Where does Bond go after Craig?

1106107109111112675

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,957
    mtm wrote: »
    There's certainly a large chunk of Bond fan who have been vocal about the return of the formula. Just check out the 'where should Bond go next' thread.

    As you didn't want Q, 'Penny etc. back it just goes to prove one thing: no matter what they do someone will complain! :D

    Oh no doubt, I'm not questioning that, just saying that everyone has their own tastes and that's why it's hard to keep track of what the "fans" want, since everyone's so different.

    Regardless, no matter what they do in the future, it certainly won't please everyone! That's an impossible task sadly.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited February 2022 Posts: 6,272
    I preferred the stripped-down Bond of CR and QoS where there is no cavalry coming over the hill. It's too easy to have him dialed into M, Moneypenny, Q, whomever...that's lazy writing.

    There's a world of difference between Bond ordering missiles to attack over the phone like a drunk bloke ordering a pizza, versus Bond realizing that missiles are coming that he is powerless to stop and completing the mission by himself.

    I'd like to see Bond 26 feature Bond out of contact with the office and having to rely on his own wits, his phone taken away from him/blown up/dropped in the ocean.
  • Posts: 2,161
    That sounds good.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    Posts: 1,636
    Birdleson wrote: »
    That sounds good.

    They should get the entire theater crowd in on it, too. A purely phone-less cinema experience.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,546
    Part of what made espionage interesting, I think, in the original Bond stories was the complete lack of technology, and these secret services basically having to accomplish the same sort of things as they do today in a world without today’s technology.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,957
    It's these comments and wishes that wouldn't surprise me if they took the next era back to the past and went with period pieces instead. It wouldn't be entirely accurate to the times, of course, but that alone would certainly bring a whole "new" feel to the films by cutting out modern technology and what have you. Perhaps then we could return to the sleuthing and spy work.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited February 2022 Posts: 5,970
    It would very risky financially and in terms of audience, so I'm not sure they would, especially when they should be making conscious efforts to make Bond even more popular again.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,308
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    It's these comments and wishes that wouldn't surprise me if they took the next era back to the past and went with period pieces instead.

    They seemed pretty clear in a recent interview that they wouldn't want go period with the films.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,171
    Venutius wrote: »
    It’s really in QOS that he acts more like a sourpuss.

    So he should, though - he hasn't had a chance to work through any of the fallout from CR, he's mourning the love of his life and he's driven by rage. Haggis wrote it, and Craig played it, perfectly. Immediately after QOS, Dan did say that he wanted to reintroduce Moneypenny and Q, so that would've happened in some form but I think you're right and if QOS hadn't taken such a beatdown from the critics the next films would've been closer to it in tone than the ones we did get.

    When CR ended, it showed Bond triumphant over his capture of White. He didn’t look like a man mourning over Vesper. He looked like Craig having transformed into the classical James Bond. It was a perfect ending of an introduction. But then comes along QOS saying “oh no, he’s actually still bitter over her!”

    IMO they should have taken the route Fleming did with his follow up to CR. Instead of having the film set directly after the ending of CR, it’s set months later with a new mission turning up that gives Bond the opportunity to get some payback. No literal mention of Vesper. Leave that to the subtext.

    It would have been easy to be able to make it work as both a second chapter and a stand-alone film. Given how stylistically different QOS is from CR, I would have preferred that it was more a stand-alone entry. That’s why I think the two films actually DO NOT work together back to back because they’re so jarringly different in execution. It always astounds me when I read fans claiming that QOS works great as an epilogue to CR rather than a stand-alone. WHAT?! Watching QOS right after CR just makes the former look even worse!
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    This is very true.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited February 2022 Posts: 3,147
    Bond was triumphant over White at the end of CR. But isn't part of QOS explicitly about how such moments can be relatively fleeting and don't always bring closure? Because even after the satisfaction of getting White, Vesper's still dead and Bond's got to live with that. Even with an unfinished first draft script, QOS managed to address those ideas really well, I thought. Sometimes explicitly, as in some of the conversations with Camille, sometimes implicitly, such as with Mathis on the plane. Just as CR showed some of the physical consequences of Bond's life, QOS showed some of the mental and emotional consequences of leading such a life. All that, great dialogue, great gags, Olga Kurylenko, the Tosca sequence and a Bond that's a force of nature. I love QOS.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited February 2022 Posts: 8,171
    And I’m glad EON downplays QOS. The film deserves it.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited February 2022 Posts: 3,147
    Well, QOS isn't for everyone...
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Like... Tosca?
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,147
    peter wrote: »
    Like... Tosca?

