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
Re; Soderbergh fast filming. Doesn't Clint Eastwood shoot his movies in 5 or 6 weeks? I believe he doesn't do rehearsals or retakes!
This is why I would love a 2 parter film cause it could work out well with Madleine. Kill her off in part one, get his revenge in part 2
Soderbergh is known for his fast productions.
He's a character of some tragedy, as Fleming wrote.
If "SPECTRE" had a more conventional ending and if Bond was merely bedding Madeleine as a 'hot blond item', then obviously that would be a good choice.
But "SPECTRE" still is the first ever Bond film that ends, really ends with a serious love relationship that at the same time is a positive ending, yet not a 'sexist "Ooohw James!! shower scene'. Bond and Madeleine have a true Honeymoon-esque send-off, which in a way is similar to Bond and Tracy leaving their own wedding (before Tracy gets killed). Perhaps the "SPECTRE"-send-off is a bit more subdued and leaves more stuff open for your own interpretation (That's typical Sam Mendes). But on the whole, Bond leaves his "SPECTRE"-adventure not only a positive note...he leaves this adventure in a very serious relationship:
So if Daniel Craig returns, I find your option of simply ignoring Madeleine and not letting her return a rather inspirationless affair. It is weird. To me it shows that there would be a serious lack of creativity, reminiscent on the opening of "Diamonds Are Forever" were producers blatantly ignored the very existence of Tracy.
I don't want that. Nor do I want Madeleine to be killed off by Blofeld. Been there, done that. No, I think the PTS or perhaps the first 15 mins after the Main Titles need to show a proper, serious break-up sequence. Similar to how Tiffany Case forever leaves Bond's flat in the novel "From Russia With Love" or how Bond blatantly says 'Hasta La Vista darling, I don't need you anymore!' to Pussy Galore in "Trigger Mortis":
That's completely interesting, it has never been done before in a Bond film, and Bond can continue a more formularic 'chase of women' without all the problems that arise when he's in a relationship. On top of that, after only 20 min;s you can get down to business and let Bond indulge in a good, proper 'destroy the villain plot'.
I think it's the best way to continue. You completely finish off all of Bond's personal affairs that were written throughout all the stories of all previous four Bond films, from "Casino Royale" to "SPECTRE". But in a neat and inspired way.
Seeing Bond and Madeleine fight and break up is just about the last thing I need to see from the series. And if it was something they did: why bring her back just for them to argue, break up, and then she disappears? It's the equivalent of not having her return at all, and not only that, but it would cut down on running time and save the movie from possibly being too bloated with unnecessary scenes/information.
The oddest statement of all, though: not bringing Madeleine back displays a lack of creativity? In what way, exactly? If you ask me, introducing a second love interest so soon after Vesper (which took Bond two whole films to get through/over) is what screams "lack of creativity."
I don't want another murder-revenge story either. The difference between Vesper leading to Tracy was about 10 books in between. Too soon in Craig's films.
Give up continuity unless you have a script that's so ridiculously good, you have to tell it. If she serves the story and it's great, keep her. Of course, you need people to discern what a great script is. Mendes "had" to tell the SP story after all.
It would be unsatisfying to ignore the Madeline character and just move on, but lots about SP is unsatisfying...
Bite the bullet, screw the past, and give us an adaptation of FRWL or LALD or TB would be my choices.
I think we completely disagree on "SPECTRE" and how it could inspire Bond #25 to become even better. You severely dislike "SPECTRE", I have SP consistently on 7th place in my ranking. Perhaps we both are heavy outliers on the general average that SP is around 11th to 12th place in the average rankings :-).
For me, I think comparing Madeleine with Vesper is a bit weird. There are love relationships....and love relationships. Some are entirely complex, and might in the real world even seen rather obnoxious or overblown. Others are much more simple and less complex.
Sometimes, in reality love works like that: Because sex....why not?? You say Madleine goes from hating Bond to loving him at an incredibly unrealistic rate. Well, both CR and SP have similar running times. And in both films the girls weren't exactly Bond's best friend during their first meeting. Well, this is a comparison between the two characters from my side, but on the whole Madeleine and Vesper are entirely different characters.
Vesper is an orphan who carries a huge secret; a secret that is a huge mental burden to her and that makes her even depressed. Madeleine on the other hand has a fairly OK-life as a Jr. Doctor in a rich Clinic. Boring yes, but far from dificult as opposed to Vesper's life. Bond simply walks in her life because of the simple events: Mr White's death. But in CR Vesper is already quite a fierce government official at first. Madeleine isn't like that.
So, in all honesty? I just don't get your arguments regarding Madeleine. Perhaps you compare him too much with Vesper. Yes, she's perhaps less enigmatic than Vesper. But IMO she still is miles ahead as a woman with less interesting, but still believable character traits. Especially when you compare her with bimbo's like Mary Goodnight, Tiffany Case or Christmas Jones. Something that you don't mention.
Overall, it's an interesting discussion off course :-). But it's also a matter of personal taste: You heavily disliked "SPECTRE", and therefore you want Madeleine to be completely ignored. I disagree and think that, despite certain flaws, it's better to neatly conclude the relationship between Bond and Madeleine in the first 25 min's of the film :-).
Madeleine is NOT Tracy. If anything, she is more like Fleming's Tiffany Case. Even then, still not the same character.
I'm not sure the current team at EON actually understands this. I wouldn't be at all surprised, given their track record of strange decisions, if they dug in their heels re: continuity and followed up on the most obvious promises made by Spectre's ending (return of Blofeld and death of Madeleine). Such a film would likely get a reception just as lukewarm as SP's was, if not colder.
