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
Fine if you are not enthusiastic about my story treatment. I appreciate your honesty. But then you have passed by the bigger story of my treatment. Also, why not making a "Goldfinger"-style film. Just....skip the story lines from SP a bit....and simply produce a great story...with Craig.
The ending of SP lastly can be seen in many ways. As an open-ended film, but also as a closed-ended film. I, like a majority of voters in this poll so far, think Daniel Craig also deserves a better story...and better writers.
So which is it? Back P&W or ditch them?
That's the thing. I actually think it'sa bit....dangerous to again re-invent the wheel. I mean, the "Mission: Impossible"-franchise is not revolutionalizing anything. That franchise just continues in a fashion that Bond once did. I think it's time to do that as well.
I think the strength of the Bond franchise lies in.....revolutionalizing once every 30 to 50 years.and besides that producing a good Bond film every 2 or 3 years. Just get the damn thing going without another CR-esque revolutionary reboot or reboot-esque vehicle.
By the way:
Moreover, we have to deal with thefact that Neal and Robert are returning. So probably we won't get any revolutionary reboot after all....
Based on what I see they are both considered forgottable and mediocre efforts. I haven't gone to the effort of asking members of the general public which they think is worse. SP was seen by more people because it followed a global juggernaut (probably the top grossing film of 2012 when one strips out costly 3D which benefited Avengers greatly).
Nobody has suggested another CR. What we want is a GE esque refresh. No origin story or anything like that. It doesn't have to reinvent the wheel (although it should do enough different to feel fresh). What fans in the same camp as me and @bondjames want is just a really good Bond film, free from the continuity of the Craig era.
Or a really good Bond film, free from continuity, "Goldfinger"-style, but with Craig :-).
What my camp wants........is simply a damn good Bond film. And a good Bond film is being made with a damn good screenplay, regardless of the actor, regardless of Daniel Craig. And since Daniel Craig is a marvellous actor, and since I think GE gets lots of credit for the fact that the film premiered after a 6-year long hiatus and not just for its own quality, I say....let Daniel Craig return :-).
But hey, that's an ongoing thing now hehe. We'll probably never agree :-).
He is a marvellous actor. Complete agreement on that. We were lucky to have him. But he's not irreplaceable and he's had the role for a long time now. It's starting to feel a bit stale, especially after how neatly SP wrapped things up. Time to let someone else have a go imo.
You're right that we'll probably never agree. And to be honest I think you're right and Craig will be back (I genuinely believe that if SP had been better recieved though he would have happily let driving off into the sunset in the DB5 be the end, I think it was made to work as his last film if he wanted it to be). I'm just not sure if that's a good idea. I know for me personally, it's an anti climatic and not at all exciting prospect. But of course I'll be going into Bond 25 hoping they blow me away no matter who's in the role.
EDIT: One more thing, GE didn't get praise because of the hiatus. It got praise because it was brilliant and a great modern reinvention. I actually went in skeptical because I wanted Dalton back. Still loved it, because it's just a very good Bond film.
--> 77 people have voted
--> Some people have voted twice, those 2nd votes I have deleted
--> From the 77 people, 4 people have given two options, being:
@RC7, @TellyBlofeld, @RogueAgent, @JamesBondKenya
I kindly suggest these four people to make one choice, since I am calculating percentages
If not, I kindly ask you guys on some advice. Shall I delete their votes? Or shall I add them and calculating the percentages based on '81' people?
*high five* hehehe
Bond fans can sound pretty spoiled these days no ;-)?
I've read this a lot but I don't see how wanting shorter gaps makes the fans spoilt or impatient. Some of us just miss the days of getting a film (mostly) every couple of years. I don't see why we can't be critical of them for not managing that when they have done before and other franchises do it easily?
A longer gap doesn't necessarily do anything for the quality of the film and a longer wait can make a film more disappointing if it isn't any good (or in the case of Bond 25, is a continuation of something you're no longer invested in). It really benefits nobody imo, except Craig and the producers and everyone else who gets a nice relaxing rest after those stressful few months (and I'm sure it was exhausting to be fair) two years ago that earned them millions of dollars.
I know they don't owe me anything so I don't want to sound entitled but speaking as a fan, I wish they'd hurry up so I could get these films I love on a more regular basis. That's not such a crappy thing to say is it? I mean we pay to see them. It's not like they make them out of the kindness of their own hearts, they benefit too.
