if he’d had a different look.
    Interesting point about Hayward, I just assumed that Roger just looked natural in a suit. Roger is probably the only Bond in my mind who could have made those Brioni suits work.
    As I remember he was received very favourably at the time. After Goldeneye his films felt slick but lacking something, and I think he was regarded as the right actor but he was unfortunate in when he took over. I remember coming out of Goldeneye thinking he was a great Bond and that we were in for some great films to come. Unfortunately that wasn't (imo) the case, and I came out of TWINE feeling numb.

    Then Craig took over and suddenly Bond was stronger than ever, but Pierce suffered badly from the comparison. Roger has kind of suffered the same fate, being a great crowd-pleaser at the time, but now his films and approach are out of fashion.
  • TuxedoTuxedo Europe
    Posts: 258
    peter wrote: »
    delfloria wrote: »
    As much as I love Connery, to me Daniel Craig is the quintessential Bond. We can't go back to jokey Bond now.

    I'd put Dalton up against Craig any day as Fleming's Bond. Not jokey for sure, but better written humor needs to return.

    I liked Dalton a lot. But his weakness, for me, was the stick up his rear approach. Too often, he always seemed angry. Too angry to the point of being close to unlikeable.

    No matter what Fleming said, his character was likeable and he certainly was not one where he was ready to snap at everyone he came in contact with.

    Craig had a better sense of when to slow down, and say, have a drink with Mathis and enjoy it, although it was business; after his win with Le Chiffre , he celebrated; using Fields for his own enjoyment, but to soften her up and manipulate her in his favour; having dirty Martinis with Madeleine… he was far more dimensional than Dalton.

    I think that difference mainly came from the scripts and directors but not from the actors.
  • Posts: 2,197

    Then Craig took over and suddenly Bond was stronger than ever, but Pierce suffered badly from the comparison. Roger has kind of suffered the same fate, being a great crowd-pleaser at the time, but now his films and approach are out of fashion.

    I think people are going back and at least appreciating both Moore and Brosnan’s films now that the Craig era is over. Besides I don’t Brosnan’s perception as Bond amongst general audiences has really changed regardless of Craig or not. People who grew up in that era with those films, and playing the video games still regard him quite highly while recognizing the flaws of his films. It’s really only the fan base that seems divided over him.
  • edited June 11 Posts: 3,321
    delfloria wrote: »
    Regarding the comment "but all of them walk into a room and there's not a doubt in their mind that they are the sexiest, manliest, coolest guy in that room.", I've met or worked with all the Bond actors and the only one in real life that reflects this comment is................... Connery. You can feel his presence when he walks into a room. Very strange sensation.

    I've read that many times before about Connery, far more than any other Bond actor. In fact there aren't that many actors out there which possess this rare kind of animal male presence that everyone immediately feels when being in the same room.

    I also believe what you say about the other actors not carrying this unique trait. I've never heard any other person that has worked with the other Bonds who also claim they also carry this strange presence.

    It's probably one of the reasons why Connery was constantly labelled as the `sexiest man on earth', despite a balding head with grey sides, badly ageing facial features, and not very appropriate remarks on slapping women. He was the ultimate Alpha Male, silverback gorilla in human form.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited June 11 Posts: 8,148
    Physically, Dalton was surprisingly slight ; I wonder if the fit of his clothing was an attempt to fill him out a bit?
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited June 11 Posts: 9,185
    Tuxedo wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    delfloria wrote: »
    As much as I love Connery, to me Daniel Craig is the quintessential Bond. We can't go back to jokey Bond now.

    I'd put Dalton up against Craig any day as Fleming's Bond. Not jokey for sure, but better written humor needs to return.

    I liked Dalton a lot. But his weakness, for me, was the stick up his rear approach. Too often, he always seemed angry. Too angry to the point of being close to unlikeable.

    No matter what Fleming said, his character was likeable and he certainly was not one where he was ready to snap at everyone he came in contact with.

