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
I don’t think it was silly at all. It was a bold move. Craig wouldn’t have made the film otherwise
To be honest, I think a lot of people overthink the whole age thing with SF. It's Bond in his early 40s (so mid-career as 007) after a really bad mission. It's pretty much Brosnan's Bond in GE (albeit with the injuries etc). He overcomes his injury and proves the new guard wrong/continues. I'm not sure why a Bond film wouldn't want Bond to overcome the fact that he's lost a step.
Even NTTD gave us a Bond in his 50s. He wasn't young, but he was still physically capable. A Bond in his 70s is a completely different thing. I think it would have to touch upon something melancholic to work. Or be a sort of 'old man Bond' type thing, which I don't think many people really want to see in practice. I don't think it would work or get a good enough development.
You just have to make a lot of "I'm too old for this sh*t" jokes.
I feel like killing off Bond, if it had to happen, would only be acceptable if it was known if the movie was the series finale, which it doesn’t look like it was.
The only somewhat loose end was Koskov surviving at the end of TLD. Could he return or cause an issue that requires Bond to return?
I like the idea of EON at least acknowledging the actor as he ages in the role. To ignore it or take it nowhere seems odd to me. If we do bring back Dalton or Brosnan please no "de-aging". I haven't seen a good one yet in film.
It's really hard to imagine a version which wouldn't be a NTTD retread though. Maybe you go Bourne Supremacy route and have Bond being framed for something so he has to return to sort it out.
In advance of selecting the next Bond actor, that's also the case for Brosnan or Dalton, both could have their due. A clever story told with flashes of action, something that doesn't extend to a full movie or fit into one. It also wouldn't be a spinoff or extension of the Bondiverse. It would be Bond.
Now a Reunion With Death videogame taking place in 1991, that would be different matter entirely.
As for Brosnan coming back. No, because he had his four goes. Bond needs new blood.
1. We've already had three movies in a row about Bond being old and outdated.
2. Dalton is 79, Brosnan is 71. That's simply too old to convincingly do action. By comparison, Old Connery was 52 in NSNA.
3. I prefer to remember Dalton's and Brosnan's Bonds when they were in their prime, not as has-beens coming back for one last romp.
I think that the only option would be Brosnan; he has a broader appeal.
And of course, you'd run the risk of the codename theory gaining more traction if you do this concurrently with the new Bond actor's run. Probably a bad idea all around, as others have said, but I can't claim that I wouldn't be watching.
A CGI Connery is more likely than Dalton's return.
Koskov is up to something... and the film is called "Death To Spies."
If Tim was even five years younger, I'd be all over that.
Lets move back to the last film. The producers, at Craig's insistence, decided to kill the character at the end of NTTD. This was polarizing for the fans and resulted in some difficult creative choices for the producers. Turns out it is Amazon that is left to figure things out.
But what if...what if Craig relented and Bond didn't perish at the end of NTTD?
What if No Time To Die had ended with Bond surviving—how would you reboot from there?
Would love to hear how things might change if Bond survived the end of NTTD. Would the new guy get references to Vesper? Like the previous Bonds got references to Tracy? Or would the reboot require a different tack?
Share your ideas? What if James Bond didn't die at the end of NTTD?
The new James Bond won't live the CR story with Vesper on screen, but it should be part of his history. It's what establishes the character, and was really there all along not dependent on the 2006 film.
Tracy is different and would not be mentioned or appear until a time when the Bond character needs to be recharged and the Blofeld trilogy plays out again. Likely in a more coherent order.
Best path ahead is to not blatantly reference anything unique to the Craig era and do it without an air of ignorance or contempt, like the exploding pen quip which didn't sit well with some fans. Some minor winks, like a line of dialogue or an object in the background are welcome, but otherwise just get on with creating a new world.
When you see all of these tabloids doing stories about who the next Bond will be, none of them are confused by the idea of another Bond film happening. It's so weird that some folk are.
It is tiresome. I try to use the Batman example, as in Michael Keaton and Christian Bale are not the same Batman, but they are both playing the Batman character. It's like trying to explain it to a 5 year old at times.... 8-|
The Batman example is a good one, because at the end of Dark Knight Rises (spoilers follow for anyone who hasn't seen it) the inhabitants of Gotham City see Batman 'die' for them- that is the end of Batman, Bruce Wayne fakes his death and disappears off to another country, never to be seen again. The End. But, whaddya know, four years later there's a new Batman film with a new bloke playing him, and the events of the previous films never happened. Literally every single person in the world who saw it was able to figure out what was going on.
Exactly. I did start off using the King Kong character as an example, but someone accused me of comparing James Bond to a giant Gorilla, therefore the Batman became the best example i could muster.. :D
I don't think people are as confused about the idea of a 'reboot' as you guys think.
I'm sure everyone understands what a reboot is - they just don't think it works with a real-world based* series like James Bond.
It's like the Bobby shower scene in Dallas. Just because I thought it was a daft thing to do, didn't mean I was confused by it. I understand what they did.
*and before people start giving examples of outlandish scenes in Bond films, what I mean is, it's not sci-fi.
I don't think there's any reason that can't work in a real world series like Bond. It's certainly easier than trying to get your head around different 'universes' in superhero films which draw attention to this and go into detail explaining these things.
Believe it of not, I don't like having Batman and King Kong used to explain James Bond. Yet I see on here, all the time . . "it's like Batman".
Sod Batman! Sometimes I think some people won't be happy until Bond is flying round London in a cape.
Why doesn't it, though? There's so many examples of the same role being played by different actors in different productions, I've never heard of anyone struggling with the concept before this.
Folks can come up with all sorts of things like 'but it'll have the same theme tune which means it can't work'- someone even said that having the same producers would mean it can't work; which now obviously isn't even a problem. Just a couple of weeks ago there was a new version of Bergerac on the telly, yes, with the same theme tune: I did not see a single person questioning how he could possibly exist.
Have you seen Sherlock Holmes? There's loads of them, all in different versions of it. Or, I dunno, The Equalizer. The Saint. Haiwaii Five-O, Magnum PI, MacGyver, Poldark, Upstairs Downstairs, Matlock, Married With Children etc. etc. Not to mention other stories which get remade all the time like Hamlet. None of these are in a 'multiverse', they're just remakes or reinterpretations. You can find reasons as to why these are different to Bond, but it's the same mindset- if anyone can accept there can be different versions of them, who look different and don't hold the memories of the previous version of the character, then it's exactly the same process for Bond.