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
Same.
Even with the increased focus on personal elements, the formula has been pretty well respected and adhered to. I'd much prefer to see a film that completely ditches the checklist and goes off and does something different.
That's what Craig said three years after that fact. Those comments overlook the fact there was a writer (Joshua Zetumer) working on Quantum during shooting -- according to multiple stories written *at the time* of production.
It's not rumor. But I suspect it's exaggeration by Craig long after Quantum's production.
https://www.reddit.com/r/JamesBond/comments/4q4kso/preproduction_work_has_begun_on_bond_25/
According to the poster, Mendes filmed Hiddleston's screentest. Sounds like bullshit.
Is this man really James Bond?
I reckon he'd play it like how I'd imagine Jude Law would have done it in 2004. Slightly more jokey and British.
They should ditch the pre-credit sequence, and titles. In fact like most movies in the 21st century, save all credits until the end.
Also instead of having an obligatory Bond villain (that got old after Dr No), just not have a villain. The drama or conflict should be an everyday situation that normal people face: like Bond gets defriended by someone on facebook and gets his feelings hurt. But it turns out the person just deactivated their account for a day or so.
Instead of a Bond girl, 007 tries to meet someone online, and they stand him up. The film could be a situation comedy along the lines of Three's Company or Seinfeld.
That would be a nice departure from the formula and be new to the series.
Nah, I prefer a James Bond movie to actually be a James Bond movie. If I want something completely different I could always watch Office Space or Ed Wood. Those films don't adhere to the Bond formula.
Even more so considering Mendes isn't even working on B25. What I gather from print at least.
Exactly!! The Spy Who Loved Me and The Living Daylights both follow the formula, yet feel like completely different movies. Same with Goldfinger and For Your Eyes Only. The filmmakers should embrace the fact they're making a Bond film instead of following The Bourne series, Dark Knight or whatever the latest trend, yet not make the formula so obvious and indicating it's a James Bond film by throwing the expected elements in our face.
Re: Refn as director
From that podcast a few pages back, it does sound like Refn really gets what's important about Bond. He loves how raw and "culture" Dr. No and From Russia With Love are, laughingly says he likes Goldfinger for its "absurdity," and sites OHMSS as his favorite James Bond film (same as me!), noting its "great music, great story, and unbelievably powerful ending." As far as I'm concerned, you can sign this man up from those credentials alone.
From his actual films, I've only seen Drive (looking forward to Neon Demon, though). Yes, his films, while truly visually striking, are more on the ambient and violent side of things, and yes, that is more or less what we've just gotten with Skyfall and Spectre, but in the hands of a director who actually gets Bond, this could be a very good thing.
Imagine a close adaptation of Moonraker, Diamonds Are Forever, or You Only Live Twice—with all the necessary parts changed of course—done in the style of Refn's films. If Daniel Craig were brought back, how awesome would it be to see a YOLT-style finale where Madeleine is killed off in Bond's arms or in his sight at the conclusion of the PTS, only to launch from there into Bond's bizarre and depression-fueled nightmare journey to Japan and on into the Garden of Death. I know this directly contradicts my recent assertion that I'm all for a more adventurous, more lighthearted flick next time out, but done right, I can take artsy and depressing in my Bond any day.
Re: Step Brothers semantics and Waltz's portrayal of Blofeld
It is truly semantics. Step brothers, foster brothers, childhood chums who were told to treat each other exactly like brothers... Whatever. The point is, Blofeld explicitly states that their forced childhood relationship was as if they were brothers. That's the only thing that matters, whatever label you want to slap on it. And yes, it was a horrifically dumb idea for Bond, and a very lazily executed dumb idea at that.
As for Waltz's portrayal of Blofeld, count me in the camp who was very excited to see him cast, based purely off the strength of his performance in Inglorious Basterds, only to be woefully underwhelmed by what he gave us for Bond. There was no heart, no nuance, no power or energy or anything whatsoever in Waltz's Blofeld. To quote Mikkelson's infinitely more captivating LeChiffre, "What a waste." I am all for the idea of bringing Waltz back in the role—if he is going to do something with it. If not, get somebody who will do something with the part. (And sorry, but the writing can't be blamed here. He was outshined by every single other actor in the film and they were all pulling from the same writers' pens.)
Re: P&W
I've always been a fan of these guys. I may be in the minority here—I know the film has its detractors—but The World Is Not Enough was a great screenplay right out the gates. I know many of the things TWINE did first and best have since been done to death in the franchise, but at the time, providing M a larger and more personal role in the story and having the Bond girl turn out to be the villain (sort of a dark Tracy, if you will) were great ideas. I love everything about The World Is Not Enough. Definitely one of my favorites, and that's perhaps the purest P&W story we've received to date.
Die Another Day? You can tell from the first half of the film alone that there was a lot of potential story-wise for this film. I'd be very interested to see P&W's earliest treatment for DAD. They have since gone on record saying that Tamahori basically took all of their ideas and amped them up to absurd levels, resulting in what we actually have on-screen.
Casino Royale is solid, as is Quantum of Solace, as far as I'm concerned. As for Skyfall and Spectre, which admittedly really aren't my favorites, does anyone really know how much is P&W and how much is Logan? Or what parts they are each responsible for? As @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 mentioned above, P&W did save us from some of Haggis's and Logan's more rubbish ideas for QOS and SP respectively. And they have proven from interviews as well as from their screenplays that they are hardcore Fleming enthusiasts and that they have a basic core understanding of the character of Bond. I also believe they mentioned at one point that they have tried to introduce the character of Gala Brand into nearly every Bond film they've worked on (one would assume with the exception of Casino Royale) and that right there gets a thumb's up from me.
