It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Oh wow! I hope someone has a video of this, or that the Academy posts it.
To be clear, I've only read about that as a second-hand (?) account. But I'm assuming it did in fact occur.
I could be wrong, and perhaps they do have Villeneuve in mind, and because it’s a longer gap they can wait. But I wouldn’t put a bet down for it either way (we simply don’t know and won’t know until long after). The truth is as well none of us understand how much work goes into these films before pre-production, let alone what the situation is with Amazon, what EON’s long term plans for Bond are etc.
@007HallY I personally don't have a problem with the lesser known director names you mention, David Michod is very interesting indeed, The King is one of the best films of the past decade IMO. I think if they were looking to downscale slightly, and go back to a more intimate 150 - 170 million as opposed to 250 - 300 million behemoth, then he would be a very intriguing choice.
I think that’s one where it worked out for them anyway as they couldn’t set a release date due to MGM’s financial issues. I know Mendes came on after QOS and they just kept him on as a consultant throughout that period. I suspect if they wanted someone specifically they’d do something similar (I know Mendes did another film in 2008/9 and did theatre in between as well, so maybe that’s an indication they’re open to choices/don’t have their eyes specifically set on anyone at the moment and if someone was definitively connected we'd know now or soonish). I don’t know, perhaps that means it’ll be more a Fukunaga situation this time where the director is brought on a bit later and helps iron out the script/direction for what EON want, as opposed to Mendes having that more hands on role in coming up with the concepts earlier on.
I think they delayed CR by a year but not due to the director.
Yeah, I think he’d be interesting too. And like I said every director will give us something unique, albeit a spin on EON’s desired Bond film.
I suppose budget depends on necessity and what they want to do. If the story’s scaled back then maybe a 200 million price tag thereabouts is all that’s needed. I don’t know though and I suppose we’ll see.
So yeah, there are plenty of possibilities.
There is a reason, even if you don't acknowledge it. A combination of industry contraction due to the pandemic and the merger of MGM into Amazon. That's why.
Well, that hasn't stopped movies from being released. We can always find an excuse but the world keeps turning.
Yeah, but a lot of those movies didn't do well, including established IPs. I don't think that's the reason for this gap this time round mind (I think it's a combination of things truth be told - getting to grips creatively with a new direction, working out their new working relationship with Amazon/mapping out the future of the franchise and EON as a whole, a longer term strategy involving EON taking a more hands on role in things like the video game/reality show, getting other projects done etc). I'm sure alternative producers could have gone head first into a new era (although it wouldn't necessarily have been a good idea as we now know given the writers/actor's strikes, and I can easily imagine a majority of Bond films in that scenario not doing as well as they could have).
It has stopped movies from being released. There are significantly fewer theatrical releases now compared to before the pandemic. The entire industry is in an uncertain period of transition.
But Barbara talked about taking risks... :D
The industry changes all the time.
You can take risks creatively and have the foresight to know you're not prepared yet at a given time. In laymen's terms taking risks doesn't mean being stupid.
But who knows. Maybe they're being too cautious, maybe their work and strategy will pay off. We can only wait and see.
After some reaction to NTTD, surprised to hear comments about Barbara Broccoli and risk-taking. Or suggestions she may be risk-averse.
Lol. That would be cool, along with ShatterHand, that's a fan favorite title. I think Barbara's got this confidence that Bond would still be a hit, even if she does something new or offbeat with him. So as such, I'm expecting to see things that won't sit well with me, even if Bond would still be Bond.
Also, I'm not necessarily a fan of Bond's womanizing. I can do without it. But it's also a trait the character's known for. But right now, it's looking like Bond might not bed women that much anymore, since an intimacy coach was hired for NTTD.
I don’t think we’re going to see an end to Bond’s womanising anytime soon. NTTD was kind of an exception as Madeline was established as the love of Bond’s life, and even then we get flirtatious scenes with Paloma and Nomi which hint Bond was sleeping around while in Jamaica. Also Craig’s Bond was a lot more promiscuous than many believe. The guy openly joked about sleeping around with married women in CR, and constantly used sex to get what he wanted.
Also was the intimacy coach thing actually true? The only thing I can find about it are tabloid rumours before the film’s release saying such a coach was hired for sex scenes between Bond and… Paloma. Which makes me very skeptical.
I tend to agree with SAM that I can take or leave it too, it's not a part of the films which does much for me much as I like seeing attractive women as much as the next guy, but I've no problem with it remaining part of his character.
Yeah @007HallY I'm hoping so. But I think another thing is, it isn't necessarily the womanizing bits. It's somewhat the mechanics of it. We saw that in NTTD, Madeleine pinned Bond to a wall and kissed him, she was also atop him in bed. Maybe that's how Bond could be from here on out? But like you say, I'm hoping it's specifically for NTTD. Not that I want Bond 7 to be a sex predator like Connery, Lazenby, Moore and Brosnan. But he's got to be in-charge to a certain degree. Even if EON are trying to be decent, in accordance with today's standards.
Also, yeah...the intimacy coach thing surprised me too...considering Bond and Paloma did nothing.
Fair enough. To be honest I don’t know how it works and yes I’m sure someone onset has some sort of role working with the actors in that environment. But the articles I read seemed to be rumours and not 100% correct.
I think they’ll just do what they did with Craig’s Bond, which isn’t to shy away from his vices. We saw how him seducing Solonge, Fields and Severine led to their deaths, and it plays into how Bond uses sex as a tool. We saw how his drinking affected him physically in SF. It’s not that these vices were depicted as inherently bad, just a double edged sword, and of course for every Fields or Severine we also saw Bond in more happy relationships with Vesper and Madeline.
It’s why I like the idea of seeing Bond having to walk out on the Bond girl after sleeping with her in a future film. A bit of a spin on the classic ‘Bond gets a call from MI6 while in bed with a girl’ but instead of him getting into his yellow ski suit and swanning off, we see Bond get a call while his one night stand is asleep and he has to leave her, presumably never to see her again. It’s something we’ve been told Bond has done (mainly with Paris in TND) but we’ve never seen it, and it makes Bond look like a bastard without being wholly unlikable. It could even be a great ending with Bond walking out in order to protect the Bond girl.
It's a great moment. But yeah, my guess is they'll show that 'darker side' of Bond as opposed to trying to sanitise the character one way or the other. They've been leaning into this since the Brosnan era (arguably even the Dalton one, and these ideas are there throughout Bond) so I don't see why they would dramatically change approach - Bond's actions affecting other people around him (particularly women), his tendency to use sex as a tool to get the job done, and even his tendency to fall for certain women and how that conflicts with his job. You can't really get rid of Bond's womanising anyway, and again if you sanitise it he either becomes sexless (which isn't Bond) or you just get a shallow playboy (even the early films didn't quite drift into that territory).