Where does Bond go after Craig?

1651652654656657696

Comments

  • Posts: 976
    Generation Alpha are growing up in a flawed world, they gravitate towards strong/aspirational characters, heroes who rise above, not heroes who mirror their struggles. A Bond who evolves/grows on screen, without the emotional vulnerability weighing him down. Gen Alpha are intelligent and tech savy, so Bond must be wizard-like with mastery, someone always in control. This type of portrayal would be best received, in my view.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,590
    I guess the problem with Blofeld is he’s slightly a renta-baddie. He doesn’t have much of a hook: he’s just evil and does evil things with Spectre. I kind of prefer villains who have a particular idea behind them- like Carver for example: a media mogul who wants to start a war to win ratings. A unique, eye-catching idea. Blofeld on the other hand can kind of be dropped into any plot, and in a way that makes him slightly less interesting to me.
    I guess in Spectre they were actually trying to make him a little more unique, so I can appreciate that.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 949
    mtm wrote: »
    I guess the problem with Blofeld is he’s slightly a renta-baddie. He doesn’t have much of a hook: he’s just evil and does evil things with Spectre. I kind of prefer villains who have a particular idea behind them- like Carver for example: a media mogul who wants to start a war to win ratings. A unique, eye-catching idea. Blofeld on the other hand can kind of be dropped into any plot, and in a way that makes him slightly less interesting to me.
    I guess in Spectre they were actually trying to make him a little more unique, so I can appreciate that.

    He’s really just William Randolph Hearst mixed with YOLT Blofeld, though. Hearst’s newspaper is often credited with inflaming the American public against Spain (it repeatedly claimed the American warship the U.S.S. Maine was destroyed by the Spanish in an act of sabotage, despite evidence to the contrary), helping start the Spanish-American war which in turn boosted the newspaper’s circulation; and the stealth ship Carver uses to set the U.K. and China at each other is an obvious riff on YOLT’s plot. He’s okay, but I don’t love him.

    Blofeld is fine as an antagonist, but the issue is he needs to kill Bond’s wife to really ascend to his regular iconic level of importance, and that requires a full reboot so you can tell that story again (and I hate the reboot thing) , or to acknowledge the ‘original’ movie continuity (which I’m not convinced Eon are willing to do at this point). Pleasance’s Blofeld is iconic, but unfortunately Austin Powers spoofed him so famously that well is pretty much poisoned, and without the cat, the bald, scarred look, and his status as the man who killed the love of Bond’s life, he does become generic.

    When people compare the Bond franchise to Batman they tend to overlook that Batman has a large number of iconic villains who have a strong enough hook (usually with a very strong visual component) to allow a filmmaker to play with them while maintaining their identity. I don’t think Bond has that luxury.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,590
    I know Carver is based on Hearst (I think he even gets name checked in the film doesn’t he?) but my point is that he has a hook, he’s unique to that film and the film is themed around his particular niche. Whereas Blofekd is just kind of a baddie who can do pretty much any evil plan in the movies, which makes him a bit less interesting: he has no particular defining motivation other than to be evil and make money. He doesn’t really have much to say.
    As you say, it’s killing Tracy which gives him the heft, plus in the early films he’s basically Bond’s Moriarty acting behind the scenes who basically develops a bit of a personal grudge towards 007 after foiling so many plans (all of the things people complain about the Craig films featuring!), and without Tracy the Craigs try to add to that with the foster dad thing, successfully or not depending upon your point of view.
    But to be honest I tend to prefer a Goldfinger or Zorin or whoever villain, one distinct and unique to the evil plot we’re being presented with. You couldn’t drop Goldfinger into TND, but you could put Blofeld in pretty much any of them, which shows he’s perhaps a bit less interesting.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 949
    Okay, maybe I’m going off at a bit of a tangent, but… talking about the franchise as a whole (well, perhaps video games in particular) I think it needs iconic villains, and it is difficult for a villain to hit iconic status when they only show up for one film and then are killed.

    Goldfinger and Oddjob are iconic - Goldfinger’s gold motif, Oddjob’s great visual and unique steel-rimmed bowler, are hooks strong enough to overcome the fact they are tied to one story that kills them at the end. Cat-stroking Blofeld is iconic. Even Jaws is iconic. I think if you want to stretch James Bond to video games and other merchandising you need these very memorable villains with their strong (reusable!) visual hooks. This is what the Batman franchise has in abundance, but the Bond franchise is lacking in. Carver’s one-and-done bad-guy is so tightly tied to his one story I don’t think he transcends it the way Goldfinger (and Oddjob) does.

