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
Some months ago, I posted that I had been told by Sam Mendes that this would be Craig's last Bond and, specifically, that something happened in the film that would make it "impossible" for him to return. I was subjected to a barrage of abuse, most consistently by mcdonbb, accused of being an attention-seeking fantasist, and only recently called a "nutter" by the member called timmer.
Having now seen SPECTRE, the film ends with
It is quite clear that this is what Mendes was referring to. I'd also point you to this quote, from the Mirror, referencing the Kermode/Mayo interview, available online:
Asked about the movie appearing to have a “sense of completion”, Sam admitted: “I think there is and that is deliberate.
"We were both aware of that – and that is something we were eager to achieve as well.”
And for those insisting Craig's signed a contract:
Contrary to what the screen heartthrob said during an interview with Event, he revealed that he can back out from doing another "James Bond" film after "Spectre."
"There is no contract. It's up to me," he told The Sun. "I have the right to change my mind any time I want to."
I don't think any of this means Craig definitely won't return but I think it completely bears out my story, posted months before any of this came out.
It would be nice to see some kind of apology from the people who've been so unpleasant towards me but I doubt any of them have the grace to do that. I came to this site to share some information thinking that Bond fans would be interested. I've learned more very interesting things about the creation of SPECTRE and I would like to have discussed them with fellow fans of the series.
No doubt I should have retained a dignified silence but I'll admit that I am both offended and hurt by the reaction and do not like to be thought of as a fantasist. Whether it causes resentment or not, I am - to some extent - an "insider" in that I know several people involved with the franchise. Members of this forum might want to reflect on whether they wish to allow other members to drive away people like myself with their bilious comments. I can understand that some people didn't believe me but I would suggest it is both prudent and polite to keep an open mind, in future.
And that is my final comment on the matter, I promise.
You lost me at "I'm going to post on this site one last time" your post is so you can check back to see if anyone is willing to now accept your prior prediction that you passed off as having from Mendes himself. Do you know Mendes?, or is Sam Mendes the man who wanted to keep Blofeld reveal a secret going around telling random members of the public that Craig or Bond can't return because of the way SPECTRE ends. I think your clutching at straws having seen the film and feel it's backing up your predictions. It's a forum stop taking comments so personally. If you post such information claiming to have gotten from the director expect members to question you about it and expect members to ask you to evidence it.
I don't want to see any member leave.
FYI - Latest interview can be read here with Both Craig and Mendes together and it is far from clear either of them have said that it we are done, they both want time to enjoy life before deciding. http://entertainment.inquirer.net/182175/a-chat-with-daniel-craig-and-bond-film-director
Having said that, you and @mcdonbb should make up. He didn't take too kindly to you suggesting he had an acne problem as I recall, understandably. A bit uncalled for on your part I'd say.
So - you shouldn't have sounded all so definite, THEN you would have been right. Now you are not.
All your claims of insider knowledge are fairly worthless unless you are Daniel Craig. What apology do you think you are owed since no one (possibly not even Daniel himself) knows whether he's going to do another one yet?
And for what it's worth I can't imagine Sam Mendes is in the habit of hanging around with the sort of people who bleat on Internet forums and betray information he has told them in confidence.
Daniel, producer Barbara Broccoli just said that she will never, ever let you go as James Bond.
Sam Mendes (S): As she’s clinging to his ankles (laughs)!
So, at this point, what are your thoughts on continuing as James Bond?
Daniel Craig (D): The truth, and I could bulls*** you here but I won’t, is that I have no thoughts about it. Sam, God bless him, just finished this movie and we have been working right up to the wire. All we have been doing is eating, thinking and drinking James Bond for two years. I don’t want it for a while. And what the future holds, I don’t know. That’s the honest truth.
Sam Mendes: I think that is very well put, actually. I feel like I made the mistake last time answering that question (about directing another Bond movie) straight away afterwards. Then I changed my mind because you are not really in a fit state to make those decisions when you just made it. You want to let the dust settle and let everyone watch the movie, respond and find out about real life again. It takes a while.
I did respond to your final post. Please stop singling me out. Yes stay voice your opinion.
I took great offense at your jab at me but at the same time I do not want to be at odds with any forum member that's here without a hidden agenda.
That being said neither Mendes or Craig have definitely said they aren't or can't return.
The producers themselves on live TV stated they wanted them both. So I will pretty much but respectfully disagree with your assertions that they can't.
I'm only asking now to please stop insulting me and I will do the same.
I'm a bit confused.
The last time Bond quit his job and drove off with the girl who said he'd have to give up his job to be with her was OHMSS and you will remember what happened there. [/quote]
You make a great point, sorry to be OCD with the response
The last time Bond quit his job and drove off with the girl who said he'd have to give up his job to be with her was OHMSS and you will remember what happened there" is not entirely true, it was Vesper in CR but reached the same conclusion, which further adds to your point.