    Craig had a better sense of when to slow down, and say, have a drink with Mathis and enjoy it, although it was business; after his win with Le Chiffre , he celebrated; using Fields for his own enjoyment, but to soften her up and manipulate her in his favour; having dirty Martinis with Madeleine… he was far more dimensional than Dalton.

    I think that difference mainly came from the scripts and directors but not from the actors.

    The actors bring personality. They bring their interpretation. Much of what I wrote was what Dalton brought, and there were/are times I wondered why he was snapping peoples heads off.

    He was wound tight and didn’t relax.

    However, that coiled spring worked for much of LTK (even though TLD is a stronger film, and one of my favourites).

    I think Dalton needed a stronger director who’d have the wherewithal to tell him to tone it down— that’s not a knock at Glen (the man loved action and it was his specialty, and he was damn good at it, most of the time).
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,128
    meshypushy wrote: »
    meshypushy wrote: »
    I love this video and the attitude this Bond fan is bringing. I find it totally refreshing to listen to and wish more of fandom adopts it.

    He strikes me as a guy who spends most of his time trying to kiss ass with brands, in return for free stuff, whilst being extremely careful about putting his real thoughts out there, trying to strike the balance of not biting the hand that feeds. It was pretty clear he wasn’t a fan of NTTD around the time of its release but he smiled, threw out a few pleasantries, showed up for the free brand events and then when the marketing blitz for the NTTD release ended (and associated freebies for him and his ilk had dried up), he speaks a little more freely on his thoughts on the movie.

    He has zero credibility in my view - either speak freely or take the money from the brands but don’t try fooling and patronising your audience. He’s a good example of why I prefer professional critics and journalists over ‘influencers’.

    Gee, you’re a ray of sunshine.
    I’m just calling out what I see - I’m glad others enjoy his output but it’s not for me. Critique is not an indication of a lack of sunny disposition.

    Okay. For example, I agree with his viewpoint 100% and I’m not at all receiving any kickbacks from Eon. So let’s say that what he’s saying is also my own viewpoint, what do you think of what is said?

    Too optimistic.

    The longer the break, the more tired they seem to be.

    Fans griping about it in the meantime just doesn’t really make sense for me. When Bond does finally come back, the years in between won’t really matter anymore. When GE came out, I assume fans weren’t still upset on not getting films in 1991 and 1993. They were just excited to see Bond return, and I imagine most would be excited when Eon starts production in the winter of 2027, rather than grumbling about how we didn’t get two movies in 2023 and 2025.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,185
    meshypushy wrote: »
    meshypushy wrote: »
    I love this video and the attitude this Bond fan is bringing. I find it totally refreshing to listen to and wish more of fandom adopts it.

    He strikes me as a guy who spends most of his time trying to kiss ass with brands, in return for free stuff, whilst being extremely careful about putting his real thoughts out there, trying to strike the balance of not biting the hand that feeds. It was pretty clear he wasn’t a fan of NTTD around the time of its release but he smiled, threw out a few pleasantries, showed up for the free brand events and then when the marketing blitz for the NTTD release ended (and associated freebies for him and his ilk had dried up), he speaks a little more freely on his thoughts on the movie.

    He has zero credibility in my view - either speak freely or take the money from the brands but don’t try fooling and patronising your audience. He’s a good example of why I prefer professional critics and journalists over ‘influencers’.

    Gee, you’re a ray of sunshine.
    I’m just calling out what I see - I’m glad others enjoy his output but it’s not for me. Critique is not an indication of a lack of sunny disposition.

    Okay. For example, I agree with his viewpoint 100% and I’m not at all receiving any kickbacks from Eon. So let’s say that what he’s saying is also my own viewpoint, what do you think of what is said?

    Too optimistic.

    The longer the break, the more tired they seem to be.

    Fans griping about it in the meantime just doesn’t really make sense for me. When Bond does finally come back, the years in between won’t really matter anymore. When GE came out, I assume fans weren’t still upset on not getting films in 1991 and 1993. They were just excited to see Bond return, and I imagine most would be excited when Eon starts production in the winter of 2027, rather than grumbling about how we didn’t get two movies in 2023 and 2025.

