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
Possibly, we’ll never know , but I think he would come up with something more satisfying , with superior action sequences than the one we got.
I think it's also worth assuming that EON & co are still smarting from the Sony leaks. It was probably a rather embarrassing episode for them, and presumably they decided afterwards to play their cards very close to the vest for a while.
What mistakes? You're suggesting there is a litany of them. Given how well SF and SP performed at the box office, I'm sure a lot of producers and studios would love to take on EON's mistakes.
Not hiring Christopher Nolan as director.
Not hiring Christopher Nolan as director.
Not hiring Christopher Nolan as director.
Not hiring Christopher Nolan as director.
Not hiring Christopher Nolan as director.
....
:P
What I find baffling is how remarkably scoldy this thread is. Most of the other threads on this site are a delight - speculation, debate, learning, banter . . . all great.
But for some reason this thread is 50% members chastising other members for speculating too much, not speculating enough, for being too cynical, being too credulous, not being reverential enough toward some members, the volume of posts, the tone of posts . . . it's all a bit exhausting.
There's been a suggestion here on the forums that part of the Boyle/Bond fallout was due to the former's unwillingness to up the action ante. Given what seems like the general response to SPECTRE's collective action sequences (subjective as it is), I could see it being the case. And understand why the producers would want that.
Specific to Bond 25, I've always believed there were two distinct creative success vectors the film could take, given recent shifts in the competitive landscape (Kingsman's explosion in popularity + Mission: Impossible's continued action sequence dominance).
#1: Purposely dramatically-driven thriller, low stakes and high tension, cleverly written and plotted, very much in the vein of another CR or Skyfall to "complete the tonal triad" in the Craig era, as it were. Purely, distinctly, and uniqely James Bond, in the Flemingian sense we know him.
#2: Full-born classic cinematic Bond, with the same nostalgic and reverent approach of the last two films but a noteworthy injection of energy and inventiveness into the music, pacing, and action sequences to re-cement 007 as the cinematic spy hero to end all cinematic spy heroes.
The first option's more interesting to me. If only because my personal feeling is that Craig, with his final film, has earned a unique opportunity in the history of the franchise to experiment. But I'd likely love seeing the second.
My only real concern is that we could end up with a compromise of the two approaches that ultimately weakens the elements of each.
Then again, when I'm sitting in the theater next November and those first E-minor chords start twanging -- I'm sure I'll be excited regardless.
Not to mention, who is from the UK and who is not.....what if your parents are from the UK, does that mean I can be of the in crowd please? oh please oh please! Come on, pleeease..., like it matters. Some of them caused past members to leave based on their comments and snap-backs.
When SP came out, I mentioned in one of my posts that James Bond should go through a surgical change of looks, as the story of an OHMSS broke out for Bond 25, this would help fans accept Craig's departure and eventual replacement through a nice, long film to help make up for the years we could have had more great films with him. And not people are arguing over the whole P&W script vs the other guy who left and now the series is possibly at the mercy of directors who've never really had all that much experience before instead of choosing the people who would be passionate and are experienced to come back in their respective roles including Marc Forster, David Arnold, Geofrrey Wright, Dennis Gassner, and the filmographer from Blade Runner.
Mate, you might as well smear your balls in liver and lie naked in a dog pound.
Two toxic comments that add absolutely nothing to the discussion. Seriously, how old are you guys?
You're the one who's been toxic being rude and disagreeable with everyone who thinks differently than you do. You're attacking @peter and @ColonelSun for no reason. Now you're changing your tune because everyone is onto you. You can dish it but now you can't take it. What do you add with your constant assumptions that Nolan will direct Bond 26 acting like you can see into the future?
Spot on!
Stage 1. denial. :))
And James Bond returns to video games next month
Or just had a life.
Shhh I keep telling you it doesn’t exist it’s all the main frame man....
Numerous comments about Nolan directing Bond 26 has nothing to do about this discussion - neither is several comments dismissing a rumoured shortlisted director because of what types of glasses she's wearing. Have a look at your own comments.
That wouldn't be surprising.
Well, you could be of the sadomasochistic persuasion, with a I'll-hit-you-so-you-can-hit-me kind of inclination. You do know what buttons to hit, I'll tell you that.
I come here to enjoy endure.
I'll add this.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=1vrEljMfXYo
I've started doing so as well; right around about the time accusations of the board being a hierarchy started flying.
;)
BTW, wish he was in Bond25, in retrospect it couldn't have been true at that time, right?
I like Spectre very much and agree with you on almost every point, however, I really dislike the M briefing in the film because of the way Bond speaks to M, which IMO is very disrepectful towards M. I'm a huge fan of literary Bond (as I'm sure most here are) and in my opinion Craig plays a Bond very similar to that of Fleming's from the novels. In this instance however I feel Bond is portrayed very far from the literary Bond.
He's just started in the M position, and is growing into it. Bond is obstinate, and it serves its purpose. M learns during the film that OO7 actually shouldn't tell him everything. At times Bond works in spite of MI6 but always in their interests. If M was aware of it all he himself would be hamstrung from acting when he needs to.
That should bring a different dynamic to BOND 25. Even so, M getting frustrated by Bond is a staple I expect pretty much every film.