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
To pursue that setup just negates every cliche imaginable from revenge to lost love. Barf how boring can you get?
If Bond can make it to B26 then that's probably were the series will get interesting again.
That's assuming with get a straight sequel to SP.
Bond spent over two decades following a tired formula in the films, so if the continuation of this story, which could lead to an interesting examination of how Bond behaves when domesticating himself away from MI6, bores you, you must have been even more numb during the Moore and Brosnan eras.
No I enjoyed both those eras. And I enjoyed Craig except SP.
I don't get how Bond domesticating himself from MI6 has to do with either the Moore or Brosnan films. Most of those films were straight escapist mission films.
Only SP "numbed" me.
I guess if I wanted to see Bond escape Bond I could watch Three Men and Baby or True Lies.
It's a chance to tell a story that hasn't been told before, and one that Fleming never got to tell. Would Bond settle for the quiet, or find himself brought back to the fray, of the bullets and battles?
I'd much rather get kind of story than a movie I can see coming every step of the way, with nothing but a formula holding it together with all the desperate clinging to gadgets and those damned one-liners. What worked in the 60s was for that time, and as recent as the 90s and early 2000s, the Brosnan films showed us that that approach doesn't necessarily work for creating truly exceptional films anymore. Why the franchise (and its fans) can't step away from that more is beyond me, but the Craig films have shown us that it can be done, and done well.
And all this talk of EON wanting to drop connected stories doesn't work either. SP was a movie that was all about bringing up the past films, even QoS, and took time in the story to remind audiences of them, along with bringing back White, playing with Bond's feelings for Vesper and developing his character even further as he looks back on his time as a 00 and thinks of his future. Dan's take on Bond has continually been developing as a fully-formed character unseen before, and all that he's experienced in CR, QoS and SF is on his face in the film. Because EON are telling these stories with Dan's Bond, all the past films are always important, as they are stepping stones for him growing to be the man he is in every movie, a development you can accurately chart in a sensical, deep fashion.
Part of the reason I think SP failed to engage some critics and audiences is because the movie requires a good bit of knowledge about this Bond and the events of the past films that made him to truly "get it" and experience the movie to its fullest. If EON were willing to take that risk and tell a connected story in the film, they wouldn't shy away from continuing the story they all wanted to tell in SP, especially when the movie teases a continuation of it in the last ten minutes with Blofeld set up to haunt Bond in the next adventure.
It's all there, if you go to the right oculist and are able to see it.
I think the storyline will be, and should be, continued. That doesn't mean any kind of long explanation (or screen time) of Madeleine is necessary, though. Blofeld, yes. EON won't throw all that away.
I personally do not want a rehash of OHMSS, nope. No Bunt, no killing off of Madeleine. Be creative and do something else ... with Blofeld, though, yes.
And directors - I'm open to Nolan but would welcome someone fresh and different. But I definitely don't want Guy Ritchie anywhwere near a Bond film.
We may find Bond leaving Madeleine to return to MI6 (likely when a SPECTRE threat arises) and we don't see her again as Bond chooses his old life for the new one, or Bond comes back to her at the end when Blofeld is dead. If the film went to the effort of really exploring Bond's inner life and which choice he sees himself selecting in its conclusion to tie off the era, I think it would supply us with some great drama, drama that Dan can shoulder.
Craig's Bond has quit in every film to seek revenge or find himself.
There's other ways to deal with life than retirement. C'mon the hold point of the reboot was to have Bond to become Bond which we almost got SP only to be stuck with yet another romance that unfortunately isn't all that convincing.
Me? I'm hoping for an escapist fun Bond that we've seen with Connery, Moore and Brosnan eras, which could only be done with a soft reboot. I miss these old days.
There's also no question of Craig's 007 becoming Bond. To me, he has been Bond from the start, and far more Bondian in just one debut film than some of the Bond actors managed in their entire eras, to be quite frank. These films aren't as much about him becoming the Bond we know, but simply about him developing as a man and agent, period. We see him alter and adapt himself over the course of the films, with a very clear arc of change occurring as his experience turns to knowledge.
