› ›

Where does Bond go after Craig?

1…608609611613614…681

Comments

  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    edited August 23 Posts: 3,327
    Burgess wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    So Bond needs to appeal to a younger generation, but no one is able to articulate any specifics. We don't know, but the brains at EON will have it figured out because they always do. I would like to read something from someone on this site who fits that targeted demographic to explain what's unique about their generation that should be reflected in the next Bond film to entice them to the cinema. It has surely got to be more than Bond using the most recent technology or a theme song by the artist of the moment.

    The film Bond has always a man of his times. Connery used pay phones. Dalton used a portable phone the size of bread box, and Craig used a smartphone. If using current devices is what makes Bond modern, then I have been modern my entire life.

    If it's more than that, then someone ought to be able say this is what makes Bond modern and appealing to the current and coming generations.

    Or will it simply be a much younger actor playing Bond? And we'll call it good.

    This is probably getting more into something a bit more philosophical (if you can call it that), but it’s usually said the major difference between Millennials and Gen Z is that the former were born into a world where there was more a sense of political/social optimism in the late 80s/90s, only for the post 9/11 and post 2008 years to shatter that. Gen Z were basically born into the latter eras and that’s the world they grew up/are growing up in.

    If you apply that to some of the films we’ve been talking about the idea’s there. The Batman, for example, puts us in the centre of a dark, grimy version of Gotham where crime and evil is all around, and even our hero isn’t able to be truly virtuous within this world (to the point where he even indirectly influences some of these villains around him). The film of course is about him learning to truly inspire hope rather than follow vengeance. Heck, the idea of being born into a strange world where that’s all you know and ultimately changing it is even there in Barbie.

    Bond 26 can channel that too. Craig’s Bond was a man who found himself in a more morally grey, post 9/11 world, but he actively went out of his way to do the right thing - he went against orders, disobeyed M etc. He was a blunt instrument in his methodology, but not a loyal foot soldier. The next Bond might be younger, but he may be more that loyal blunt instrument we know Bond to be traditionally, albeit in a certain context. He might be a man who has to carry out dirty jobs, assassinate people for King and Country etc. We might get more a sense of MI6’s moral greyness (perhaps not M’s directly, but those around him/in tandem with the mission Bond is sent on). Much like The Batman we might get a bit of optimism with Bond ultimately making a choice and doing something for a higher good by the end (ie. saving the day), even if it means choosing to go against an order or effectively do what Craig’s Bond was more willing to do.

    You’d have to find the right story to express those ideas. To me it sounds a bit like TLD with Bond being enlisted by MI6 to carry out two assassinations, the latter of which seems highly questionable/tenuous insofar as it involves killing a well known official (and of course it unknowingly makes Bond a pawn in the villain’s plan). It’s of course Bond deciding not to kill Kara or Pushkin and take matters into his own hands which saves the day. So those ideas aren’t without precedent in Bond. Anyway, that’s a broad but timeless way you can make a Bond story that’s relevant. It’s more thematic than specific though and has nothing to do with tone, who to cast, or even how to do this.

    I wonder if we’re overcomplicating this question. There’s the issue of the next film’s thematic direction but, on a broader level, the franchise needs to expand how and where it markets to young people. To me, Bond’s direct competition isn’t other espionage franchises but comic book movies.

    That’s not to say that Bond should copy the story beats or aesthetics of any particular comic book property, but there’s something to be learned about how comic book characters are marketed to fans and the general public. The Bond franchise needs video games. The Bond franchise needs collectible (and affordable) figures and statues. The Bond franchise needs easily obtainable t-shirts and gym wear. The Bond franchise needs to expand its reach into consumer products at stores like Macy’s and Target.

    The Bond franchise needs a consistent market presence beyond a theatrical release. I think EON knows this on some level which is why we got a Bond-themed reality competition show. EON needs to balance the high-end nature of the brand with consistent mass marketing to the average person.

    If the next Bond movie is good, people will watch. Success begets success. But the brand needs a wider, cost conscious reach. I think, in part, this means uncoupling the brand from any particular actor or face. Obviously, each new movie needs to push the actor playing Bond but, like Batman, there needs to be a focus on the IP as a brand instead of simply marketing for a specific film or a particular version of Bond.