As for people discussing Nolan... They have already done Nolan-esque films in SF and SP. I can't imagine that style will still be in vogue in 2018 or 2019. Nolan would also probably want control over the story and script, and I can't imagine him wanting to shoot a direct follow-up to Spectre, because that was Mendes' story.
Sorry, I don't agree. Pursuing more Swann is just a retread. Why not ignore? Bond has had many women in and out of his life.
SP's ending whether by design or not opens to go either way. So glad they didn't use that "we have all the time in the world" line or we might have indeed been forced into another revenge plot.
I find Bond and Swann's relationship about as interesting or believable as Denise Richards as a nuclear physicist - Bond falling in love out of the blue so soon after spending all that time getting over Vesper? No. Doesn't work for me at all.
Rehearsals: Tuesday, October 11, 2016
Previews: Tuesday, November 22, 2016
Opens: Monday, December 12, 2016
Closes: Wednesday, January 18, 2017
With 'Lucky Logan' wrapping up filming on September 28, 2016.
Okay @Creasy47 . But remember, I also said we entirely disagree on that. We have very different opinions on the actual film.
In fact, in the right hands, it could be bloody great.
I didn't particularly feel a connection between them in the film, despite the scenes that were put there to convey that (the sudden sex post-Hinx fight and the similarly sudden declaration of love in the torture chair come to mind). In fact, I felt somewhat confused by the nature of their relationship after my first watch of the film, and that feeling persists to this day. Does he love her? It's questionable, given his lack of emotion when she leaves him in London. It seems to me that she's more his way of escaping his past and his MI6 life. Does she love him? Ostensibly, if one relies on her declaration at Blofeld HQ. However, was this to give him support and strength, because she felt he was about to die? One wonders...
Ultimately, I'd prefer that they completely forget about her in the next one (assuming Craig is back). However, if they must drag her back, a quick Sylvia Trench FRWL scenario would be all I'd want. As I've said before, I find it unlikely that B25 will be a continuation of SP, since Mendes is now gone from the franchise, and everyone except Bond and Tanner are his creation.
Of course, the inherent assumption in all of this is that Craig is back for one more.
Time will tell.
I see neither a 'serious' relationship, nor a shoehorned love angle. There is nothing to suggest Bond is in love with her (he's not, I think that's clear) but she does represent a way out. He represents a way out for her also, but there's a certain infatuation there, too on her part. The 'relationship', and that is a complex term, is the result of a pressure cooker scenario. I often wonder (I don't mean you) how many people on here have experienced relationships with women, because reading comments on here you would think that things progress in a very regimented, linear (boring as fuck) fashion - lets have a drink, then maybe dinner, perhaps a kiss... The Bond/Swann relationship works absolutely fine for me and is completely believable. These are extraordinary circumstances. Sometimes shit happens, things move quickly. There's more to be had from it.
This; it was retroactively tied together, it wasn't planned from the start. I'm also not suggesting that they won't progress the continuity if Craig returns, just that I'd prefer not to have Madeleine return. Helps the script and the movie if they don't spend time having them break up, and it won't feel so been-there-done-that if they avoid killing her and having Bond driven by revenge once again.
I think you can have her, or ditch her. If I was writing I know what I'd do with her.
I think SP was a great happy ending but if Craig does return, they should have him back at MI6, and Madeline shouldn't feature but should be a sore spot that he avoids discussing. Bond has, as far back as the novels, craved excitement despite the strain his job puts on him (even in OHMSS, he never actually leaves the service does he? And in the book he worries that his exciting life will be ruined by marriage). And the Craig era continues this, his reluctance to take a desk job in SF for example. I think if Blofeld comes back they should make it more interesting than him breaking out of prison and Bond fighting him. Some sort of scenario where Bond is forced to team up with him (radical new Spectre leader, he needs intel from the man who knows the organisation best?) could be interesting I think. Bond would be forced to work with Blofeld who can tease him for how things worked out with Madeline etc and can be sort of a wild card. Agrees to help Bond but is plotting to escape the whole time. I'm picturing something like the end of the last season of 24: Jack's saved the day, but just when he thinks it's over, when he thinks he's pulled it off and won, the Russians come back into play. That sort of scenario with Blofeld would be great imo, with him acting as sort of a wild card.
As much as I'd love a YOLT adaptation, I don't think now is the right time. Bond's relationship with Madeline was not in any way equivalent to his relationship with Tracy, and the revenge story route is probably the dullest option they could go down.
I think SP was a great happy ending but if Craig does return, they should have him back at MI6, and Madeline shouldn't feature but should be a sore spot that he avoids discussing. Bond has, as far back as the novels, craved excitement despite the strain his job puts on him (even in OHMSS, he never actually leaves the service does he? And in the book he worries that his exciting life will be ruined by marriage). And the Craig era continues this, his reluctance to take a desk job in SF for example. I think if Blofeld comes back they should make it more interesting than him breaking out of prison and Bond fighting him. Some sort of scenario where Bond is forced to team up with him (radical new Spectre leader, he needs intel from the man who knows the organisation best?) could be interesting I think. Bond would be forced to work with Blofeld who can tease him for how things worked out with Madeline etc and can be sort of a wild card. Agrees to help Bond but is plotting to escape the whole time. I'm picturing something like the end of the last season of 24: Jack's saved the day, but just when he thinks it's over, when he thinks he's pulled it off and won, the Russians come back into play. That sort of scenario with Blofeld would be great imo, with him acting as sort of a wild card.
As much as I'd love a YOLT adaptation, I don't think now is the right time. Bond's relationship with Madeline was not in any way equivalent to his relationship with Tracy, and the revenge story route is probably the dullest option they could go down.