Where does Bond go after Craig?

1614615617619620698

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,624
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    You know I actually thought the same thing about that sequence in Cuba, that it should have been Bond commandeering the car and driving it, it wasn't enough him just coming out and shooting a few bad guys!

    I liked that Paloma got to do something inventive, so I wouldn't take that away from her, but I must admit I was always a bit confused about the level of praise that sequence got at the time because Bond doesn't really do much which is cool- as you say, he mostly just shoots people. He falls into the bar which is something, but it's not hugely original or memorable.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    That sequence feels like it's from a different installment or era almost. I really, really love the score there, the look of the sets, the relationship between Bond and Paloma, but the action's fairly weak and it turns into an absolute snoozefest of Craig sniping folks with a rifle with simplistic ease and little cover required, something I despised about SF and SP's latter sections.
  • Posts: 7,624
    mtm wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    You know I actually thought the same thing about that sequence in Cuba, that it should have been Bond commandeering the car and driving it, it wasn't enough him just coming out and shooting a few bad guys!

    I liked that Paloma got to do something inventive, so I wouldn't take that away from her, but I must admit I was always a bit confused about the level of praise that sequence got at the time because Bond doesn't really do much which is cool- as you say, he mostly just shoots people. He falls into the bar which is something, but it's not hugely original or memorable.

    I never liked the way he popped up after falling into the bar too! It was a bit melodramatic the way he did it! Yes, I agree the Cuba sequence belonged to Paloma, but she did get that cool moment dispatching those few thugs in such a balletic way, Bond should have been given something as cool!
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 27 Posts: 16,624
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    You know I actually thought the same thing about that sequence in Cuba, that it should have been Bond commandeering the car and driving it, it wasn't enough him just coming out and shooting a few bad guys!

    I liked that Paloma got to do something inventive, so I wouldn't take that away from her, but I must admit I was always a bit confused about the level of praise that sequence got at the time because Bond doesn't really do much which is cool- as you say, he mostly just shoots people. He falls into the bar which is something, but it's not hugely original or memorable.

    I never liked the way he popped up after falling into the bar too! It was a bit melodramatic the way he did it!

    Oh I don't mind that; it's a bit of humour, he's playing it a little for laughs there which I can't complain about.
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Yes, I agree the Cuba sequence belonged to Paloma, but she did get that cool moment dispatching those few thugs in such a balletic way, Bond should have been given something as cool!

    I think the idea of Nomi and Bond snatching Valdo back and forth from each other was a good one, which maybe they could have leant into a bit more. I feel like they could have had a bit more fun with it.
    I wonder if they were limited by the set a bit, it almost feels like they should have covered a bit more ground.
  • Posts: 4,310
    Wasn’t the original idea to make it a sort of Busby Berkeley type dance but with guns? I guess it’s kinda there when Paloma and Bond start shooting by the staircase/have this choreography to their movements.

    It’s a bit too zany for me as much as I enjoy it. It feels just a bit too divorced from reality for Bond (the best Bond sequences I feel are heightened reality. Silly enough to have elaborate premises, but presented in a real enough way that you don’t question it).
  • edited August 27 Posts: 1,462
    007HallY wrote: »
    I think it would be a 'careful what you wish for' situation (at least the idea of Nolan directing something 'faithful' to Fleming). It might be something that appeals to a minority of fans in theory, but I suspect in practice it wouldn't necessarily turn out great. Maybe not a disaster as such, but just not the best outcome for a future Bond movie.

    Nolan can't be worse than a TV director with a lazy script.
  • Posts: 3,278
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    That sequence feels like it's from a different installment or era almost. I really, really love the score there, the look of the sets, the relationship between Bond and Paloma, but the action's fairly weak and it turns into an absolute snoozefest of Craig sniping folks with a rifle with simplistic ease and little cover required
    They should have made more of that impressive set they built. The attention to details are mindblowing, from the "cuban" storefronts to paintings of cuban revolutionaries on the wall. But Bond walking out in the open, like only a noob with no combat experience would do in that case, also bothered me a lot. Was he suppose to be drunk? He did after all have several drinks just moments earlier. The whole sequence belongs to de Armas and her quirky facial expressions. My favorite scene in the movie - the sinking ship - moments later.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,624
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    That sequence feels like it's from a different installment or era almost. I really, really love the score there, the look of the sets, the relationship between Bond and Paloma, but the action's fairly weak and it turns into an absolute snoozefest of Craig sniping folks with a rifle with simplistic ease and little cover required
    They should have made more of that impressive set they built. The attention to details are mindblowing, from the "cuban" storefronts to paintings of cuban revolutionaries on the wall.

    How would you make more of it? You can't really shoot the film to show off details on the walls.
    Zekidk wrote: »
    But Bond walking out in the open, like only a noob with no combat experience would do in that case, also bothered me a lot. Was he suppose to be drunk?

    He's James Bond- notice he had no trouble.
  • Posts: 3,278
    mtm wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    That sequence feels like it's from a different installment or era almost. I really, really love the score there, the look of the sets, the relationship between Bond and Paloma, but the action's fairly weak and it turns into an absolute snoozefest of Craig sniping folks with a rifle with simplistic ease and little cover required
    They should have made more of that impressive set they built. The attention to details are mindblowing, from the "cuban" storefronts to paintings of cuban revolutionaries on the wall.