    ;)
  • Venutius wrote: »
    Bond was triumphant over White at the end of CR. But isn't part of QOS explicitly about how such moments can be relatively fleeting and don't always bring closure? Because even after the satisfaction of getting White, Vesper's still dead and Bond's got to live with that. Even with an unfinished first draft script, QOS managed to address those ideas really well, I thought. Sometimes explicitly, as in some of the conversations with Camille, sometimes implicitly, such as with Mathis on the plane. Just as CR showed some of the physical consequences of Bond's life, QOS showed some of the mental and emotional consequences of leading such a life. All that, great dialogue, great gags, Olga Kurylenko, the Tosca sequence and a Bond that's a force of nature. I love QOS.

    Here here. QoS is a flawed film but it does a better job in what it sets out to do better than the 3 films that came after it. It manages to do so much more with less, Bond doesn't need to be a speech-giving chatterbox and we get incredible scenes like Mathis and Bond on the plane, the Tosa shootout, Mathis' death, Bond's escape from MI6, Bond and Camille's interactions and the PTS, which I think is the best car chase in any Bond film. QoS is a gem and we're fortunate to have it.
  • Posts: 1,073
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Bond doesn't need to be a speech-giving chatterbox

    Ha!

    I want to hear the screen Bond say "balls to you Tiger, and balls again!".
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,171
    Fleming Bond used to call his women “silly goose”. When are we finally going to get that?
  • Posts: 1,073
    Didn't Dalton say "be a dear Moneypenny, and. . . " when asking her to do something? That's the sort of Moore-era stuff that I suppose we won't get again. But it's very much Fleming's Bond.
    Or was it "Be a darling and. . "
    Ah, the old ways.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,308
    I feel like Connery did say "so that's the score!" at least once, or something similar, and Fleming did like to have Bond say that.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,171
    They’re definitely dated phrases. Like referring to adult women as “girls”. No one would have ever called Bond a “boy” unless it was a villain.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,147
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    QoS...manages to do so much more with less.

    Well put. And spot on. For a short film with relatively little overt exposition, there's so much in it. You're right, jimjam, QOS is a gem.
  • OOWolfOOWolf Savannah
    Posts: 140
    Venutius wrote: »
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    QoS...manages to do so much more with less.

    Well put. And spot on. For a short film with relatively little overt exposition, there's so much in it. You're right, jimjam, QOS is a gem.

    I truly believe that a step in the right direction would be to hire new writers that would simplify things. QOS does do that, although I don't think it was as effective as it could have been. Regardless, new life needs to breathe into the series. That's a definite.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,147
    Campbell tried to get rid of P & W for CR (allegedly), but couldn't oust them. Forster dumped their QOS script, yet they returned for SF. Mendes dumped them for SP, yet they returned when Sony/MGM panicked. They're like nanobots, man...
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    Venutius wrote: »
    Campbell tried to get rid of P & W for CR (allegedly), but couldn't oust them. Forster dumped their QOS script, yet they returned for SF. Mendes dumped them for SP, yet they returned when Sony/MGM panicked. They're like nanobots, man...

    Hahaha great post. I wonder if P and W will ever retire from Bond?
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited February 2022 Posts: 13,978
    Venutius wrote: »
    Campbell tried to get rid of P & W for CR (allegedly), but couldn't oust them. Forster dumped their QOS script, yet they returned for SF. Mendes dumped them for SP, yet they returned when Sony/MGM panicked. They're like nanobots, man...

    Heracles, more like. ;)
  • OOWolfOOWolf Savannah
    Posts: 140
    Venutius wrote: »
    Campbell tried to get rid of P & W for CR (allegedly), but couldn't oust them. Forster dumped their QOS script, yet they returned for SF. Mendes dumped them for SP, yet they returned when Sony/MGM panicked. They're like nanobots, man...

    Well said. The only thing I can think of is that they're financially a good deal for EON. I all honesty, their scripts have become stupider and stupider.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    I see Ben Wishaw has cast doubt on him returning as Q. It's interesting that the question of a 60's era Bond came up and he said he has no clue.

    I wonder why everybody keeps talking about the next Bond being set in the 60's? Do insiders know something we don't? Or is it pure speculation
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    Posts: 1,636
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    I see Ben Wishaw has cast doubt on him returning as Q. It's interesting that the question of a 60's era Bond came up and he said he has no clue.

    I wonder why everybody keeps talking about the next Bond being set in the 60's? Do insiders know something we don't? Or is it pure speculation

    I think, unless it's a one-off, there is zero chance. They aren't interested in playing with the formula too much - they've said they don't want spinoff streaming movies or series, I doubt they want to commit to two decades of locking themselves in the past.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,308
    Broccoli and Wilson did say explicitly they weren't interested in a period setting in one recent interview.
Sign In or Register to comment.