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
There were some real bizarre, out there stuff in the series though ( the Sphere!!) so am hoping he reels it in a bit, ( and I hope its not on the lines of 'Tenet') and it will be hard to get someone as unique as Patrick McGoohan as Number 6, or maybe he's reuniting again with Mr. Murphy?
I was more referring to EON as an entity rather than the regimes at helm. But beyond that, it’s still the same concept. They know these films inside and out. Heck MGW alone has been involved in the series since at least the early 70’s. It’s a family business and one that has been passed from one generation to another, and with it the knowledge of how to make these films the best they can possibly be. It’s not really that different to seeing a family own business with a sign that says “established 1962.”
So yeah, they HAVE been making these films for the last 60 years.
Definitely don't visit the Ian Fleming bit of the library then if you don't like inner demons! :D
I'm guessing you're ok for a bit of personal/character drama in Bond if you like Gilbert and Wood then? TSWLM has its share in its story (the film I mean). It's one of the reasons I think it's a great Bond film, better than a lot of the earlier ones in fact.
Not trying to catch you out by the way, just genuinely asking/curious what you want in a Bond film.
The Spy Who Loved Me is one of the more dramatic cases though. Fleming himself regretted it (mostly due to poor public reaction) and the reason we have the Gilbert/Wood version is because he stopped the story's contents from being released.
It is hard to come across a Bond fan who doesn't like one of OHMSS, FRWL or CR and those, while not all 1:1 adaptations, give us an interesting main character who is caught up in some sort of drama (unfortunately not much as the Fleming novels). I find it very hard to believe that there can be a Bond fan who would not be one if they read the books first/saw honest adaptations
When I think of something like Mission Impossible Fallout, which for me is one of the best spy action movies ever, there are emotional stakes being thrown at me all over the place, and just made the climax one of the most exciting and tense times I've ever had in the cinema.
The most popular Bond films, amongst fans even, are the more dramatic ones. There's the Bond ranking game going on in the other thread and if entries like OHMSS and CR aren't way up near the top, or at the top, I'll eat my steel-rimmed bowler.
I'm surprised you mentioned QOS. In that he's still dealing personally with Vesper's death.
I kinda agree, I want a confident Bond, one who's a womaniser, a gambler, drinker, and a hard edged agent (so very much in his prime). But you can have that while having a story that forces him to deal with some sort of conflict/obstacle (doesn't need to be personal demons or something from his past), or have him make a mistake perhaps... most of the films do in some form. I don't want to see another SF or SP either (love SF incidentally). I don't see any indication they're going to go down the 'family man' route again for Bond 26 so...
Yes, that is what fuels his rage going on a rampage. Strong. And that I like. I have to accept that the 'just give him a MI6 mission'-days with no personal strings are gone, but that's okay I guess. The Bond/Vesper arc was written perfectly in CR and hasn't been bettered since.
TSWLM has more personal drama than TMWTGG though...
So you don't like any either of From Russia with Love or Majesty's? Neither the books nor the films?
CR's reboot may have added some action scenes (mainly the parkour scene), but the complaint that I hear a lot is about the tacked on Venice scene. That film also removed an action scene from the novel where Bond nearly gets blown up. But anyway the film still keeps the drama/romance angle and that keeps it successful
What do you mean?
The latter is a spectacle based on another movie which is very loosely based on Fleming's book. I consider the former a boring drama, more akin to the novel, just with Thaland replacing the Caribbean (iirc), with a bit of kung-fu camp and Ekland cheese thrown in. It also almost sunk the franchise. But Scaramanga wasn't a cardboard character and generic villain, like Stromberg.
I'm afraid you've remembered Fleming's novel all wrong if you think it has anything to do with Golden Gun.
TSWLM actually has a pretty interesting dramatic story at its centre with Anya and Bond. It has spectacle (I think Bond should have that incidentally) but it has substance to it.
In Golden Gun, Bond seems a bit ruder, and a bit more of a bastard to innocent people, which doesn't really make sense in terms of literary character. If a girl grieving her parents got in this guy's way, I don't see him being overly compassionate. He's also a bit more blasé, which can sometimes be Bond's mood, but for the wrong reasons. Moore just moves around like a playboy type I suppose, which is off for the character. As for the plot, Bond does chase Scaramanga, but there's no JW Pepper, kung-fu, Andrea Anders, Solex, no lair on an island, no Goodnight getting kidnapped. There's also no tracing bullets, Goodnight is a more competent character, and no globe-hopping.
In fact, outside of the Gilbert trilogy, only maybe Diamonds are Forever could be less faithful to a title-sharing novel than Golden Gun.
I've asked Solitaire but she's more interested in my lovers' lessons.
Nope. THEY have not been making films for 60 years. EON as a company has. The staff comes and goes. Barbara Broccoli may be the next to go, if she has her way. It's obvious that she has her sights set elsewhere than Bond. How do I know? It's just human nature. All the signs are there. Don't believe me, check back on this post in another year.
Did I not mention that I was referring to EON as an entity rather than the individual people earlier? Because I’m fairly certain that I included that.
How many times has this conversation been had on this forum? Why is it that Barbara Broccoli having other projects she wishes to pursue suddenly mean that she no longer cares about Bond? Clearly the Craig era was successful enough to where she feels justified working on other things besides Bond; and fair enough to her for that. I didn’t like certain elements of Craig’s tenure as a whole because I thought them to be rather poorly planned out (like building a continuity from CR to SP at the last minute) and if taking more time means those issues aren’t present for the next guys era then I’m all for it.
Plus there have been so many other events that have happened since NTTD’s release; Amazon, the changes at MGM and UA, the recent box office trends. I understand being let down by EON whenever they say that nothing is happening but this has been a conversation done over and over again, articulated by people who’ve done a much better job than I can at explaining what’s happening in the industry (some even working in it.) Speaking for myself, I’ve been pessimistic (and perhaps overly critical) of a lot of EON’s choices; but I don’t deny their love for this character the way some have been as of recently, and I’m not going to buy into claims that they “no longer care about this character” or that “EON is creatively bankrupt.”
I understand where you are coming from. I don't think THEY/EON no longer care about 007 but Barbara's interests obviously lay elsewhere. I believe that when Bond restarts that Greg or someone else close to EON will take the reigns. Yes, a prediction not based on concrete facts but a gut feeling based on human nature.
To me Barbara is invested in the Bond character, as on display for the Craig films with an intense focus for that. Surely she'll be engaged and part of an eventual hand-off and changing of the guard for the franchise. And I just called some folks Shirley.
Perhaps; the truth is none of us really know what’s going. I think they’re just faced with too many external factors at the moment that they’re waiting to see how things play out. At least those are my observations.
Yes, And I believe one of those factors is that Barbara has made HER Bond films and they starred Daniel Craig. She now has to decide whether or not she wants to do it all over again or hand the reigns to another member of EON.
I don't imagine there have been any script treatments written, but maybe Amazon is holding things up? Perhaps holding out for Barbara and Michale to agree to streaming.
As far as I'm concerned ANY film that skips the cinematic release and goes straight to streaming is essentially a TV movie. The modern day equivilant of "straight to video".
If something like that is the case I don't blame Barbara and Michael for standing their ground. 007 is meant to be seen on the big screen.
Regardless I do hope things turn around for B26. We seem to be on our way to yet another 6 year minimum gap.
At this point 10 years ago we were getting concrete news regarding SPECTRE. There's only been one other movie made since those days. :(
I'd say it's more than perhaps.
And if there is someone with direct knowledge here of what is really going on you can be sure we won't hear anything from them.