    I think it’s going to be difficult for Eon to balance the more respectable real-world tone they’ve gone for in the Craig-era which tends to favour relatively real-world villains, while trying to drive the franchise like it’s a Batman merchandising bonanza, which I think they’d also like to do. Safin was definitely an attempt to make it work, and though I loved his visual, I think many people feel he’s a bit undercooked. I’m just not sure how you make this work. I’d think like to see an occasional reoccurring villain who has a strong enough visual hook that you wouldn’t need an exact likeness in other media to identify him… but I worry that might make him cartoony. I’d like that to be interspersed with more one-and-done plot-dependent villains who wouldn’t need to have such a strong visual. I guess I’d like to mix it up, basically.

    Sorry, that was more rambling than I intended. I think the franchise needs some big villains, I just don’t know how to make that happen without getting too far into cartoon territory that it makes the films feel too comic-book.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,590
    Interesting thought, I don't disagree, although I wonder if a lot of those take time to become iconic as well as being inventive and eye-catching.
    It is kind of why I think rebooting Scaramanga wouldn't be the worst thing in the world: a very memorable villain who was perhaps better than the film they gave him.
  • Posts: 3,278
    I think the franchise needs some big villains, I just don’t know how to make that happen without getting too far into cartoon territory.
    Cartoon territory... that's real world 2024. Just take a look at the american election. This guy is easily a great inspiration for a villain. He's even practicing the Kubrick stare:
    ef35008245347c84.jpg
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,693
    Zekidk wrote: »
    I think the franchise needs some big villains, I just don’t know how to make that happen without getting too far into cartoon territory.
    Cartoon territory... that's real world 2024. Just take a look at the american election. This guy is easily a great inspiration for a villain. He's even practicing the Kubrick stare:
    ef35008245347c84.jpg

    Try living here now, lol.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 949
    mtm wrote: »
    Interesting thought, I don't disagree, although I wonder if a lot of those take time to become iconic as well as being inventive and eye-catching.
    It is kind of why I think rebooting Scaramanga wouldn't be the worst thing in the world: a very memorable villain who was perhaps better than the film they gave him.
    Yeah, I think he has good potential. Diego Luna, maybe?
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited October 6 Posts: 6,373
    I wish Waltz had lived up to the promise of his Blofeld, but honestly I prefer Charles Gray to his portrayal. The SP script was just so bad!

    For me, Savalas is the gold standard of Blofeld, despite the accent. He has the plan and he has the menace. Plus, Steppat is just so good (as of course is Rigg) that she elevates Savalas.

    I know Steppat died, but in an alternate universe, both Savalas and Steppat returned in the next film no matter who was playing Bond.

    I can't put the voiceover Blofelds of FRWL and TB in the same class as the onscreen ones. To me, that's more good screenwriting than performance.
  • Posts: 2,025
    As the Craig era began with a clean slate, essentially erasing all previous Bond history, will that be the direction of the next series? Will Bond 26 have zero connection to all previous Bond history? As Craig's era was a continuous story, it seems unlikely that despite the change in actors, Bond 26 can somehow be sandwiched in between CR and say SF.

    Assuming a start from scratch, might we see a new version of Ernst and Irma. If so,
    will they have killed Tracy in the new Bond's past? If Tracy appears, will they eventually kill her? Or will it be Tracy has yet to meet Bond in the next series or perhaps never will?

    Will the new villainous couple be reinvented without any connection whatsoever to the events in previous films and novels?
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    I don’t think we’ll be seeing Blofeld any time soon.
  • Posts: 2,025
    peter wrote: »
    I don’t think we’ll be seeing Blofeld any time soon.

    That's fine with me.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,373
    CrabKey wrote: »
    As the Craig era began with a clean slate, essentially erasing all previous Bond history, will that be the direction of the next series? Will Bond 26 have zero connection to all previous Bond history? As Craig's era was a continuous story, it seems unlikely that despite the change in actors, Bond 26 can somehow be sandwiched in between CR and say SF.