    I can think of two who will grumble, cross their arms and try and hold their breath…
  • edited June 11 Posts: 1,132
    meshypushy wrote: »
    meshypushy wrote: »
    I love this video and the attitude this Bond fan is bringing. I find it totally refreshing to listen to and wish more of fandom adopts it.

    He strikes me as a guy who spends most of his time trying to kiss ass with brands, in return for free stuff, whilst being extremely careful about putting his real thoughts out there, trying to strike the balance of not biting the hand that feeds. It was pretty clear he wasn’t a fan of NTTD around the time of its release but he smiled, threw out a few pleasantries, showed up for the free brand events and then when the marketing blitz for the NTTD release ended (and associated freebies for him and his ilk had dried up), he speaks a little more freely on his thoughts on the movie.

    He has zero credibility in my view - either speak freely or take the money from the brands but don’t try fooling and patronising your audience. He’s a good example of why I prefer professional critics and journalists over ‘influencers’.

    Gee, you’re a ray of sunshine.
    I’m just calling out what I see - I’m glad others enjoy his output but it’s not for me. Critique is not an indication of a lack of sunny disposition.

    Okay. For example, I agree with his viewpoint 100% and I’m not at all receiving any kickbacks from Eon. So let’s say that what he’s saying is also my own viewpoint, what do you think of what is said?

    Too optimistic.

    The longer the break, the more tired they seem to be.

    Fans griping about it in the meantime just doesn’t really make sense for me. When Bond does finally come back, the years in between won’t really matter anymore. When GE came out, I assume fans weren’t still upset on not getting films in 1991 and 1993. They were just excited to see Bond return, and I imagine most would be excited when Eon starts production in the winter of 2027, rather than grumbling about how we didn’t get two movies in 2023 and 2025.

    Many fans miss Dalton's third movie. It mattered a lot.

    If the producers ran out of ideas, then it matters.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,128
    meshypushy wrote: »
    meshypushy wrote: »
    I love this video and the attitude this Bond fan is bringing. I find it totally refreshing to listen to and wish more of fandom adopts it.

    He strikes me as a guy who spends most of his time trying to kiss ass with brands, in return for free stuff, whilst being extremely careful about putting his real thoughts out there, trying to strike the balance of not biting the hand that feeds. It was pretty clear he wasn’t a fan of NTTD around the time of its release but he smiled, threw out a few pleasantries, showed up for the free brand events and then when the marketing blitz for the NTTD release ended (and associated freebies for him and his ilk had dried up), he speaks a little more freely on his thoughts on the movie.

    He has zero credibility in my view - either speak freely or take the money from the brands but don’t try fooling and patronising your audience. He’s a good example of why I prefer professional critics and journalists over ‘influencers’.

    Gee, you’re a ray of sunshine.
    I’m just calling out what I see - I’m glad others enjoy his output but it’s not for me. Critique is not an indication of a lack of sunny disposition.

    Okay. For example, I agree with his viewpoint 100% and I’m not at all receiving any kickbacks from Eon. So let’s say that what he’s saying is also my own viewpoint, what do you think of what is said?

    Too optimistic.

    The longer the break, the more tired they seem to be.

    Fans griping about it in the meantime just doesn’t really make sense for me. When Bond does finally come back, the years in between won’t really matter anymore. When GE came out, I assume fans weren’t still upset on not getting films in 1991 and 1993. They were just excited to see Bond return, and I imagine most would be excited when Eon starts production in the winter of 2027, rather than grumbling about how we didn’t get two movies in 2023 and 2025.

    Many fans miss Dalton's third movie. It mattered a lot.

    If the producers ran out of ideas, then it matters.

    GE was originally a Dalton film, if he had actually returned it would have still came out in 1995, not before.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,185
    meshypushy wrote: »
    meshypushy wrote: »
    I love this video and the attitude this Bond fan is bringing. I find it totally refreshing to listen to and wish more of fandom adopts it.