I'm sick of hearing this being wheeled out. 6 months work every 4 years is a tough, stressful job is it? Go and work on a oil rig or a Saturday night in A&E and then come back and bleat. You're getting paid ludicrously well for ludicrously short hours.
People are slating Neymar's wages but he's expected to put it in in training and then leave it all on the pitch twice a week.
Be interesting to do a time and motions study over the period 2015 to 2019 and see who gets more per hour worked - Neymar or EON and Danny C.
I really want more (relatively) lighthearted Craig, and I want him to get the chance to star in a Bond film in which there is as little navel-gazing as possible, being replaced by a lighter tone with a healthy sense of humor, and a sense of not taking things that seriously. Spectre has part of this in its DNA (which is why it's my second favorite Craig entry after Casino Royale) but I want more before Craig leaves us... a film in which we can be certain that the "Bond we know and love" has arrived.
I'm cool with Blofeld returning, as long as they find a narratively satisfactory way of skirting that foster brother thing, or at least minimizing its presence in the movie as much as possible. Let's try to forget about the past as much as we can and just try to focus on Bond vs. Blofeld; Spectre left me wanting more in that area.
I'm also fine with the Whitehall brigade returning, just keep them in the background. Historically, these roles have been supporting and very brief in terms of screentime. If the actors don't like that shouldn't have taken them in the first place. What Bond needs instead is a Kerim Bey/Draco/Columbo/Mathis style ally.
If B25 is made this way and Craig departs after it, hopefully they'll keep the MI6 actors around, and avoid any sort of explicit reboot, soft, hard or otherwise. What need is there for it? We did fine without it for many years, and all it does is create unnecessary expectations. Just keep the actors: it's what they've always done and it helps to ease the transition between one Bond and the other.
Oh don't get me wrong I agree. This is a post of mine from the production timeline thread a while back where I said something similar
"I get sick of actors going on about what a "tough shoot" some film or another was. Yeah I'm sure it is tiring but you're getting paid millions and get to sit on your arse for months, maybe years afterwards. Nurses, firemen, etc, don't have that luxury."
And that's what I was trying to get across in my other post as well, when I talked about how they did a few months work two years ago and got paid millions. I just wanted to point out before someone else did for me that yes the actual work probably is tiring (especially since he's pushing 50 and still does all the physical stuff for it). But I absoloutely agree with you that he's more than compensated for that.
Mind you, for each poll option there are obviously some 'grey zones'. For example, if you have chosen poll option D, you obviously want Daniel Craig return, but with as little background information and narrative related to the past 4 Bond films. That doesn't mean however that Daniel Craig's Bond can't say one tiny line like: "Ooowh but Felix, they almost put you behind bars huh, working for that deceptive CIA-director :-)??"
I try to specify the poll options as perfectly as possible, so it's clear for everyone what you are chosing for. Obviously it's easier to answer questions like "Should Bond resign?" or "Should we reboot once again"? By writing down the four available poll options, I have made certain that the poll is as statistically sound as possible (Although I do know that people's post aren't always that clear with regard to one choice, for those people I have been a bit liberal).
The results: In the past few days at least some 8 new forum members have casted their votes. Even then however, poll option A) seemed to be the most popular option on the board with a clear majority of 59%. Combined with option D) (Option A) and D) both foresee in the return of Daniel Craig), this percentage rises to almost 64%.
Recently there have been some strong voices in the Bond #25 production topic (https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/10843/bond-25-production-diary-yann-demange-spotted-at-eon-hq-b25-wont-be-based-on-never-dream-of-dying#latest) that favor option C), a complete full reboot (or as much as a reboot as possible, with perhaps only Ben Whisaw returning) with a new Bond actor. Yet it has to be said that those are mostly the more frequent posters ('hardliners'). In this poll however almost 80 people have voted, of which most of them aren't posting that frequently.
Still, option C) accounts for one/quarter of the votes; 25%. And combined with option B), which foresees in the resignation of Daniel Craig, this percentage rises to 36%. But the overall conclusion is quite clear: The MI6community clearly want Daniel Craig to return in the next Bond film.
Many fans wanted him back, but certainly not in Nov 2019. You slyly added that bit on.
I accidentally did that. Already changed it. No need to be so judgemental :-).
Wasn't really a dig at you mate, just general annoyance that people who have an extremely cushy number can think saying they really need 18 months off to recover should be treated with anything other than derision.
