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
He said 'high class'.
B25: 2 Fast 2 Die Young
Sorry, but if you think the reboot-button is the only way to....move the Bond franchise forward, then I think this option has way too little nuance. I mean, come on, charting a new course first of all starts with a good script. Let's focus on that first, regardless of extreme and radical measures like the Hollywood reboot-button or prequel-button.
I understand the criticism towards EON. Gosh, add me to that group of critical forummembers too. I don't know if you read my article, so you ought to know all difficulties involved in producing Bond #25. But that goes for both a continuation of the Craig-timeline as well as a full reboot.
Having said that, for the long-term future of the Bond franchise, I do prefer Daniel Craig's return. I mean, what's next? Rebooting with every new Bond actor? Sorry.......I am longing for a more continuous run of Bond films, which makes it eventually also easier to produce Bond films with a more stand-alone nature.
So I prefer to empower Neal Purvis & Robert Wade, instead of completely u-turning on that official EON-decision. Critical is one thing, but slamming EON's decision to start pre-production with Neal Purvis & Robert Wade isn't very helpful either. I think there's this topic I made about realistic story ideas. Focus on that instead of thinking that the good almighty 'reboot-button' might save you. We know what happened with failures like "Batman vs. Superman".
*sigh*. There ARE actually people who like the idea of the Bond franchise lending stuff from that bloated "Fast & Furious"-franchise? @Minion? It's time to do this to you:
A reboot doesn't necessarily mean starting all over again. It means start a new timeline unrelated to the previous installment and what was related to it, and still have a veteran 007 a la Dr. No. Want to avoid constant reboots? Don't set dates and numbered milestones alongside them. Easy peasy.
And "action" doesn't instantly mean Fast and Furious. You could approach other ways to inject a reasonable argument against the genre.
In retrospect, QoS was the first mistake, as the first 'sequel'. They should have just moved on to standalones right after CR. Bond was Bond at the end after all, or so we thought after the 'Bond, James Bond' moment.
That was all the way back in 2006. We're still not sure if he's fully Bond now in 2017. Every film we get a tease of him shedding his baggage but it never fully gets wiped from him.
I really wouldn't have minded so much if they'd just gotten on with it and finished the whole Quantum thing off in 2012 with SF. Rather, they detoured to M's family issues and then came back to it again in 2015, 9 years after it began. Now some are clamouring for more continuity in 2019? I'm sorry but you know what I'd rather do than watch that (clue: hide all sharp objects).
Another reboot is fine, in a way almost every actor change has been its own soft reboot anyway (I think MGW is even on record saying that each era has its own continuity). And that still doesn't mean that a complete fresh start will be necessary with every future actor. It just is in this case.
Cue Bond theme.
I regret nothinggggg!!!!
The next phase is Asian James Bond. For hella billions in Chinese dollars.
But that's exactly your own 'angst' that I don't share. You could easily create a more stand-alone-ish Bond film. Just end the Madeleine Swann-storyline in a Fleming-esque way, by simply....breaking up a love relationship. Preferably during the first 30 mins of the film (a la novels "From Russia With Love" and "Trigger Mortis").
And regarding Blofeld? Gosh, just.....let him escape in a believable fashion. Orrr......do a "Goldfinger"-like film, in which the producers ignored SPECTRE and Blofeld between films.
You know, recasting is one thing. But you tend to forget the other MI6-crew too. We barely got to see Ralph Fiennes tennure as "M", and I'm not done with him. At the end of SP he finally turned into an "M" I like. More controlled than Judi Dench's globetrotting. Then there are "Q" and Moneypenny. I'm not done with them either. We barely re-introduced "Q" and now you want to get rid of him.
I think your 'angst' is the fact that you can't look at both options: A more reboot-esque Bond film, in which the entire set of characters are recast....OR a continuation "Goldfinger"-style, which could also result in a good film. It's just a matter of...not putting to much weight on the background stories. Then one doesn't need to limit oneself.
I agree completely. A full on reboot shouldn't be necessary. Just keep moving forward. DAF wasn't a reboot after OHMSS wasn't the financial success they were hoping for, it just kind of... ignored it, and moved on. Like most Bond movies, the continuity is loose. Once DC is gone, stop bringing up Bond's childhood; the death of the previous M; Brother Blofeld. Throw a mission at him and have fun.
Problem solved. Just promise a solid script.
Did they make a fuss when the torch passed from Connery to Moore, or Moore to Dalton? No. It was business as normal.
After 13 years (as of 2019), and 3 interconnected stories I'd prefer someone new, but I can totally understand them wanting to milk this cow one more time.
I can live with a standalone film with him (if they must) but I think a younger man in the role would serve to re-energize the franchise and get the buzz back. Make it relevant & fresh again.
I think it's probably best to leave Fiennes and Harris behind because both of those are fairly easily replaceable imo and it'd make it clearer that they're not following on directly from the Craig films. Wishaw can stay though.
Agreed. I don't understand the "Craig's story isn't over!" Argument. All it hinges on seems to be that Craig didn't put a bullet in Blofeld on that bridge. Then again, when has any Bond? He got chucked down a chimney, that's the nearest equivalent. Oh, and left dangling in his bath-o-sub, I suppose.
Problem is, the next generation of writers and directors have been weaned on episodic drama (binge watching subscription) and could, almost by default, see future Bond instalments as segments of the dreaded 'arc'.
I fear the Bond template we know and love is in jeopardy.
Yes, it's a sad reality that true cinematic language is dying with celluloid. What we have now is a televisual language, which doesn't speak to cinema. Thank god that filmmakers like Nolan still exist that's all I can say.
Specifically, he called it "a series of series," New York 007 convention, 1995.
OMG. Where? Link??
Bigger than SPECTRE and Nine Eyes, which I have no problem with. Just a progression with the new film, escalation, maybe coming out of Blofeld's frustrations.
Jesus calm down mate youre like Pavlov's dog hearing the dinner bell.
The film is realeased in 2019 so you don't have to be Woodward and Bernstein to surmise it will be filmed late 2018 into early 2019.
A few more scoops:
Post production will be done in mid to late 2019.
The teaser trailer will be released in early to mid 2019.
The poster will be released in mid to late 2019.
Where are these scoops coming from?
Thanks Sherlock.