One might say the singular theme of QoS is revenge in fact: "It'd be a pretty cold-hearted bastard who didn't want revenge." Camille takes revenge by killing Medrano, and it could be argued that Bond takes a measure of revenge as well by ensuring Greene suffers horribly in dying rather than bringing him in or ending it quickly for him. Bond is then faced with the ultimate decision of revenge or no revenge when he seeks out Vesper's boyfriend, but chooses not to exact revenge this time. Similarly, he is faced with the choice of whether or not to exact revenge upon Blofeld at the end of Spectre, but again he lets the man live.
As far as quitting goes, Craig's Bond actually quits in some form in all four of his films! He plainly quits via official memorandum at the end of Casino Royale. He goes rogue in QoS, which M interprets as quitting, but which Bond does not—hence the "I need you back"/"I never left" dialogue. He definitely quits at the start of Skyfall by simply not returning to service, opting instead to drink himself into oblivion on a beach for however many months. And then we have him quitting again at the end of Spectre, foregoing duty for a dame...forever...ostensibly...make that indubitably...until the next one, that is, when "England needs you again, 007."
Craig's era is definitely about themes of revenge, for sure. M expects Bond to kill anyone involved with Vesper's death, Camille has a mission against Medrano (both of which you say), and we can happily toss Silva's mission in there too as well as well as Blofeld's need to kill Bond for his meddling in SP.
However, Bond himself is not the revenging type, which is what I was arguing, not that the films didn't feature revenge of one kind or another; there is a difference. After all, it's the above that helps put Bond off the idea of revenge. He resents M for thinking he would go behind her to get at anyone connected to Quantum, and when he sees just how little killing Medrano does to help Camille heal, he sees more than ever just how pointless a mission of revenge can be. Mathis also tells him many times that he needs to forgive himself and Vesper instead of being destructive, and Bond realizes at the end of things that no matter how much blood he could wash his hands in, Vesper would never be brought back to him. That's why he doesn't go on a revenge mission, and why he doesn't kill Yusef. Where Blofeld is concerned, he knows that time behind bars will hurt Ernst more than a merciful bullet, and that the information he has thanks to his SPECTRE leadership will help the world governments in shutting the organization down as much as they can. He puts his anger below the needs of the multiple, and does the right thing in effect.
Now, on to the quitting. As I stated, Bond does in fact prepare to resign in CR to live an "honest" life with Vesper, and we are possibly heading into him going cold on spy work at the end of SP, but neither QoS or SF show him quitting. In QoS he isn't rogue, because being rogue by its very definition would require Bond to be working free of his employer and doing things for his own invested interest. Instead, Bond is freeing himself of some red tape and doing the mission he knows needs to be done, finding out what Quantum and Greene specifically are up to, finding their scheme and killing it from the roots up. There isn't one moment that he is wavered from that mission, and is always focused on the next lead. In a film full of characters with double motives, schemes and lying faces, Bond is one of the only people on the straight path and aware of just what he is doing, and for the right reasons. Of course he leaves Greene to die, as he would have with or without the connection the man had to Quantum and how the organization strung along Vesper. The man was a sociopathic monster, who controlled a resource that he could turn profit on while the civilian public starved with thirst. Bond wasn't going to play nice and allow the bastard to live, and he also knew that if he didn't get to Greene, Quantum sure would for his failures (he remembered how they responded to Le Chiffre's failure previously). It's the same derisive discontent Bond has felt in the past with villains like Dr. No, Grant, Largo and Blofeld; they have no right to a life in his eyes, and deserve no pleasantries.
In SF Bond doesn't quit, in fact he thinks that MI6 has turned on him, not the other way around. He feels deflated and angry because he wasn't trusted enough to do the job he had proven he was capable of doing an untold number of times, but through that disappointment and resentment he came back the very moment he was needed, a sign of loyalty no "quitter" would ever have.