    Assuming a start from scratch, might we see a new version of Ernst and Irma. If so,
    will they have killed Tracy in the new Bond's past? If Tracy appears, will they eventually kill her? Or will it be Tracy has yet to meet Bond in the next series or perhaps never will?

    Will the new villainous couple be reinvented without any connection whatsoever to the events in previous films and novels?

    The genius of rebooting with CR is that it freed the character, and series, from all of that backstory.

    I'd rather Eon start afresh. Let Bond #7 have his own adventures. I really don't want to see Goldfinger or Tracy reappear. And I'd rather Bond #7 not be saddled with Tracy or callbacks to Goldfinger either. Same thing for the Craig era. Leave Vesper, Madeleine, all of them in the past.

    I suppose they could eventually try for a new Blofeld, but I hope they think the character through first. Part of me feels that they should ditch Blofeld as well because they never quite seem to get him right. The cat and the scar and all that feels as retro to me as continually dusting off the Aston Martin.

    What made CR work is that it all felt *fresh* again. Aside from M, Bond, and Leiter, it was showing us characters that we hadn't seen before in the Eon continuity: Vesper, Mathis, etc.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    CrabKey wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I don’t think we’ll be seeing Blofeld any time soon.

    That's fine with me.

    I think it’s fine for a vast majority of us.

    There are more interesting baddies they can create than going over this ground again.
  • Posts: 2,025
    Fan that I am of the original Bond films, I don't expect to see future films that remind me of them. Those days are long past. I am perfectly fine with moving on, but I really want it to be a clean slate. If we're going to get a reworking of scenes from past films and novels, we have not left the past behind, not fully reinventing. I don't require something reimagined from a past film to convince me I am watching a Bond film in a series that has a long history. The Bond theme, the gun barrel opening, Bond himself and his cast of supporting characters will be enough to convince I am seeing a Bond film. By not sampling bits from previous films and novels, I feel as if the films will be freer to chart a path unhampered by what has gone before. IMO, NTTD would have been a better film without the YOLT storyline. Why, because it took me out the film and back the original film, which I am not a fan of, and the novel, of which I am a big fan. I know there are many here who disagree. Yes, I know, Bond films have continually reworked bits. The thing is, they don't have to. If as Peter has said, very talented writers in the film industry and hundreds of story possibilities, then cut all ties with past stories and go where previous Bonds have not gone before.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Fan that I am of the original Bond films, I don't expect to see future films that remind me of them. Those days are long past. I am perfectly fine with moving on, but I really want it to be a clean slate. If we're going to get a reworking of scenes from past films and novels, we have not left the past behind, not fully reinventing. I don't require something reimagined from a past film to convince me I am watching a Bond film in a series that has a long history. The Bond theme, the gun barrel opening, Bond himself and his cast of supporting characters will be enough to convince I am seeing a Bond film. By not sampling bits from previous films and novels, I feel as if the films will be freer to chart a path unhampered by what has gone before. IMO, NTTD would have been a better film without the YOLT storyline. Why, because it took me out the film and back the original film, which I am not a fan of, and the novel, of which I am a big fan. I know there are many here who disagree. Yes, I know, Bond films have continually reworked bits. The thing is, they don't have to. If as Peter has said, very talented writers in the film industry and hundreds of story possibilities, then cut all ties with past stories and go where previous Bonds have not gone before.

    The belief is there are only six (some say seven) types of stories/plots.

    But creative writers find a way of telling a story with a unique spin. So I’m afraid you’ll never get what you are truly looking for, @CrabKey .

    Especially in film where producers literally want “the same, but different” (which is asking for one of these stories with a fresh spin).

    There isn’t a story out there that hasn’t been told. So the writers for Bond will have to come up with a fresh spin on stories they’ve already told several times in the first twenty five films.

    https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20180525-every-story-in-the-world-has-one-of-these-six-basic-plots

  • edited October 6 Posts: 4,294
    Add to that the fact that Bond is a pretty formulaic series anyway (I don’t mean that in a positive or negative way - it just is). The nature of Bond is it’s always the same but different. There’s always a villain with a caper Bond has to thwart, a Bond girl of some sort etc. If there are only seven basic story outlines as said above, I’m sure you can narrow in on the Bond series specifically and say that it also has a limited number of broad story outlines - each example distinct with unique ideas in them incidentally.