    He strikes me as a guy who spends most of his time trying to kiss ass with brands, in return for free stuff, whilst being extremely careful about putting his real thoughts out there, trying to strike the balance of not biting the hand that feeds. It was pretty clear he wasn’t a fan of NTTD around the time of its release but he smiled, threw out a few pleasantries, showed up for the free brand events and then when the marketing blitz for the NTTD release ended (and associated freebies for him and his ilk had dried up), he speaks a little more freely on his thoughts on the movie.

    He has zero credibility in my view - either speak freely or take the money from the brands but don’t try fooling and patronising your audience. He’s a good example of why I prefer professional critics and journalists over ‘influencers’.

    Gee, you’re a ray of sunshine.
    I’m just calling out what I see - I’m glad others enjoy his output but it’s not for me. Critique is not an indication of a lack of sunny disposition.

    Okay. For example, I agree with his viewpoint 100% and I’m not at all receiving any kickbacks from Eon. So let’s say that what he’s saying is also my own viewpoint, what do you think of what is said?

    Too optimistic.

    The longer the break, the more tired they seem to be.

    Fans griping about it in the meantime just doesn’t really make sense for me. When Bond does finally come back, the years in between won’t really matter anymore. When GE came out, I assume fans weren’t still upset on not getting films in 1991 and 1993. They were just excited to see Bond return, and I imagine most would be excited when Eon starts production in the winter of 2027, rather than grumbling about how we didn’t get two movies in 2023 and 2025.

    Many fans miss Dalton's third movie. It mattered a lot.

    If the producers ran out of ideas, then it matters.

    Why’d you assume anyone has run out of ideas?
  • Posts: 1,132
    peter wrote: »
    meshypushy wrote: »
    meshypushy wrote: »
    I love this video and the attitude this Bond fan is bringing. I find it totally refreshing to listen to and wish more of fandom adopts it.

    He strikes me as a guy who spends most of his time trying to kiss ass with brands, in return for free stuff, whilst being extremely careful about putting his real thoughts out there, trying to strike the balance of not biting the hand that feeds. It was pretty clear he wasn’t a fan of NTTD around the time of its release but he smiled, threw out a few pleasantries, showed up for the free brand events and then when the marketing blitz for the NTTD release ended (and associated freebies for him and his ilk had dried up), he speaks a little more freely on his thoughts on the movie.

    He has zero credibility in my view - either speak freely or take the money from the brands but don’t try fooling and patronising your audience. He’s a good example of why I prefer professional critics and journalists over ‘influencers’.

    Gee, you’re a ray of sunshine.
    I’m just calling out what I see - I’m glad others enjoy his output but it’s not for me. Critique is not an indication of a lack of sunny disposition.

    Okay. For example, I agree with his viewpoint 100% and I’m not at all receiving any kickbacks from Eon. So let’s say that what he’s saying is also my own viewpoint, what do you think of what is said?

    Too optimistic.

    The longer the break, the more tired they seem to be.

    Fans griping about it in the meantime just doesn’t really make sense for me. When Bond does finally come back, the years in between won’t really matter anymore. When GE came out, I assume fans weren’t still upset on not getting films in 1991 and 1993. They were just excited to see Bond return, and I imagine most would be excited when Eon starts production in the winter of 2027, rather than grumbling about how we didn’t get two movies in 2023 and 2025.

    Many fans miss Dalton's third movie. It mattered a lot.

    If the producers ran out of ideas, then it matters.

    Why’d you assume anyone has run out of ideas?

    I said IF.

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,185
    That’s kind of a redundant thing to say, especially in response to Makeshift’s post. And why would it “matter”? Their job, as filmmakers is to come up with ideas.

    You don’t suddenly lose them as a collective team, lol!
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,155
    meshypushy wrote: »
    meshypushy wrote: »
    I love this video and the attitude this Bond fan is bringing. I find it totally refreshing to listen to and wish more of fandom adopts it.