    The Bond franchise usually does a good job of marketing wherever a film comes out, with lots of brand tie-ins, whether its high end cars like Aston Martin or Jaguar, or low end like Ford.

    For drinks there is usually a Heineken promotion for the low end, and something like Bollinger for the high end.

    Regarding clothing, the 007 franchise does seem to keep this at the premium end, with the likes of N. Peal, Sunspel, Omega and Orlebar Brown being the high end luxury brands that release official Bond related merchandise to wear (and not very affordable).

    Maybe they could target the lower end market too, introducing some cheaper brands, but then maybe there is a reason why EON have never gone down this route, because they are trying to keep Bond at the higher end.

    It probably stems from the roots of Fleming and upper class snobbery found in the novels - expensive high living, sea island cotton shirts, Rolex watches, etc.
  • Herr_StockmannHerr_Stockmann
    Posts: 910
    jetsetwilly wrote: »
    Maybe they could target the lower end market too, introducing some cheaper brands, but then maybe there is a reason why EON have never gone down this route, because they are trying to keep Bond at the higher end.
    Beyond clothing, the lower end market they could target would be toys. At the height of Bond mania, Eon had no hesitation in producing toys and merchandise aimed at a younger audience. As much as I love that Bond has become a quality, almost luxury brand that echoes the tastes of its protagonist, one could argue that the franchise ceased to dominate the cinematic landscape when the series stopped marketing more mainstream merchandise.
    tumblr_lzh4lsj53w1qiwn71o1_1280.jpg

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 23 Posts: 16,413
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @Peter -- I don't believe anyone on this site believes they can make a better Bond film than EON.

    Oh, I don't only belive that I could make a better Bond film than EON. I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON. And by that I don't necessarily mean better than CR or SF. I mean better than EONs average since BB & MGW took over.

    It's just a silly thing to say.


    jetsetwilly wrote: »
    Burgess wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    So Bond needs to appeal to a younger generation, but no one is able to articulate any specifics. We don't know, but the brains at EON will have it figured out because they always do. I would like to read something from someone on this site who fits that targeted demographic to explain what's unique about their generation that should be reflected in the next Bond film to entice them to the cinema. It has surely got to be more than Bond using the most recent technology or a theme song by the artist of the moment.

    The film Bond has always a man of his times. Connery used pay phones. Dalton used a portable phone the size of bread box, and Craig used a smartphone. If using current devices is what makes Bond modern, then I have been modern my entire life.

    If it's more than that, then someone ought to be able say this is what makes Bond modern and appealing to the current and coming generations.

    Or will it simply be a much younger actor playing Bond? And we'll call it good.

    This is probably getting more into something a bit more philosophical (if you can call it that), but it’s usually said the major difference between Millennials and Gen Z is that the former were born into a world where there was more a sense of political/social optimism in the late 80s/90s, only for the post 9/11 and post 2008 years to shatter that. Gen Z were basically born into the latter eras and that’s the world they grew up/are growing up in.

    If you apply that to some of the films we’ve been talking about the idea’s there. The Batman, for example, puts us in the centre of a dark, grimy version of Gotham where crime and evil is all around, and even our hero isn’t able to be truly virtuous within this world (to the point where he even indirectly influences some of these villains around him). The film of course is about him learning to truly inspire hope rather than follow vengeance. Heck, the idea of being born into a strange world where that’s all you know and ultimately changing it is even there in Barbie.

    Bond 26 can channel that too. Craig’s Bond was a man who found himself in a more morally grey, post 9/11 world, but he actively went out of his way to do the right thing - he went against orders, disobeyed M etc. He was a blunt instrument in his methodology, but not a loyal foot soldier. The next Bond might be younger, but he may be more that loyal blunt instrument we know Bond to be traditionally, albeit in a certain context. He might be a man who has to carry out dirty jobs, assassinate people for King and Country etc. We might get more a sense of MI6’s moral greyness (perhaps not M’s directly, but those around him/in tandem with the mission Bond is sent on). Much like The Batman we might get a bit of optimism with Bond ultimately making a choice and doing something for a higher good by the end (ie. saving the day), even if it means choosing to go against an order or effectively do what Craig’s Bond was more willing to do.