    How would you make more of it?
    A proper setpiece, not just a half-ass shoot'em up scene. Build a set, have stuff going on there, and then find an excuse to blow it up, destroy parts of it or at least be more creative than ending the scene with some falling powercables (!) With some greenscreen added to the set, there could even have been a chase. Footchase down the street, on the roof, whereever. Better use of the old cuban policecars.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,624
    I don't really see how that would make more of the set to be honest.
    I'd like it to be a better setpiece, but that's nothing to do with the use of the set. If anything, as I said above, I feel like the set perhaps actually restricts the scene- with Valdo moving it feels like it was perhaps intended as more of a chase to me.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,703
    mtm wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    You know I actually thought the same thing about that sequence in Cuba, that it should have been Bond commandeering the car and driving it, it wasn't enough him just coming out and shooting a few bad guys!

    I liked that Paloma got to do something inventive, so I wouldn't take that away from her, but I must admit I was always a bit confused about the level of praise that sequence got at the time because Bond doesn't really do much which is cool- as you say, he mostly just shoots people. He falls into the bar which is something, but it's not hugely original or memorable.

    I never liked the way he popped up after falling into the bar too! It was a bit melodramatic the way he did it!

    Oh I don't mind that; it's a bit of humour, he's playing it a little for laughs there which I can't complain about.
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Yes, I agree the Cuba sequence belonged to Paloma, but she did get that cool moment dispatching those few thugs in such a balletic way, Bond should have been given something as cool!

    I think the idea of Nomi and Bond snatching Valdo back and forth from each other was a good one, which maybe they could have leant into a bit more. I feel like they could have had a bit more fun with it.
    I wonder if they were limited by the set a bit, it almost feels like they should have covered a bit more ground.

    I honestly think Paloma should have died on the boat with Felix. It would have been more of a shocker, and she would get more screen time.
  • Posts: 7,624
    Ah, no. Nobody wanted to see Paloma die!!
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited August 27 Posts: 3,160
    Agree that Cuba could almost be from a different film. Loved Paloma, as we all did/do, but it got a bit too daft for me, tbh. 'May I cut in?', etc. Dan's Bond was much better at dark, dry humour than out and out gags. IMO, obvs. I'd much rather have a Bond film that sustained the tone of Matera and Jamaica.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited August 27 Posts: 6,393
    Venutius wrote: »
    Agree that Cuba could almost be from a different film. Loved Paloma, as we all did/do, but it got a bit too daft for me, tbh. 'May I cut in?', etc. Dan's Bond was much better at dark, dry humour than out and out gags. IMO, obvs. I'd much rather have a Bond film that sustained the tone of Matera and Jamaica.

    It's interesting. If you removed the Cuba sequence, you'd have a more tonally consistent film.

    As much as I love de Armas, I find that sequence weirdly directed, from the Spectre ceiling onward. OHMSS had a similarly weird sequence but the transition wasn't as jarring.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    NTTD had plenty enough death as it is. I'll sacrifice a couple extra minutes of Paloma if it spared her from being thrown into that category.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,602
    Are we taking the rumors about EON meeting with Edward Berger with a grain of salt?
  • My interest in Nolan has wavered back and forth, but I've actually warmed up to the idea of him doing Bond if it were a more stripped back, espionage thriller like FRWL, TLD, FYEO, etc. I think it could lend well with his nonlinear storytelling and some of his interests/talents as a writer... I think I'd be less interested in a Nolan Bond film in the vein of his Batman films or Inception, I think we've sort of been there and done that with the Craig films, particularly SF and NTTD.

    Berger is kind of interesting to me, but my ideal choice would still be Gareth Evans or Denis Villeneuve.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,703
    Are we taking the rumors about EON meeting with Edward Berger with a grain of salt?

    Slightly. I don't think the Venom writer has much of a chance. Campbell is always asked back, but this time he might take it, as it is a new Bond actor.
    My interest in Nolan has wavered back and forth, but I've actually warmed up to the idea of him doing Bond if it were a more stripped back, espionage thriller like FRWL, TLD, FYEO, etc. I think it could lend well with his nonlinear storytelling and some of his interests/talents as a writer... I think I'd be less interested in a Nolan Bond film in the vein of his Batman films or Inception, I think we've sort of been there and done that with the Craig films, particularly SF and NTTD.

    Berger is kind of interesting to me, but my ideal choice would still be Gareth Evans or Denis Villeneuve.

    Good viewpoints. I can agree with more of an espionage thriller with Nolan. Same with Denis Villeneuve, I like how they use ensemble casts. I think the MI6 cast will be brought down in screen time, though. Knowing Villeneuve and Nolan though, as fans, they may bring back some iconic characters. If they both directed more than one, Blofeld would almost certainly show up. If they did an origin story, Charmian Bond would probably show up. It just seems like a trademark of theirs. Diving into the mythology of Bond, while using their ensemble casts to full use.
  • edited August 28 Posts: 399
    I don’t think Bond needs Nolan or that Nolan needs Bond but that combination is money in the bank. I can’t think of a franchise and director with better creative/brand synergy in today’s film market. I wouldn’t be surprised if Nolan never directs a Bond film but the proposition will enter franchise lore as one of the great “what if’s”, alongside Spielberg directing a Bond film in the 70s/80s or Brosnan starring in The Living Daylights or Dalton getting a third film.

