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
I'd hrow Sean Connery, Ken Adam and Peter Hunt into that too.
An embarrassment of riches. No wonder there's no chance of us seeing the like of the 60s again.
Not quite the same is it?
There's no talents like the old days in any fields, that's just the way it is. Film being one of the biggest examples.
The Eon team from the 60's-80's : Cubby, Maibaum, Binder, Glen, etc had the bonus of constantly working on their crafts every couple years. Elements that might have not worked in some entries would be remedied by the follow up, yet the films never failed to feel like Bond films. Practice makes perfect.
It's kind of like being a musician and picking up your guitar every day, jamming for yourself, practicing and learning new chords, licks, etc. Then being ready each time you get a gig.
If you don't pick up your instrument for 4 years, and get a gig you're bound to be rusty.
Perhaps that's why P&W are racking their brains to come up new approaches to keep Bond relevant? They only get to write a new Bond script a three times per decade.
At any rate, is keeping Bond relevant something that requires that much effort? We know much of the appeal of Bond is in knowing what we're going to get: martinis, girls and guns-- timeless things. I think P&W talked about "Bond's place in the world"... his place is secure. I mean, what bad guys has he battled in past films? Evil organizations, evil industrialists, rogue generals, smugglers, drug dealers... these are all still around.
This shouldn't be too hard, just give us kiss kiss bang bang and be sure to take the pulse of world events every once in a while, to keep the stories fresh and current.
Yeah, you'd think so with the value of the franchise they'd have it all planned ahead. Thing is Eon has always marched to its own drummer. Now they can claim they have all these other projects aside from Bond.
While in the theatre having a blast, I reminisced about the fact that at one time EON ironically were the 'sausage factory' of sorts, churning out somewhat formulaic but still highly entertaining and anticipated entries with some regularity for 20+ years into the late 80s. They arguably wrote the book from which Marvel has taken a leaf. How times have changed.
Additionally, while patiently viewing the ending titles waiting for the post-credits scene (a tradition with these films) I also realized that even this was sort of reminiscent of EON in the past. After all, EON used to tease the title of the next film (which almost inevitably would arrive in theatres 2 years later) during the end credits.
With the Bond franchise being so iconic and tenured as it is, how can EON allow Bond films to be as competitive (on-par, if not surpassing) with the Star Wars franchise?
What do you feel makes Star Wars more competitive than Bond? Is it that it's marketed more towards comic book/sci fi folks (a broad audience)? I felt that perhaps it was because it was marketed more toward an American market, whereas Bond is more UK/Euro.
He's Russia's greatest love machine and he's bang on the money. Привет товарищ.
Edit: I've just seen his comment in the football thread and thus retract the above praise.
2. 80's
3. 90's
4. 70's
5. 00's
6. 10's