    You’d have to find the right story to express those ideas. To me it sounds a bit like TLD with Bond being enlisted by MI6 to carry out two assassinations, the latter of which seems highly questionable/tenuous insofar as it involves killing a well known official (and of course it unknowingly makes Bond a pawn in the villain’s plan). It’s of course Bond deciding not to kill Kara or Pushkin and take matters into his own hands which saves the day. So those ideas aren’t without precedent in Bond. Anyway, that’s a broad but timeless way you can make a Bond story that’s relevant. It’s more thematic than specific though and has nothing to do with tone, who to cast, or even how to do this.

    I wonder if we’re overcomplicating this question. There’s the issue of the next film’s thematic direction but, on a broader level, the franchise needs to expand how and where it markets to young people. To me, Bond’s direct competition isn’t other espionage franchises but comic book movies.

    That’s not to say that Bond should copy the story beats or aesthetics of any particular comic book property, but there’s something to be learned about how comic book characters are marketed to fans and the general public. The Bond franchise needs video games. The Bond franchise needs collectible (and affordable) figures and statues. The Bond franchise needs easily obtainable t-shirts and gym wear. The Bond franchise needs to expand its reach into consumer products at stores like Macy’s and Target.

    The Bond franchise needs a consistent market presence beyond a theatrical release. I think EON knows this on some level which is why we got a Bond-themed reality competition show. EON needs to balance the high-end nature of the brand with consistent mass marketing to the average person.

    If the next Bond movie is good, people will watch. Success begets success. But the brand needs a wider, cost conscious reach. I think, in part, this means uncoupling the brand from any particular actor or face. Obviously, each new movie needs to push the actor playing Bond but, like Batman, there needs to be a focus on the IP as a brand instead of simply marketing for a specific film or a particular version of Bond.


    The Bond franchise usually does a good job of marketing wherever a film comes out, with lots of brand tie-ins, whether its high end cars like Aston Martin or Jaguar, or low end like Ford.

    For drinks there is usually a Heineken promotion for the low end, and something like Bollinger for the high end.

    Regarding clothing, the 007 franchise does seem to keep this at the premium end, with the likes of N. Peal, Sunspel, Omega and Orlebar Brown being the high end luxury brands that release official Bond related merchandise to wear (and not very affordable).

    Maybe they could target the lower end market too, introducing some cheaper brands, but then maybe there is a reason why EON have never gone down this route, because they are trying to keep Bond at the higher end.

    It probably stems from the roots of Fleming and upper class snobbery found in the novels - expensive high living, sea island cotton shirts, Rolex watches, etc.

    Yeah I'm not sure merch is the way you bring people to the movie particularly; the tie-ins you mention do their job to cross promote very well, but I don't know if t-shirts at Target would bring a whole new audience. I'm also not sure it's why comic book movies are doing that- I think that's more of a brand exploitation (i.e. make money out of it) thing than a brand awareness thing: two different ends of the brand path, really: you make people aware of the brand and then you make money out of it. One feeds into the other slightly but I'm not sure it's the main path to bringing the money.
    Video games: sure, I can see them bringing a new audience.
  • ZekidkZekidk
    edited August 23 Posts: 3,276
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON.
    Huh?
    What is your definition of "making a movie"? Creating a first draft? Being head of production? Directing? Making a movie - especially a blockbuster - involves many, many people, from light technicians to the ones in charge of catering to the people involved in the creative process (director, editors, DOP, actors, composer, extras etc)

    Have you ever wondered why no pieces of fan fiction have been made into a feature movie? Making a big budget action blockbuster is not as easy as for example making a 'Blair Witch Project' kind of film, where only a handful of talented people are needed.

    I'm sure there are a lot of us that think we have ideas, whether it being an idea for a setpiece, some cool lines or whatever, and these are great, but in the grand scheme of things they are just bumper stickers that will never be attached to the luxury car.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,413
    I guess 50 Shades of Grey was technically fan fiction, and that got made into a movie :D
  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    Posts: 1,368
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @Peter -- I don't believe anyone on this site believes they can make a better Bond film than EON.

