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
Yeah, and a new Bond is required for the spell to work!
The more I think about it the more I'm convinced, that 4 could be the magic number from now on.
The first will always be the best of the lot and the third the least good. That worked well for Brosnan and Craig.
So if Actor No 7 will get 4 movies as well, we will get one classic for all ages and three good to very good movies.
That'll make me more than happy.
Yes, this is what I'm thinking. B25 will probably be the best of the next four films. Plus the new Actor will benefit from a fresh approach.
I'm not fond of the idea to let Sony be distributor again. EON Productions already faces two movie companies every new Bond production: MGM and a distributor. Chairman Wang Jianlin may be a charismatic chairman, but it does mean that EON needs to take into account the wishes of Wanda Cinemas as well.
Moreover, the Chinese market becomes slightly saturated as well. Disney has a big finger in entertainment affairs as well. Recently the biggest Disneyland opened in China, and that's a bit of a marketing vehicle too.
My gut feeling tells me that Warner Brothers will become the next movie distributor. EON is facing hardships, MGM is gacing hardships, Warner is facing hardships..........and in a way that's a positive thing for a new Bond production. No excessive high expectations anymore.
What've I told you about goading the pre-schoolers? It's supposed to be their nap time.
At least maybe in NA. Maybe?
Bond's got nothing to do with it. Sony made a dumb deal with their previous financier that allowed them to obviously partake in the profits but weren't obligated to share in the losses and let Sony take the full brunt of it, particularly tge GB movie. Naturally, Sony needed a new financier and Wanda were more than happy to oblige, particularly given the rate of proliferation of the company's reaching arm.
Sony I'm sure would love to keep Bond but they need to stop dropping their pants and bending over so willingly for such crappy returns. If they're still negotiating they need to come up with a more satisfactory deal, especially after the huge losses Sony succumbed to and MGM's weakened position, with such bombs like Ben Hur.
No surprise there!
For those who have read all of Flemings Bonds, which novel could be successfully translated to the big screen as effectively as Casino Royale? I'm sure opinions will vary
Amazing (not) how most member's top 3 films or 3 of the most respected 007 films are the closest to Fleming's novels : FRWL,OHMSS,CR.
LOADS of material,but all mixed up,eg : the aquarium fight from LTK is actually from Fleming's LALD novel @talos7
They should definitely incorporate unused Fleming material into films, like they did with LTK/LALD. That would be terrific.
What they should stop doing is referencing old films. That's the one thing I'm really fed up with. Especially with reusing and modifying old villains and elements (volcano/crater lair, SPECTRE meeting, Blofeld's scar, etc.). I see that as a complete lack of creativeness.
If they think smaller-scale homages and references are necessary, I'd also rather see something from the novels. For example, Bond eating scrambled eggs and bacon.
The thing is......after 24 (or 26) films there will always be inevitable referencing anyway. There's something not much...original stuff to do anymore after 54 years. A lot of scenes are merely 'accidental' references, and weren't born out of some deplorable uncreative motivation.
Take for instance the white dinner jacket in SP. Look, before Bond actually wore a white dinner jacket, Roger Moore did so the last time in AVTAK. If I'm not mistaken, there were actually suggestions every now and then from Bond fans if it wouldn't be a nice idea to re-introduce one again after so many years?
Moreso, white dinner jackets HAVE become slightly fashionable as of late. Not because of Bond, but because it's simply the case among fashion circles. In a similar way we saw the double-breasted jacket featured heavily in "Kingsman". But, all we do here then is slamming Bond for being uncreative.
Most likely, a costume designer at one particular time had a hunch that's not even related to Bond. To Jany Temime introducing a white dinner jacket had everything to do with re-creating an Indy Jones/Casablanca-like exotic atmosphere.
Same thing with 'hollow volcanoes'. To me, I truly loved Blofeld's re-imiganed 'crater lair'. Yes, it rings some bells, but come on that's not a 'lack of creativeness'. Within the Bond-formula I think it's actually more sinister than an ice palace. If you really dislike such a lair, then what else would you have done?? After 54 years?
I mean come on, the idea of a villain's lair is in any case a typical Bond-esque thing to have. Just like lush designed casino interiors ("Casino Royale"), but also scarred and touched-up villains (Le Chiffre's bleeding eye, Renard's bullet hole, Trevelyan's scar, Hinx's steel nails, Xenia's thighs, MayDay's fashion choice).
Lastly, you forget that by referencing old films, you are sometimes referencing Fleming as well. It's a bit easy to say that the aquarium fight from LALD therefore should be re-introduced again. Isn't that suddenly not one of your 'deplorable movie references'
Frankly, to me these so called 'references' aren't the real problem of some films. I think there are a lot of Bond fans with this kind of attitude these days:
The biggest problem as of late were inspirational problems and logical thinking during the writing process of a new Bond film. We have talked about that many times before. If we touch up that aspect, if we write slightly more logical storylines and get a bit rid of all the historical links between characters and continuity gymnastics, then we have a good Bond film on our hands.
I would love it if he made it clear either way. Then it would feel like something is actually happening.
I think people sometimes forget that at this very moment already things are happening for Bond #25. It's a misgiving to think that EON House is closed until December 31st. Lot's of pre-production stuff is already happening that we don't know off openly.
This week's news that Michael Wilson went to LA to meet with Guy Ritchie at this stage is far from confirmed. But it does make logical sense. The Sam Mendes rumour was actually the first ever rumour back in 2010....and he turned out to be the evntual "Skyfall" director.
I also think that's how EON works at first: Search for a new director (or try to let the same director coming back), lay out some common ideas, write the first story treatment during some brainstorm sessions later this year, etc. etc.
That's how it goes really. Let's not forget that with Daniel Craig we usually had a very quiet post-premiere year. Just be patient, and also enjoy the secrecy at this stage! It actually made me turn to writing a bit. It's the nicest thing you can do as a Bond fan: fantasising, laying out possible scenario's, etc :-):
https://spycommandfeatures.wordpress.com/the-spectre-of-bond-25/
Always the voice of optimism, @Gustav. ;)
Yes, I was among those who suggested it here several years ago, but I wasn't talking about that type of referencing. Besides, that was a welcome change from the usual black/midnight blue dinner jacket Bond wears all the time.
We will definitely disagree about that. Of course after 54 years some things will look similar, but blatant homages should be avoided. References should be subtle and barely noticeable to most people. That's why I was suggesting unused Fleming material instead of old films.
Leave the past in the past, and be as original as possible.
The kid doesn't like the food, that's completely legitimate. :)
Where do you rate shoving the DB5 down our throats in all this?
That's not a mere coincidence. It's shameless fanwankery from Mendes.
But your final paragraph holds true. Coming up with something original and creative is what is needed and any so called nods or homages should only be by accident, because you are making a Bond film and there are 24 others so it is inevitable. They should not be by design.
The script writing process during the Mendes era seems to have been let's think of as many homages as we can and then after that we'll cobble together a plot around them.
+1