    And that’s not a bad thing. It’s how genre movies work in general. Heck, it’s pretty much how all art works. It’s about what each individual work does with those basic story outlines, tropes etc.
  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    Posts: 556
    Zekidk wrote: »
    I think the franchise needs some big villains, I just don’t know how to make that happen without getting too far into cartoon territory.
    Cartoon territory... that's real world 2024. Just take a look at the american election. This guy is easily a great inspiration for a villain. He's even practicing the Kubrick stare:
    ef35008245347c84.jpg

    The guy making electric vehicles is a villain!
  • ArapahoeBondFanArapahoeBondFan Colorado
    Posts: 69
    Zekidk wrote: »
    I think the franchise needs some big villains, I just don’t know how to make that happen without getting too far into cartoon territory.
    Cartoon territory... that's real world 2024. Just take a look at the american election. This guy is easily a great inspiration for a villain. He's even practicing the Kubrick stare:
    ef35008245347c84.jpg

    The guy making electric vehicles is a villain!

    For a second I thought, duh, it's Mads Mikkelsen!
  • Posts: 2,025
    Wow, @Peter, it's all quite disappointing. Should the next Bond film be called NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN. I understand the seven plot archetypes and the basic Bond formula. My hope was for a team of very talented writers who might produce something fresh and inventive. It seems now all we'll get is a bit of spit and polish of something we've seen over and over. Not encouraging at all, especially that "the writers for Bond will have to come up with a fresh spin on stories they’ve already told several times in the first twenty five films." You say there aren't any stories out there that haven't already been told? Do you really believe that? As a writer, you've surely considered a Bond story that hasn't been told. I've got to think there are a lot of great, original Bond stories that owe nothing to previous films and novels waiting to be told.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,590
    But then we have lots of other people saying they don’t want anything new, that Bond shouldn’t get emotionally involved with the mission, that it should be like the 70s again etc. Not everyone can be pleased.
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,168
    A clean slate with the majority of the Craig era placed in the past, would be fine with me.
    Obviously, James Bond has to return. So, to Felix Leiter and even Rene Mathis would be okay for a fresh spin, in the next Bond eras films.
    Leave the likes of Vesper and Madeleine in the past, along with the DB5!
    It's a beautiful and legendary Bond car, but it's done its time. Let's try something new, Bond doesn't need the DB5 to be Bond.
    Whilst Blofeld has been done in both the earlier films and the Craig era, and arguably better in the earlier films. The reintroduction of the character in the future need not be a negative. Following the Fleming character who changes his appearance and doesn't have a scar or a white cat would be a possible route.
    I'm all for using story ideas from Fleming that have yet to make it into the films, along with Fleming characters that haven't been utilised yet. Sir James Molony for example.
    There are many ways Bond can move forward, and still be James Bond. Without the need to place a homage to the past or bringing out the DB5 again.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Wow, @Peter, it's all quite disappointing. Should the next Bond film be called NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN. I understand the seven plot archetypes and the basic Bond formula. My hope was for a team of very talented writers who might produce something fresh and inventive. It seems now all we'll get is a bit of spit and polish of something we've seen over and over. Not encouraging at all, especially that "the writers for Bond will have to come up with a fresh spin on stories they’ve already told several times in the first twenty five films." You say there aren't any stories out there that haven't already been told? Do you really believe that? As a writer, you've surely considered a Bond story that hasn't been told. I've got to think there are a lot of great, original Bond stories that owe nothing to previous films and novels waiting to be told.

