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
"Who is she,your mother ?"
"She likes to think so."
--
EDIT: Ms. Weisz on ABC this morning. Not a word about Bond (probably by agreement).
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Culture/video/rachel-weisz-compares-romance-drama-shape-water-54708685
I agree that is what they should tap into, but it will take another cultural Revolution to get there, I think. What studio do we know currently which hasn't embraced PC culture with open arms. This has all come about since Craig was cast, and everyone in Hollywood is now lining up in uniformity to preach from the same hymn sheet! Unless there is a freedom movement on the horizon, like in the 60's, I see thinks as very bleak. Whatever person or entity takes on the franchise in future will be treading on eggshells from day one. That is not even considering the advancement of technology, and the bigwigs pressuring to do everything in a computer to save money. And not even adding to that the need to make everything understandable for a Chinese audience.
Even if they breaking back the formula and make a straight adventure like we're clamouring for, it's likely that it won't be recognisable as real Bond. I think the Craig tenure was the last chance to make that happen, personally.
I still believe that with the right actor one can embody the essence of Bond, including his not so savoury attributes, without being so explicit. As I noted earlier, I watched DN yesterday and it's a film that can hold up even today in many respects (apart from fetch my shoes and what not). Much of that is due to Connery. He projected his masculinity without needing to be overt about it. Moore did something similar, but with a bit more disarming charm.
It's all in the writing and in the acting, or rather, the personification.
You will get many answers to that question. To some it is Fleming’s version, to others it is Moore’s. They couldn’t be more different.
Even if they breaking back the formula and make a straight adventure like we're clamouring for, it's likely that it won't be recognisable as real Bond. I think the Craig tenure was the last chance to make that happen, personally. [/quote]Good points. The pressure to 'conform' is stronger than ever in my view. It's rather sad.
I still believe that with the right actor one can embody the essence of Bond, including his not so savoury attributes, without being so explicit. As I noted earlier, I watched DN yesterday and it's a film that can hold up even today in many respects (apart from fetch my shoes and what not). Much of that is due to Connery. He projected his masculinity without needing to be overt about it. Moore did something similar, but with a bit more disarming charm.
It's all in the writing and in the acting, or rather, the personification.[/quote]
I agree. I believe that it is going to be much tougher now to portray anything without a twitter revolt. I believe they have done a good job the last few movies showing Bond's manliness without causing offense, but it still makes me nervous that he is going to be extra sensitive.
Not every movie has to be a reflection on what is happening in the real world...Movies are movies for a reason!!!!
But they also share a lot in common.
Not that much:-)
Yes, and she will be in conversation with him at the Montclair Film Festival on Saturday. I've friends attending, I asked them to let me know if she mentions Bond at all, or if DC is there.
Bond is as it always should be, a reflection of true manlihood, what it means to be a man, to be testosterone fueled, to be classy, to be the man every man wishes they were and everyone woman wishes they were with.
That’s all Bond is.
Yes!
Imho, given the times we live in presently, a softer touch may be required, rather than a brute. That's why, much as I like Hardy, I recognize he may not be the right man for the job. Craig is already reflective of the past too, again imho.
That's interesting. So when you say softer touch, you mean someone in the vein of Moore?
It's a matter of finesse in this sensitive climate.
You forgot that the next two Bond movies will be directed by Boyle and Nolan. The true Bond Renaissance is still ahead of us.
How come your so sure nolan will direct bond 26? I would love to see that happen but you make it sound like fact it's going to happen
It's definitely not fact. Possible, but not fact at this point.
Cause with nolan's comments about wanting to take over with a new actor and the fact that bond 25 will be craig's last then it's likely that nolan will take over the reins with bond 26 anyway does anybody think that annapurna is teasing us with their latest bondian photo on Instagram?
Not really though. Fleming's version of Bond is a troubled, flawed, off-beat person atypical of the general man of his time; Who can use his psychopathic traits to manipulate people, out wit his opponents, but can also take things head on with brute force.
That's what makes him so deadly. He's smart and physically in touch with his body.