    He strikes me as a guy who spends most of his time trying to kiss ass with brands, in return for free stuff, whilst being extremely careful about putting his real thoughts out there, trying to strike the balance of not biting the hand that feeds. It was pretty clear he wasn’t a fan of NTTD around the time of its release but he smiled, threw out a few pleasantries, showed up for the free brand events and then when the marketing blitz for the NTTD release ended (and associated freebies for him and his ilk had dried up), he speaks a little more freely on his thoughts on the movie.

    He has zero credibility in my view - either speak freely or take the money from the brands but don’t try fooling and patronising your audience. He’s a good example of why I prefer professional critics and journalists over ‘influencers’.

    Gee, you’re a ray of sunshine.
    I’m just calling out what I see - I’m glad others enjoy his output but it’s not for me. Critique is not an indication of a lack of sunny disposition.

    Okay. For example, I agree with his viewpoint 100% and I’m not at all receiving any kickbacks from Eon. So let’s say that what he’s saying is also my own viewpoint, what do you think of what is said?

    Too optimistic.

    The longer the break, the more tired they seem to be.

    Fans griping about it in the meantime just doesn’t really make sense for me. When Bond does finally come back, the years in between won’t really matter anymore. When GE came out, I assume fans weren’t still upset on not getting films in 1991 and 1993. They were just excited to see Bond return, and I imagine most would be excited when Eon starts production in the winter of 2027, rather than grumbling about how we didn’t get two movies in 2023 and 2025.

    Many fans miss Dalton's third movie. It mattered a lot.

    If the producers ran out of ideas, then it matters.

    I preferred Dalton to Brosnan, but the public didn't. A third Dalton movie at that time could have killed the series.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,000
    echo wrote: »
    meshypushy wrote: »
    meshypushy wrote: »
    I love this video and the attitude this Bond fan is bringing. I find it totally refreshing to listen to and wish more of fandom adopts it.

    He strikes me as a guy who spends most of his time trying to kiss ass with brands, in return for free stuff, whilst being extremely careful about putting his real thoughts out there, trying to strike the balance of not biting the hand that feeds. It was pretty clear he wasn’t a fan of NTTD around the time of its release but he smiled, threw out a few pleasantries, showed up for the free brand events and then when the marketing blitz for the NTTD release ended (and associated freebies for him and his ilk had dried up), he speaks a little more freely on his thoughts on the movie.

    He has zero credibility in my view - either speak freely or take the money from the brands but don’t try fooling and patronising your audience. He’s a good example of why I prefer professional critics and journalists over ‘influencers’.

    Gee, you’re a ray of sunshine.
    I’m just calling out what I see - I’m glad others enjoy his output but it’s not for me. Critique is not an indication of a lack of sunny disposition.

    Okay. For example, I agree with his viewpoint 100% and I’m not at all receiving any kickbacks from Eon. So let’s say that what he’s saying is also my own viewpoint, what do you think of what is said?

    Too optimistic.

    The longer the break, the more tired they seem to be.

    Fans griping about it in the meantime just doesn’t really make sense for me. When Bond does finally come back, the years in between won’t really matter anymore. When GE came out, I assume fans weren’t still upset on not getting films in 1991 and 1993. They were just excited to see Bond return, and I imagine most would be excited when Eon starts production in the winter of 2027, rather than grumbling about how we didn’t get two movies in 2023 and 2025.

    Many fans miss Dalton's third movie. It mattered a lot.

    If the producers ran out of ideas, then it matters.

    I preferred Dalton to Brosnan, but the public didn't. A third Dalton movie at that time could have killed the series.

    Yes, was never going to happen. The studio aren't always wrong.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,128
    If I had to guess, mine would be Eon is intentionally spacing out the length between NTTD and the new film, going by the idea that absence makes the heart grow fonder. This happened with GE, despite many at the time believing Bond might be out of date.

    This allows them all the time in the world to think of what avenues to go. It also lets them figure out problems modern cinema is facing, such as the idea of potential moviegoers deciding to wait for streaming because now they’ve all been trained to expect a film to go straight to streaming after only a few short weeks. There’s a lot of variables they need to sort out.

