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
Don't get me wrong, I was neither disparaging O'Connor or pushing for O'Connell, I was just saying that being a favourite for the role in the press matters little in the long-run.
I’ll just say I watched the video and… yikes.
Hopefully deleting it from my watch history helps.
Maybe EON will mix the two versions. Supposedly that’s what The Q Mysteries is going to do.
Yeah I don't know about Q. To be honest both versions feel a little played out to me, Cleese's one probably wasn't quite as interesting as Llewelyn's to me so I'd be hesitant about just doing another one like him, but equally it seems pointless doing another version like Whishaw's now. May as well keep changing Q, but just making him a woman or something feels a bit obvious and trite; it needs a new character dynamic concept between Q and Bond.
To be honest I thought the dynamic between Whishaw's Q and Craig's Bond was a treat: it wasn't just the 'bring this back in one piece' thing repeated, great though that was with Llewelyn. I loved that moment in NTTD where Q pretends he hasn't seen Bond for years when he meets him in M's office, that's wonderful.
The only other version of Q we've seen is Algy in NSNA, which I think is okay, but having Q be a fan of Bond means there's no conflict, and without that it would be a bit harder to have fun with him in the long run.
I'm always a bit rubbish at this thread: basically what I want them to do is come up with some great ideas which I'm not capable of! :D I'd have never been able to write that relationship between Craig's Bond and Q and yet I loved it, so I want more stuff like that please.
You prefer the old, gay Q?
The longer this power struggle goes on, the more of a narrative will build around it. I remember the Actress who plays Snow White in the upcoming remake made some disparaging comments about the original film, and it has more or less torpedoed any chance of the remakes success in cinemas. As this Barbara vs Amazon dispute rolls on, the narrative of David versus Goliath will set in people's minds and become folded into the production of the next film. Everyone likes a underdog story, and I think once Bond returns 4 or 5 years down the line there will be a massive feelgood factor around the film. People will come out in droves, similar to The Force Awakens (although obviously not as successful).
I'm amazed such YouTube channels have anything even remotely intelligible to say, and I'm even more worried that they exist in the first place.
I hope Barbara Broccoli wins this round if only to demonstrate once more that she does care about the series, her father's legacy, and the fans, including those who in the past have frequently weaponized her sex when attacking her. I am pumping a fist because another Broccoli is trying to keep our beloved film series alive and healthy.
The AVTAK Nazi backstory feels "more stuff thrown on the heap", like most of the film (microchips, seawater, horse racing, company takeovers, ...).
Other than that, I fully agree that the '80s Bonds, though sometimes treated as "lesser", are creative highpoints in the series for me. I'll happily include LTK, though thematically and tonally different than FYEO - TLD, of course. Each of Glen's films brings something different. FYEO, OP, TLD and LTK rank among my favourite Bond films; that's 4/5 for Glen -- not bad.
Well, since you singled out the Cold War, it makes sense that post-GE Bonds were less involved with that. However, these films have other things to offer.
yes.
Josh O'Connor is 6'1''
Too much like the iron man films IMO.
I think, whether man or woman, a younger, tech-savvy Q makes so much more sense in today's world. Love Desmond, but the old, quasi-doddering Q is a bit played out.
Or Benedict Wong as an older, curmudgeonly Q
I can see that…
I'm all for that but Eon does go toward the audience pleasing (gadgets, white cats) in the end.
That being said, I love the white cat maneuver, and the follow-up line, in DAF. That should have been the end of the white cats, though.
I think the approach with the next film needs to be radically different, and the current Superman is a good example of what I mean. If in 2016 after you've seen Man of Steel and BvS I told you that the next solo Superman film would feature him being saved by Krypto coming to the rescue and pulling him through the snow by his Cape, you'd probably roll about on the floor laughing. Even now there are people who see the trailer and think it's a bit too goofy, but that's just because it's not completely in line with what we're used to seeing - it's radically, or at least majorly different.
When I say I think Bond next to take a different course and go in a more comedic direction, people say that audiences today will never accept that, that it's going backwards and returning to the 70's, but we haven't seen it yet. People feel that way in part to there close acquaitance and familiarity to the Craig portrayal, and often times we feel uncomfortable when something is way different, it feels odd and takes some getting used to, but then after a while it just becomes the norm and feels natural. Next year we have Superman and the Fantastic Four being released, both tenetpole films for DC and Marvel, both crucial for their plans to forward their cinematic universes, and both likely having a much more hopeful, joyous message than were used to in the last few years. In a sense, this could be teeing up the next cinematic trend after a long period of Hollywood scrambling in find its footing and countless flops in the post-pandemic environment. Seems like the studios are finally getting their ducks in a row, and figuring out what people want is an escape from the inflation, threats of world war, cost of living, AI paranoia, global warming and every other needling anxiety that comes with modernity, but especially in the recent 2020's.
In short, if you want to continue the films after Craig you have to go with a radically different approach, so much that it would be silly to try and compare them, otherwise people will always be asking "who did it better"?
I’d say a good parallel might be GE coming off of LTK after several years. It’s a film that I don’t think would be the way it is without LTK (it has some very gritty/dark scenes, a personal element to the story involving Bond etc). But it’s a very unique Bond film itself with its own creative priorities.
Because the Craig era was left behind in such a definitive way, going into a new film fresh will have an impact. But I don’t think they’ll go into this one trying to create the polar opposite of the Craig films. I think that’s the difference between a hard course correction film like CR or DAF, and one like LALD, TLD, and GE (all of which I’d say are unique Bond films, and all have similarities to their predecessors).
A lot of it likely comes down to the fact that these are the same producers helming these Bond films and have honed these creative directions for so long. I think something of the Craig films will be there in Bond 26. But again, you can have a distinct film while doing that.