Need I say more?
And I'm with you on a continued story with Craig. As you say, he can shoulder it.
Nicely written @0Brady.
M, Mr. White, Felix, Mathis
@0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Which loose ends? The only one is that Blofeld is still alive, and that's not even a loose end because he got arrested at the end of the movie, so I count no loose ends.
+1
+2
@Walecs, SP's ending is what I call in narrative terms a "false resolution." There's loose ends because the film is quite visibly setting up the possibility of Blofeld striking back at Bond when the spy thinks he's secured an "honest" life. In his New Yorker interview, Dan outlined the very thing I've said for months previous, stating that Bond "thinks" he's had a happy ending for the moment, underscoring that the next film would no doubt explore the choice Bond has made and what the consequences will be of upsetting Ernst if he returns.
New Yorker spectator question: “At the end of Spectre, Bond walks away with Madeleine. Is that the end?"
Dan: "Yes, at that moment in Spectre, that's what he thinks. But it always says 'to be continued."
To put it all into an equation, now:
Film's wide open ending+sign of vengeful Blofeld+sign of Bond trying to domesticate+Dan thinking the game isn't up for Bond= Many loose ends
This story is far from over.
@peter, cheers. Sometimes I feel like I'm arguing with brick walls, so it's nice to have you here.
-5,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
Anyone can waste posts on numerical values. :-\"
Again if SP hadn't sucked and the characterizations been better then yes I would welcome the rest of the story. Neither Madeline nor Blofeld worked so rather just move on.
So -1 to your post. It's a forum with opinions. Not once have I devalued your opinion in this discussion nor have I questioned your understanding of the film or series. I just disagreed.
+3 squared to whomever wants a Bond film and +2 if you want those characters to be closer to what Fleming wrote. ....not foster children gone bad and ersatz Tracy characters.
+7 if you want a Bond film with an actual Bond soundtrack... you know with the Bond theme.
+1
One shouldn't state an opinion as fact and then follow that statement up with a diatribe on how people can have different views other than yours.
It's all a rather silly business, this, but I hold that the characterizations are one of SP's strong suits in most cases, especially when compared to past Bond films which are jokes in comparison for the lack of any insight or depth they carry. Just the hotel scene alone with Bond and Madeline tops anything in the Brosnan era and later Moore films when it comes to using a space and the dialogue within that space to characterize a pair of people. There's a lot of meat to chew on in that scene alone, and it carries some of the film's greatest narrative weight because of it, especially once White's secret room is uncovered and Bond is again faced with the human behind the monster he once thought White was, while also finding Vesper's interrogation tape in the same breath, showing him the many layers and co-existence of both love and cruelty that existed inside the man they called "The Pale King."
The Bond and White interaction and all it represents blows away even more past dialogues in the Bond canon than the above, for what the scene is on the face of it and what it signifies for Bond and White as characters meeting again and the symbolism their final meeting holds for the entire narrative in its rippling effect.
Craig, sources say, initially shied away from talk about Broadway because the critics were lukewarm to him in 2013’s “Betrayal.” But he’s happy now — as is his co-star, the excellent David Oyelowo — and senses a shot at a Tony for Best Actor in a Play, if the show can get in under the Tony cut-off date, which is April 27, 2017.
Barbara Broccoli, who controls the James Bond franchise — which has kept Craig toodling around in Aston Martins for years — is the money behind “Othello.”
http://nypost.com/2016/12/15/will-bands-visit-make-the-jump-to-broadway/
Bond 25 is 007 in New York....
Well it's better then the undertakers wind
;)
Dan wears coat part 1
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4069252/Now-S-planning-Daniel-Craig-goes-shopping-wrapping-paper-Boxing-Day.html =))
Dan wears coat part 2
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/2427044/daniel-craig-is-almost-unrecognisable-wrapping-up-in-a-chunky-coat-and-hat-after-stalemate-with-film-producers/