    I remember NTTD was released on Amazon streaming on November 8th, when it was only just released in the US on October 8th. Which is crazy, and almost hard to believe Eon actually approved of that.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,185
    f I had to guess, mine would be Eon is intentionally spacing out the length between NTTD and the new film, going by the idea that absence makes the heart grow fonder. This happened with GE, despite many at the time believing Bond might be out of date.

    This allows them all the time in the world to think of what avenues to go. It also lets them figure out problems modern cinema is facing, such as the idea of potential moviegoers deciding to wait for streaming because now they’ve all been trained to expect a film to go straight to streaming after only a few short weeks. There’s a lot of variables they need to sort out.

    No, no, no, and no. All of this, all of it! makes me sick!! It’s just plain optimistic and with too much common sense!

    Where the hell are Babs missteps?? Huh?? We all know she’s running out of ideas cuz she’s in love with that one dimensional/no personality idiot Craig??

    I see none of this negativity and hostility over these strangers who we know nothing about!

    Screw this, I’m outta here!

    (Well done @MakeshiftPython — I think you’re probably very close to the mark. Thanks for your post!)
  • Posts: 1,132
    If I had to guess, mine would be Eon is intentionally spacing out the length between NTTD and the new film, going by the idea that absence makes the heart grow fonder. This happened with GE, despite many at the time believing Bond might be out of date.

    This allows them all the time in the world to think of what avenues to go. It also lets them figure out problems modern cinema is facing, such as the idea of potential moviegoers deciding to wait for streaming because now they’ve all been trained to expect a film to go straight to streaming after only a few short weeks. There’s a lot of variables they need to sort out.

    I remember NTTD was released on Amazon streaming on November 8th, when it was only just released in the US on October 8th. Which is crazy, and almost hard to believe Eon actually approved of that.

    Is this good news?
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,155
    If I had to guess, mine would be Eon is intentionally spacing out the length between NTTD and the new film, going by the idea that absence makes the heart grow fonder. This happened with GE, despite many at the time believing Bond might be out of date.

    This allows them all the time in the world to think of what avenues to go. It also lets them figure out problems modern cinema is facing, such as the idea of potential moviegoers deciding to wait for streaming because now they’ve all been trained to expect a film to go straight to streaming after only a few short weeks. There’s a lot of variables they need to sort out.

    I remember NTTD was released on Amazon streaming on November 8th, when it was only just released in the US on October 8th. Which is crazy, and almost hard to believe Eon actually approved of that.

    Is this good news?

    That's a question. [/TB voice]
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,128
    If I had to guess, mine would be Eon is intentionally spacing out the length between NTTD and the new film, going by the idea that absence makes the heart grow fonder. This happened with GE, despite many at the time believing Bond might be out of date.

    This allows them all the time in the world to think of what avenues to go. It also lets them figure out problems modern cinema is facing, such as the idea of potential moviegoers deciding to wait for streaming because now they’ve all been trained to expect a film to go straight to streaming after only a few short weeks. There’s a lot of variables they need to sort out.

    I remember NTTD was released on Amazon streaming on November 8th, when it was only just released in the US on October 8th. Which is crazy, and almost hard to believe Eon actually approved of that.

    Is this good news?

    It’s nuanced news, which I guess could be rounded up or down as bad.
  • Posts: 1,805
    Not for a second do I believe the gap is intended to stimulate more interest in Bond. Nor do I believe it's to allow time to get Craig out of our systems. I was over Craig the moment the missiles landed. Actors come and go. It's Bond I'm not over, not the actor.

    But I also don't believe it takes five years to rethink Bond. Whatever the reasons for the gap, it's other issues.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,128
    We won’t really know anything until they decide to say something about it on their own volition.

    So, I’ll just wait it out. To be honest, I’ll probably only feel antsy if we reach 2026 and still get no word on what’s happening.
Sign In or Register to comment.