Just because this film is borrowing heavily from something else and ends in a particular way means absolutely nothing. If anything that proves that EON may want to take a risk and shake up the established storytelling formula for Bond 25. Or they may just go in the direction of which they've already traveled with Spectre and do the most predictable of events to start us off next go around.
Essentially these same things could've been said at the end of Skyfall; "Oh well that's it, Craig is done. His arc is finished. No more of this "Becoming Bond" nonsense, he has his Q, he has his Moneypenny, he has a new M. Trilogy complete. What's done is done. Fade to black. Curtain falls. Ect, ect."
Considering this man Craig has gone back and forth about staying with the franchise publicly since well after Quantum of Solace, I don't care what anyone with supposed "sources" or anyone on the film crew itself says; no one knows what Craig will do except for Craig himself. Everyone else just wants to feel important or 'in the know' and get some recognition.
To put it bluntly, Craig gets a hard-on for deep storytelling and giving Bond a personal edge so it's only obvious the next film is more than likely going to include a
Looks so comfortable, I Honestly can't see him walking away. :)
After this years two Bondathons and seeing Spectre I finally have warmed up to Daniel Craig.
He clearly has made the role his own and his evolution from CR to SP is amazing, although not flawless. SF clearly is the low point for me.
Craig is best when he kicks-ass, which he does a lot in CR and QOS.
In SP he moves smooth and feels comfortable like Brosnan finally did in DAD.
Being a fan is an evolutionary process.
Up to last year I always watched the Bond movies chronologically.
This year I did it randomly. QOS-SF-SP-CR with some other movies in between worked perfectly and elevates QOS to new levels.
After SP I want a fifth movie with Daniel Craig. If it is with Mendes again I can live with it as long as it goes in the same direction as SP does.
P+W though should finally get the boot.
Spectre can't be the last in the Craig-era. It would be a crying shame. Now that EON realised that they have to go back to the style of the 90's and late 70's to 80's in a perfect mix with what they did since 2006 they have to continue.
Oh absolutely. He's uber confident with the role like Connery was in GF & TB.
I rather like the Rolling Stone's review comment:
"In a photo finish with Sean Connery as the best of the six movie Bonds, Craig comes out blazing. He's a blunt instrument in a creamy Tom Ford tux, alive with danger and sexual swagger."
http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/reviews/spectre-20151104
I completely agree, I mean in 24 Jack Bauer 'dies' at the end of a season and is dying at the end of another.
That is a good point, but I think Craig wouldn't be interested if his next Bond wasn't good. When offered the part he was reluctant, unless they were going to do something good with it. Might be partly why he's being evasive at the moment. Maybe.
I have a question.
If the mods are going to close threads that have been operating for more than one day (some of which have several pages of interesting commentary from members which many of us catch up on in time) can they at least try to combine the threads and ensure that the comments get incorporated into the 'similar' thread?
If not, then can the thread be closed sooner, rather than letting it get established, and then closing it later which just seems a little unfair. It is difficult to 'quote' from a closed thread, and people tend not to go back and find comments from closed threads which support a discussion
I'm not saying that we need similar threads. I'm just saying that if they are to be shut down, then it would be nice to shut them down before they reach 13 pages like this one which you just closed (and which was opened in January, almost a year ago):
http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/comment/513943/#Comment_513943
Remember back in 2012 - Mendes wasn't going to do another Bond, and look what happened. He's being deliberately vague this time around which suggests to me he's not ruling out the possibility, but doesn't want to promise anything either way.
Like he said, his Bond bank is empty and unless its reloaded again, he won't do it.
I agree.
http://www.jborbisnonsufficit.com/2015/11/05/spectre-break-even-point/
Yes, agreed. The threads aren't/weren't exactly the same (which was the reason given for closing it) and the mods having this rather draconian power over things is somewhat annoying. And rude.
I agree as well. a similar thing happened a while ago when one of the most active threads on the forum just got shut down all of a sudden. That one hadn't been going for 10 months, but there was a lot of discussion in it, and I would have wanted to comment on new stuff that had been written even since I had last been there the previous day, but then just thought that oh well... I still think it was a shame we lost that thread, I bet there would still be discussion going, especially in light of new comments made on the issue by the man himself, Mr Craig. That thread would have been the natural place to comment on.
Is it really necessary to close down threads that clearly have a lot of discussion going (that previous case) or that have been going on for months before it gets decided that it's "not needed" (the more recent case)? Isn't that just limiting discussion? Does it even matter that much if threads are somewhat similar if they are active and healthy (=not war zones way off topic or something)? Who does it offend? Certainly if similarities are spotted right away, before there's lots of discussion, then fine, but otherwise... why shut things down?
Combining threads would obviously be fine if they are considered to be too similar. I'd support that - not that I know how easily that could be done.
Very well. I have reopened the thread. Problem is, we have the exact same discussion going on in two threads now.