Re: Who should be Bond?
Right now, more than anyone, I would like Michael Fassbender. Of known entities, I really do believe he's the best we've got. He's a fine actor who has proven his Bond chops in everything he's done to date, from Inglorious Basterds to his X-Men films. He's also the perfect age right now—and maybe it's just my eyes seeing what they want to, but I rather think he looks like Fleming's own sketch of the character as well.
Just imagine if they had kept Sciarra and Hinx's deaths as scripted, shredded by helicopter blades for the former and ripped apart by train wheels for the latter. They would have had a field day.
Completely agree with this but I'd put SP in the same boat as TSWLM and GE.
Sticking to the Goldfinger blueprint is fine so long as it's done well and feels fresh imo. I don't want every film to follow it or there's a danger of it being run into the ground and becoming tired, like it's there for the sake of it (I'm reminded of LALD which I rewatched recently, the more formulaic elements like the underground lair with the shark pit feel so forced).
But I have no problem with a "classic" style Bond film as long as it's done well. And I think the other key element is to go all out with it. That's why while I liked Skyfall, it doesn't make my top 5. It has Q but no real gadgets. A colourful meglomaniac with no evil scheme (despite his convoluted plan with the theft of the list and getting captured, Silva's plan essentially boiled down to shooting up a courthouse, I know there's a danger of going too OTT but Fleming knew the stakes had to be higher than that sort of thing). There's a sly dig at the exploding pen from Goldeneye as if they're above that now but then wheeled out the DB5 with the gadgets for the finale. I really enjoyed Skyfall, it's definitely top 10, but it felt like they wanted to go back to the classic formula but didn't want to commit to it. GE, TSWLM, and Spectre all understood that if you're going to follow the formula, you should really go all out and make it as fun, epic and spectacle driven as you can.
I wonder how much EON avoiding a high age certification on the film had an affect on the film not showing Bond in massive pain following his torture, so as not to "scare the kiddies and selected audiences." What garbage, if so, as showing him down and out would have clinched it and made it amazingly powerful and tense. SP goes dark places, but I still hold that LTK contains the darkest content of any Bond yet, especially the implied things that are done to Dela at the hands of Dario. Hinx smashing someone's eye sockets in has nothing on that horror.
But some people are prudish and scare at the sight of any violence no matter what, so not a big surprise. Though I must say it's nice to see complaints about that aspect of the film and not the intense sexuality of Bond and Lucia's love making scene or Madeleine and Bond's steamy scene on the train, as sex is commonly criticized for going too far on screen, as if it isn't the most biologically natural thing out there for humans to do anyway. Of course, the people who complain about that are the same who had a fit over Eva Green appearing in a see through silk robe on a poster for a film whose violence should've been far more worrisome than its sexuality or its depiction of a natural beauty on a piece of promotional material. Of course, thankfully it's the age of the internet and we all got the uncensored poster in all its glory anyway, saved in the digital time capsule that is the world wide web, so to hell with those people. I digress.
As much as I hate to admit it multiple in the know people have claimed Mendes did indeed direct the screen tests as a favor to Babs. But before people say see Craig is done.. Yeah and how exactly was James Brolin in Octopussy.. And before people say hiddleston is definitely bond how did Sam Neil do in the living daylights or Henry Cavil in Casino Royale?
Until someone is cast anything can happen (and even after casting anything can happen that rival for your eyes only in Canada for example if it got traction could cause the producers to use Craig out of fear)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/2016/07/02/cannibalism-necrophilia-and-a-brush-with-james-bond-meet-nicolas/
The filmmaker is currently working with Bond writers Neal Purvis & Robert Wade on a spy thriller set in Japan (does this not sound like the version of Fleming's YOLT we're all dreaming for?)
He hints that he may be speaking to the producers....
I'd love a real adaptation of YOLT from Refn. Something with that dreamy, lucid and violent quality only he could bring. This is a guy who lives in neon. Let the campaign begin!
Shrublands claimed purvis and wade are working on bond 25 and there have now been a few rumors that have said the producers have meet with directors and even the title hints at bond (avenging Swann's murder)
Though if it is I don't love the title and would prefer something from Fleming but I don't hate it either
That would be kind of mind-blowing if The Avenging Silence (which actually does sound like it could have been an Ian Fleming chapter title) turns out to be Bond 25 already in the works behind-the-scenes.
But there's no way he would be at liberty to mention it in an interview at this point. Right...? Then again, he does quickly turn to silence in the interview saying he can't talk about it...
Either way, sounds like a really cool project.
I think the meat in the story would be enough to convince him to come back for one more film just my theory anyways
Refn's film The Avenging Silence could be the buzz film the Redditer and others to be B25.
Just like BB's meeting with Bell regarding another movie was assumed to be Bond.
If the film turns out bad: All or most of the criticism will be imposed on the heads of P&W, with comments thrown at them like, "Should have known, even outside of Bond they've lost the plot," etc.
If the film turns out good: Many will rob the film of praise just to deliver a back-handed compliment like, "Oh sure, outside of Bond P&W can deliver gold, but when they're actually in the thick of it and working on Bond scripts they just take the piss. Figures."
And then there'll be people in between the two camps-like myself-doing this all the while: %-(
LOL - well whatever it was... it didn't happen so if we get any more news from James Bond Downunder don't believe it! :D