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
Agree totally.
Filming for NTTD was completed in October 2019, which means the script was completed long before then, and Craig's departure had long been known. It would be nice to be given news of something concrete.
Agreed. There’s ZERO chance they aren’t getting some “ducks in a row” during this downtime. There was most definitely a rough outline of a script before the writer’s strike (Barbs admitting P&W will come up with some ideas nearly a year ago), and the search for a new Bond has been going on for years.
To be fair, this thread was started even before the release of SP. 304-pages seems like a reasonable number for a period of 8-years.
Well said.
Must say I find myself agreeing with that too. While I enjoy the MI films fine enough I find they're a bit disposable and forgettable in the long run. And no, Tom Cruise does not have the charisma nor the charm of the majority of the cinematic Bonds (with the exception of Lazenby, but this is just my opinion. He's certainly no Moore, Connery or Craig).
I think it depends on what type of charisma really.
And Tom Cruise is aging better than some of the Bond actors, with the exception of Brosnan and Lazenby (who both still looking good despite of their age).
Tom Cruise is 61 years old, and he is still really looking good, compared to Connery in DAF (aged 41) and Moore in AVTAK (aged 58), he even look younger than Craig does in NTTD.
And I liked MI, one of the advantages that MI have on Bond is the better use of the female characters, the women of MI were beautiful but they're useful to the plot and are competent, something that I couldn't say for the majority of the Bond Girls, sorry (I'm a Bond fan, but I have to admit it).
MI definitely had no Mary Goodnight, Stacey Sutton, and Christmas Jones in them ;) and the actresses are not along the likes of Barbara Bach in terms of acting 😁, they're real actresses not models hired for their looks, and the female characters weren't given a sexually intended (double entendres) pun names.
I'm a Bond fan and I really adore the Bond Franchise, but I'll have to admit that the treatment of the female characters in these films didn't aged well.
I find these two franchises just on par with each other, I looked at them as equals, but yes, the only thing where it's different is the treatment of the female characters.
I don't find him a warm screen presence, and I'm not sold on his brand of 'charm' or charisma as an actor. I personally think Christian Bale had it correct when he said his inspiration for Patrick Bateman in American Psycho was Cruise because even when he's smiling there's 'nothing behind the eyes'.
It's worked in terms of, there's so many interesting characters in the MI series but if I'm honest as much as I like Cruise as Hunt, Hunt isn't as interesting as Bond is. I do love the MI films though and I can't wait for the new one
Haha it's possible I guess mate
That might be true of most action films these days. When do we come away from the cinema feeling as if we haven't been there, done that?
I like Bond, but 60 years in, if you're looking particularly for originality it probably shouldn't be your first port of call.
One can hope. I'm sure there is no shortage of writing talent who can bring something new to the series. Not convinced a fresh Bond begins with writers who have been at it since 1999.
That would be the logical thing to do. Taking Bond back on another young reboot tale, how he earned his 00 status, etc. would be pointless, although the one possibility is doing an adaptation of Forever and a Day, which is set before CR.
I’d like to see them continue to lean into that and the strength of their 2nd unit action crews to use the franchise as a canvas for interesting filmmakers to deliver their vision and bring their own unique voice, especially if we’re returning to more standalone installments. It’s unique to Bond and not a path I could see competitors like Mission Impossible, John Wick, MCU, etc. having success with long-term. Want to go action heavy? Gareth Evans. A cerebral epic? Chris Nolan. Foreboding with some existential dread? Denis Villeneuve. Frenetic campy fun? Edgar Wright. Twisty-turny mystery? Rian Johnson. Gritty, pitch-black nihilism? David Fincher. There’s endless possibilities to keep things fresh tonally/stylistically while still incorporating all the elements that make Bond what it is.
Never read that book. Im gonna have to check it out. But yes I don't think fans are wanting for another origins reboot again (unless its a really good story). Lets go back to the classic stand alone Bond films we all grew up loving.
If it showed the original starting of the double-0 section or something with M coming up with the plan, I could see something like that being fun.
They may just follow on from The Batman's lead and have a 007 era Bond earlier in his career. Maybe a year or two in. Not quite in his prime yet, more prone to mistakes, but not a new 00 agent either. In that case the story will likely be crafted around a mission that has a lasting impact on Bond for whatever reason. That or they'll just run with a more enigmatic but modern era Bond who's been in the Service an unspecified amount of time.
Regardless I suspect we'll be getting a completely new MI6 team, and the fact that Bond is now a younger/millennial born character will be at least hinted at. If I'm honest, I suspect the latter point is something the filmmakers are going to have to grapple with (if anyone's read Charlie Higson's new Bond novella On His Majesty's Secret Service it's something that's brought to the forefront, the fact that this Bond is a man in his 30s who never grew up during the Cold War and lives in the modern world. I must admit it's not done very well, but it's an interesting premise and could well be important to Bond going forward). In this sense I don't think we'll be going back to the same 'timeline' as the '62-'02 films, if this ever was the same timeline anyway. It'll be a fresh start no matter what.
I hope the producers are bold enough to go with a complete new cast. Make a clean break so fans don't have to rationalize why a character from the Craig era is, but is not, the same character in the new series.
While I don't believe EON has been in a wait and see posture regarding the Indy film, I'm sure the film performing below expectations will be a subject for discussion. A viewer whose first Bond film was a Craig will certainly not relate to a new Bond film in the way others did whose first films were any of the actors who preceded DC. I suspect historic Bond fans will figure less and less into the direction of the series.
I hope the series in its new form remains distinct rather than becoming an action extravaganza in which Bond plays second fiddle to stunts and effects.
An unrelated PTS would be welcome, which could be followed up by a Sylvia Trench type. However, that could lead to drama overload these days because undoubtedly there would be another love interest.
I'm not sure how DN and FRWL handled it, TBH, because it didn't feel like Connery was cheating on her with either Honey or Tatiana. Sylvia just seemed kind of effortlessly there.
Maybe try to set it up with Moneypenny with her and James going outside for a day off, but suddenly they're attacked by some bad guys.
I've got that idea from Dynamite Comics' Reflections of Death.