Well just looked back to the start of this and I voted A in Jan 2016.
A year and half later I would probably change that to B or C. Whilst I'm not devastated to see Craig return I feel they are probably only doing it because it's a safe bet and they can't think of anything better to do.
Given the narrative hole they have dug themselves into, the general apathy which seems to abound (see my comments above re the 'we're all so tired' drivel they all spout) and the creative inertia that sees P&W signed up yet again coupled with a recent increase in Nolan's stock after the overblown and disappointing Interstellar then I'd be quite happy to see him take over all aspects of production for a trilogy.
With all due respect Gustav (and I do appreciate the work you put in organising and administering these things) the results of a poll that some people voted on over 18 months ago don't hold much water as circumstances change as do people's opinions.
If the Brexit vote was taken today with knowledge laid bare that our politicians are actually even more clueless than feckless Eurocrats we tried to uncouple ourselves from would the result be the same?
Given that fact, I think it's a bit safer to stick with people's first opinions. How would you otherwise explain the huge discrepancies between a similar poll I made in this Facebook group (of which the nr. of voters easily rises to 80 within a week):
And in here (where it's much harder to get a vote in the first place):
https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/18201/bond-polls-2017-the-big-spectre-vs-quantum-of-solace-battle/p1
One could say that the voters in here are more 'knowledgeable', but to me knowledge of future events, like the production of a new Bond film, is something entirely debatable and much harder to base on facts. People sometimes 'just like' either 'this option' or 'that option'.
Lastly, even when we take into account the duration of the poll (crated early 2016), then there is also a more simple explanation: People simply want Daniel Craig back, but do have some reservations. The Brexit vote was always supposed to be more or less 50/50 in the two years preceding Brexit. Which in here, albeit with a small sample size, isn't the case.
Well Brexit was never 50/50 until very near the end. If it was Cameron would never have called it. It was around 30/70 most of the time and even on the day of the vote itself Farage conceded defeat as the exit polls were showing remain ahead.
Anyway I can't speak for other members but O am happy enough for Daniel Craig to return; but not as happy as I was in Jan 2016 when I voted.
Reasons for this? New Bond film bounce no doubt contributed (and there's not a lot to criticise in Dan's performance even though it is his weakest of the 4) to my preference.
However despite the film being obviously flawed on release, time has not been kind to it and 18 months of reflecting on the mess EON managed to create for themselves has lessened my enthisuasm for option A as my faith in EON having a clue what they are doing has reached almost DAD lows.
In addition the Nolan question has come into very stark focus over the horizon recently and clearly he would only take over with a new Bond.
A combination of both the above leads me to think a new era of Nolan Bond would be the best option.
I'm happy for Dan to return and hope he'll go out on a high but I'm unable to shift the all pervading sense of doom that we're stumbling headlong into another clusterf**k so my expectations for a P&W scripted B25 with Craig will be extremely low.
Out of interest is there anyone else out there who voted in this poll a year ago or longer who has also had a change of heart?
I know. you've been pretty clear about the C-option all along;-). And let's face..that might still happen. Nothing has been confirmed yet by EON with regard to Daniel Craig.
My biggest worry with option C, especially with regard to the long production gaps (3 to 4 years)? That the Bond franchise slowly will become less recognizable, less of the market leader and trendsetter within the spy-/action genre. I think a reboot is very risky. We know what happened to the Batman-franchise when Ben Affleck became Batman/Bruce Wayne and when Jeremy Renner got the lead part in the Bourne franchise. In the latter case it actually hurt the Bourne-franchise severely.
@Gustav_Graves, Affleck is actually one of the few things people seem excited about when it comes to the DC films. The reason there was an outcry when he stepped down to direct was because they really wanted to see his vision. Folks like me don't like this Batman for how the character has been written, but even I will readily admit that for who this Batman is, Ben played quite well. I've never heard massive criticism or even minor criticism, and when reviews came out it was a common practice to read, "this movie was garbage, but I liked Ben and Wonder Woman."
The Bourne comparison really doesn't make sense to make. Renner wasn't rebooted as Bourne, nor was the series reset to appear unconnected to the first three. The continuity was quite clear. The problem with that movie wasn't Renner or the choice to do a Bourne-less film, it was because the film was limp, hollow, and injected a super serum into what was a grounded spy thriller series. If the execution was up to snuff maybe it would've soared higher, though they shouldn't have tried in the first place if that's all they could do.