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
QOS was probably one of the edgiest political statements in the Bond realm and as someone who tends to lean right, I thought it was tastefully done. Actually I see it as a film which both sides are manipulated. I will add, to me, a non-Brit, SF does not scream a pro-Brexit film. I think Pierce2Daniel's comments are right on with that.
He's James bloody Bond. By definition, isn't it a big meaty role? He's the main character! ;-)
Well said.
Huh?
@PanchitoPistoles you're one of those...
Interesting interview I found of Mendes and Craig talking about Skyfall. I know Craig is liberal but I'm not too sure about Sam.
Good post. I totally agree that Bond is inherently political. Spot on. You just have to think a little harder with Bond to understand the subtext. It's actually much more telling about the changing political context than many other more overtly political films.
I'm always for decentralisation.
Wouldn't be surprised if Sam was a Tory.
I love Skyfall still and found it patriotic and actually never associated it with Brexit. But we all see what we want to in films, basically. Human nature.
Yes, patriotic is a better descriptor for Skyfall than Conservative. And Quantum of Solace kind of roasted liberal ethos I thought, especially with the Greene Planet dinner party.
The important part is that Bond and M are at odds with the bureaucrats, whatever they may be.
More likely we won't get anything official official until November 30th which I'm predicting the press event revealing the title and cast will be but we will definitely get loads of cast and crew leaks and locations
I agree: expect to know some cast members by October.
For a little perspective:
--MGM was two levels into "junk bond" status (technical name: non-investment grade debt) before this latest downgrade. It's now three levels into junk.
--Essentially, Moody's is saying MGM is a bit more risky now than it was under Gary Barber. I read the Moody's release. It also says it's unlikely MGM will up be upgraded through 2019.
Interesting. According to this article, Olivier Schneider is B25’s supervising stunt coordinator and Neal Callow will be B25’s art director
Callow confirmed it himself: https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/james-bond-museum-austria/index.html
One of B25’s art directors. Spectre had 6.
https://deadline.com/2018/06/mgm-gary-barber-settlement-agreement-1202408686/
In return, Barber agrees to "not engage" with MGM for three years. In other words, he won't launch a takeover bid. Reuters reported last month that Barber was looking into making a bid.
Not much effect on Bond 25. It basically averts a potential sideshow (a would-be Barber bid) while MGM and Eon get Bond 25 up to speed.
I sincerely hope not. McClory was only ever in it for the money. He had not real interest in Bond, only what he could get out of it.
Sending Fleming to an early grave and being a thorn in EON's side for decades.
I'd hope those days are over.
Nope. I'm the new McClory. Sorry.
Jeez we do not need another fiasco plaguing my beloved franchise yet again!!!
White? Why in the world should that be a criterium? Non-female yes. James Bond is a man and if anyone disagrees they are simply talking about a different franchise.
I hope they leave real world politics out. Of course they can select themes or case studies from (recent) history but I think the general public is so exhausted of everything being politicized, it wouldn't be a smart decision business-wise to include it. Besides the main source of evil always turns out to be an individual, in every installment. I think it adds nuance, same way it does for individuals in WWII movies, and it's a lot easier to accept for the viewer.
As a foreigner, I always like the British patriotism inherent in the franchise; it's part of the James Bond DNA. But I do not understand those who want Bond to make an obvious political statement in that regard. Nationalism is completely fine as long as the rhetorics aren't as serious or militant as they have been in the real world the past few years. There should always be room for self-deprecating humor, which in my opinion is also part of Bond's DNA, and it's what adds charm and universal appeal.
You act like it was entirely McClory's fault. You've conveniently left out the part where Fleming took material from screenplays co-written by two people he never had any intention of crediting. He arrogantly tried to cut them out of their share, and he paid the price for it.
I mean, really, what would you have done in McClory's shoes?
This is spot on. The cause was Fleming's initial misappropriation. The effect was McClory being a thorn in Fleming's--and eventually Eon's--side.
Taken a huge sum of money from Fleming and left the franchise alone, acknowledging that I´m neither a film producer nor a mob boss powerful enough to take up a fight against Eon.
And not exercised your right to produce a remake ten years later?
Bullsh*t.
In any case, it turns out that McClory was powerful enough to fight EON: By working with a relentless business partner (Jack Schwartzman), he managed to get Connery back and NSNA into theaters. There's nothing the fans can do to change that, despite their bleatings that the movie be stricken from existence.