    I can assure you; I’ve never thought of a Bond story that’s never been told (because the ones that don’t get told are usually not told for a reason: they’re crap).
  • Posts: 2,025
    If we can get away from the done to death world ending plots and villains, I think there are lots of ways to refresh this series. Just letting Bond do a little sleuthing and be a spy would be a change. And of course he'll be sucked into a bigger plot. Absolutely, get rid of that car once and for all. I love that car but move on. I'd love for Bond to own one of those old Bentley's. Maybe it's a restoration project. Just find a new direction. Let's quit thinking the only place to go is the past. Bond on a training mission without gear. Bond assigned to prevent someone from being assassinated. Bond to infiltrate formula one racing or world football. Bond on a ship that is hijacked by pirates. Bond on a mission to destroy an organization that manufacture bogus drugs. Bond sent to rescue a kidnapped dignitary. I doubt EON will call, but if they do, I'll post here first.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,693
    Benny wrote: »
    A clean slate with the majority of the Craig era placed in the past, would be fine with me.
    Obviously, James Bond has to return. So, to Felix Leiter and even Rene Mathis would be okay for a fresh spin, in the next Bond eras films.
    Leave the likes of Vesper and Madeleine in the past, along with the DB5!
    It's a beautiful and legendary Bond car, but it's done its time. Let's try something new, Bond doesn't need the DB5 to be Bond.
    Whilst Blofeld has been done in both the earlier films and the Craig era, and arguably better in the earlier films. The reintroduction of the character in the future need not be a negative. Following the Fleming character who changes his appearance and doesn't have a scar or a white cat would be a possible route.
    I'm all for using story ideas from Fleming that have yet to make it into the films, along with Fleming characters that haven't been utilised yet. Sir James Molony for example.
    There are many ways Bond can move forward, and still be James Bond. Without the need to place a homage to the past or bringing out the DB5 again.

    This is what I think as well. I like the idea of using Fleming characters who haven’t been used yet. Sir James Molony is a great idea @Benny I wouldn’t have thought about him. My top 5 would be Charmian Bond, Ronnie Vallance, Gala Brand, Loelia Ponsonby and May. As for the car, how about a Bentley? More true to the books. The main reason that I honestly assume Blofeld and Spectre will return is simply because they are Bond’s arch enemies. Maybe he can get the gold tooth finally!
  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    Posts: 556
    Aston Martin is too tied up with Bond now for Bentley to make an appearance. Even their bespoke service is called Q. Same deal with Omega. Rolex ain't coming back.
  • Posts: 2,025
    A classic Bentley can be Bond's personal car. MI6 can give him his usual AM.
  • Posts: 1,869
    CrabKey wrote: »
    A classic Bentley can be Bond's personal car. MI6 can give him his usual AM.

    Well that would be a change from the Craig era where Bond's personal car is the Aston Martin....................or at least it was in CR.
  • edited October 7 Posts: 4,294
    I think Aston Martins are here to stay. As said it's due to these brands having so much business association with the Bond series. The DB5 may or may not make a return as Bond's personal car. Personally, I'm fine with it making a brief appearance, but it doesn't have to either. I don't think simply changing Bond's car is the way to make these films fresh.
    CrabKey wrote: »
    If we can get away from the done to death world ending plots and villains, I think there are lots of ways to refresh this series. Just letting Bond do a little sleuthing and be a spy would be a change. And of course he'll be sucked into a bigger plot. Absolutely, get rid of that car once and for all. I love that car but move on. I'd love for Bond to own one of those old Bentley's. Maybe it's a restoration project. Just find a new direction. Let's quit thinking the only place to go is the past. Bond on a training mission without gear. Bond assigned to prevent someone from being assassinated. Bond to infiltrate formula one racing or world football. Bond on a ship that is hijacked by pirates. Bond on a mission to destroy an organization that manufacture bogus drugs. Bond sent to rescue a kidnapped dignitary. I doubt EON will call, but if they do, I'll post here first.

    I like some of those ideas a lot, but I think the issue is they're simply concepts, which by all means should be fresh and inventive, even if just for Bond. They're not stories however. Some of them have been done before even just broadly in the 007 series (ie. Bond preventing someone from being assassinated is TLD. Bond infiltrating anything, whether it's football or Formula One, is a tried and tested story outline that we see, for example, in Fleming's DAF with Bond infiltrating a diamond smuggling operation, or OHMSS with Bond going undercover as Bray). I'm pretty sure the others have all been done in non-Bond films before. That's not to say they couldn't or shouldn't be done in a Bond movie by the way. I'd love for a Bond film to start with Bond going on a training mission which goes wrong/leaves him without gear (it sounds a bit like TLD's PTS with a bit of DAD's and SF's thrown in, but stretched out a bit into the main story, which has potential).

    It's impossible for a Bond film not to have some sort of similarity to its predecessors. Again, they're formula based adventures. Short of having a Bond film with no villain, no Bond girl, no scheme for Bond to prevent etc. I'm not sure if a Bond story can be completely original. And that's fine. Doesn't mean it can't be fresh.
Sign In or Register to comment.