    In all the reporting (recent and old) of EON meeting with directors/actors/writers, it seems like two points are missed: the information detailed in these articles is likely far older than the reporting suggests, and EON is either taking pitches from directors/writers or trying to match the right director/writer to an idea, direction or treatment.

    Typically, most breaking stories from the trades or scoopers or leakers are things that have happened, or are ongoing. If it’s news concerning something that’s ongoing, then logic dictates that the reporting is detailing something that has already happened/began, even if we’re just hearing about it. For example, Deadline (I believe) reported that Sam Mendes was helping to develop Bond 23 well before he was officially attached as its director.
  • Posts: 2,029
    I am not expecting a stripped back espionage thriller for Bond 26. If anything, I expect the producers will go bigger with more stunts.
  • Posts: 1,650
    CrabKey wrote: »
    I am not expecting a stripped back espionage thriller for Bond 26. If anything, I expect the producers will go bigger with more stunts.

    Agreed ! Stripped back ? Better put that on streaming. Want to get good box office and high streaming success ? Go big or go home.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,455
    Bond 26 will be go big or go home. They need to make a big splash after such a long absence, the marketing for the movie will be huge. I have a feeling Bond 26 could beat The Force Awakens to become the biggest UK boxoffice in history.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,187
    I think it's a no-brainer, actually. The first film of a Bond actor is always seismic. Especially the last three Bonds.
  • edited August 28 Posts: 4,310
    I think you can have something that goes ‘back to basics’ in spirit while still having those big set pieces and stunts. I mean, that’s pretty much CR and TLD, and to some extent it’s GE as well. LALD and DN aren’t exactly the biggest films of their actor’s eras either.

    At the end of the day though it’s James Bond. It’s not meant to be your standard espionage thriller. It always has spectacle and a bit of outlandishness to it.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,455
    Indeed Bond 26 will be less bloated than B25 without all the baggage of past characters, a more straightforward story with more focused action, but I doubt they will spare any expense when it comes to production.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 951
    The trailer is a big part of selling the film to the public, and the trailer needs a film with big stunts to sell a Bond film. The tube-train busting through the wall in Skyfall may have been a stupid plot device but it helped sell the movie through the trailer. As 007HallY has pointed out, Casino Royale was in many ways a stripped-down back-to-basics 007 adventure, but I think it has some of the best action set-pieces of the series: the spectacular foot-chase, the Raiders-homage truck fight at the airport, and even the unnecessary fight in the sinking house, all help tell the audience that Bond is back and stronger than ever.

    With a younger actor in the role I imagine we'll get something comparable for the first film after the hiatus.
  • edited August 28 Posts: 4,310
    I suppose we’re talking about films with such big budgets anyway. We’re not in an early 70s/80s situation where budgets needed to be slashed for these movies.

    It just depends on what they need. The usual fact often brought up here about budget is that SF’s was lower than QOS’, and most people would say the former looks better and has more spectacle. If, for example, we get a Bond 26 which decides to use fewer locations in the story but really amps up the spectacle within them, that might result in a slightly lower cost than NTTD or SP (which are very globe hopping).
  • Posts: 1,462
    I don't know, a new actor is always a risk. Plus, the sequels have to be even bigger.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,264
    I don't know, a new actor is always a risk. Plus, the sequels have to be even bigger.

    Nah. The third one is where you are expected to excel. ;-)
  • edited August 28 Posts: 4,310
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I don't know, a new actor is always a risk. Plus, the sequels have to be even bigger.

    Nah. The third one is where you are expected to excel. ;-)

    Yeah, there's definitely something to that.

    For an actor's first Bond film they generally want to set a specific direction. Often it means going back to basics in some form. CR gave us a more down to earth, gritty modern adaptation of the first Bond adventure even with its big set pieces. TLD is more of a FRWL-esque story involving villains trying to play Bond, a Bond girl being used in this scheme, and it has a healthy dose of Fleming material. GE brought back a lot of the typical Bond tropes we hadn't quite seen in LTK, albeit in a way which changed it up slightly - an M briefing, a Moneypenny scene etc. Even LALD reuses the initial plot beats from DN - agents are killed, Bond is called upon by M, and he's sent to investigate.

    Just by virtue of NTTD being the previous Bond film, I suspect there'll be that same sense of going back to basics, albeit with a fresh twist in there of some sort. What they want the actual story to be might also evoke that - ie. are we going for a cat and mouse type plot along the lines of FRWL or even TMWTGG? Or will it be something like GE or TB where Bond/MI6 is faced with a potentially devastating threat? Perhaps it'll be more along the lines of DN where Bond is sent on a seemingly routine mission but uncovers a much bigger threat by the end (that would actually be a cool way of going back to basics come to think of it).
Sign In or Register to comment.