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
Alternatively why not be really original and have Bond go rogue...
How so? SP connected everything, with SF being a slight breather as GF was for the SPECTRE saga of the 60s. In SP, everything that'd happened to Bond since CR was addressed or was felt in impact. That's not a series of films forgetting each other. If EON wanted to forget QoS we'd have never seen White or Quantum again, for instance, much less have the newest film involve Bond protecting White's actual daughter. In many ways, SP is the sequel to QoS.
For the people who want to use the "SF didn't follow up QoS" argument, what happened at the end of QoS that was as consequential as Bond leaving MI6 for a retired life? That's right.
Fully agreed. It's ludicrous to say otherwise, frankly.
I also find Bond's line, "I know when a woman is afraid and pretending not to be" as an implicit nod to Vesper.
It's quite clear Quantum was pulled back, and around the time of SP was done away with entirely. With how many operations Bond was stopping, post-QoS Quantum had to hide under the blanket to avoid throwing more eyes on it and SPECTRE through association. It made no sense for them to continue operating at a fifth of their old capacity.
That's not clear at all. Not from the films.
That Quantum was absorbed? Seems pretty clear to me.
That's not exactly what I said, no. It does help to read clearly. I said the Craig era is based on continuity, which it is. You know that the man you see in SF is the same from CR and QoS, and he's developed from the man he was in those films in a way that can be empirically calculated. These films tell each leg of Bond's journey, and so the last ones matter in who he's come to be in the newest film, and onward. The angry and vulnerable Bond of CR led to the quiet and (eventually) peaceful man at the end of QoS, who led into the more professional and lively man of SF and SP. There is also a wealth of callbacks in each movie to the last ones, in not only the cinematography, but also in dialogues and little lines here and there. They're moments for the fans, and they don't beat you over the head with them, which is why it's thrilling to uncover them. Continuity isn't limited to obvious references to previous films, it's how the characters in the present relate to who they were in the past, and how far they've come in their development. Each character in the Craig era has had that sort of development, major or minor.
I'm simply calling out the contention that films like QoS have been abandoned by the series, which couldn't be farther from the truth. SP disproves that ten times over, in more ways than one. How this randomly got onto a general continuity discussion is beyond me.
As @bondjames states, the real question here is will they? SP fared roughly the same as QOS critically (slightly poorer according to Rotten Tomatoes) and both fell quite short of their immediate predecessors.
Just looking at recent history, the clean slate approach of Skyfall makes sense, but if creative control remains in the hands of Craig and Mendes, we very well might see Spectre, Pt. Deux instead.
Again, SP ended in a fashion that had to be followed up, and that basically teased another part outright, whereas QoS was the ending to the two part arc CR had set up; there wasn't any hanging thread to continue. It was the ending from which a new chapter could be written. We're still in that next chapter, which SF and SP started.
I also think the reaction to SP has been blown out of the water, as too many people listen to American critics instead of looking internationally. There were an overwhelming number of places where SP outclassed SF, especially financially. I think QoS got hate for not being enough of a Bond film, and strangely SP got hate for being too much of a Bond film. Good luck finding the logic in that drivel.
As for B25 having to follow up from where SP left off, I'm afraid we simply disagree on this point. What did SP tease that needs to be immediately followed on from? Blofeld is in prison. SPECTRE ostensibly is a headless snake now. Sure, they could drum up another SPECTRE story, break Blofeld out of prison or whatnot, but they don't need to. The threat is done with. Unlike QOS actually, where the threat was very much alive and out there and yet went completely ignored in SF. That's all I'm saying. There isn't anything SP started that can't be ignored for a film or two—or more.
Unfortunately when there no bond 25 news people will do that
I do agree here I felt the end of spectre opened a new door for a different era of bond films.
And Bond tells Eve to stop touching her ear in the casino. None of this means SF carried on from QOS plot-wise.
Bond sniffed Rosa Klebb's shoe in Die Another Day, but that didn't make the film From Russia With Love: The Squeakquel. ;)
It does make me wonder how they'll carry on from SP if Craig returns. It's not a hugely popular film but it's also much harder to ignore/downplay than Quantum (the ending either works as an ending or a setup for a direct sequel, it'd be very hard to follow it up with a standalone film and still address it in a satisfying way imo). Personally I think SP was a great end to the Craig era and that they should just leave it at that, but the longer we wait the more I think him returning is a possibility, so we'll see.
SF completely ignores QoS. There is no continuity there. Any emotional development presented in QoS is completely disregarded by SF. SF repeats a lot of ideas from QoS, instead of continuing from there.
Let´s not kid ourselves here, the thought that Eon wants to forget QoS is offering itself, because audiences associate negative reactions to things like supposed shaky cam and frantic editing with QoS. Mr White was as present in CR as he was in QoS. The references to Quantum in SP feel forced in to the extreme for the sake of making Spectre the link at all costs, and are as badly executed as the foster-brother angle feels like cheap soap opera stuff.
If you want to call that an era that was built and run on continuity, and a series of films not forgetting each other, suit yourself.
Forgive me if I can´t take you seriously on SP´s ending being significantly consequential, because the idea of Bond retiring is presented in a ridiculous manner, SP didn´t do anything throughout to give the audience the impression Bond might even a bit think about reitirement. SP´s ending truly feels as if nothing would be lost if the next film just ignored Bond and Madeline driving off in the DB5.