    Oh, I don't only belive that I could make a better Bond film than EON. I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON. And by that I don't necessarily mean better than CR or SF. I mean better than EONs average since BB & MGW took over.

    Yes, we only need enough money to hire Nolan. ;)
  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    Posts: 556
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON.
    Huh?
    What is your definition of "making a movie"? Creating a first draft? Being head of production? Directing? Making a movie - especially a blockbuster - involves many, many people, from light technicians to the ones in charge of catering to the people involved in the creative process (director, editors, DOP, actors, composer, extras etc)

    Have you ever wondered why no pieces of fan fiction have been made into a feature movie? Making a big budget action blockbuster is not as easy as for example making a 'Blair Witch Project' kind of film, where only a handful of talented people are needed.

    I'm sure there are a lot of us that think we have ideas, whether it being an idea for a setpiece, some cool lines or whatever, and these are great, but in the grand scheme of things they are just bumper stickers that will never be attached to the luxury car.

    Forgive me if I sound too much like one of those populists or a vindictive, but the difference between us and Eon is we didn't receive an inheritance of a James Bond film franchise, a rolodex of contacts in the film industry and millions of dollars and loans from banks and studios to finance blockbuster films with. Not to say Barbara and Mike couldn't do it on there own, but it certainly helps.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 23 Posts: 16,413
    Daltonforyou wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON.
    Huh?
    What is your definition of "making a movie"? Creating a first draft? Being head of production? Directing? Making a movie - especially a blockbuster - involves many, many people, from light technicians to the ones in charge of catering to the people involved in the creative process (director, editors, DOP, actors, composer, extras etc)

    Have you ever wondered why no pieces of fan fiction have been made into a feature movie? Making a big budget action blockbuster is not as easy as for example making a 'Blair Witch Project' kind of film, where only a handful of talented people are needed.

    I'm sure there are a lot of us that think we have ideas, whether it being an idea for a setpiece, some cool lines or whatever, and these are great, but in the grand scheme of things they are just bumper stickers that will never be attached to the luxury car.

    Forgive me if I sound too much like one of those populists or a vindictive, but the difference between us and Eon is we didn't receive an inheritance of a James Bond film franchise, a rolodex of contacts in the film industry and millions of dollars and loans from banks and studios to finance blockbuster films with. Not to say Barbara and Mike couldn't do it on there own, but it certainly helps.

    They've also had training on the job since 1964 and are award-winning film producers, which is also something which makes them much more qualified too.
    I'm so fed up of hearing how terrible they are. They've made so many films I love and have watched countless times. If you think you can make better films then go for it.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Daltonforyou wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON.
    Huh?
    What is your definition of "making a movie"? Creating a first draft? Being head of production? Directing? Making a movie - especially a blockbuster - involves many, many people, from light technicians to the ones in charge of catering to the people involved in the creative process (director, editors, DOP, actors, composer, extras etc)

    Have you ever wondered why no pieces of fan fiction have been made into a feature movie? Making a big budget action blockbuster is not as easy as for example making a 'Blair Witch Project' kind of film, where only a handful of talented people are needed.

    I'm sure there are a lot of us that think we have ideas, whether it being an idea for a setpiece, some cool lines or whatever, and these are great, but in the grand scheme of things they are just bumper stickers that will never be attached to the luxury car.

    Forgive me if I sound too much like one of those populists or a vindictive, but the difference between us and Eon is we didn't receive an inheritance of a James Bond film franchise, a rolodex of contacts in the film industry and millions of dollars and loans from banks and studios to finance blockbuster films with. Not to say Barbara and Mike couldn't do it on there own, but it certainly helps.

    Whether a neuro-surgeon inherits his/her dad’s practice or not, that doctor still needs to know how to operate on brains.

    Cubby was wise and he mentored his kids to make the best possible films they can.

    They exceeded this. After sixty plus years, James Bond is still a big deal, and still competes with all the other heavy weights.

    In the same span of time since the kids took over EoN, we’ve seen the end of many film series, and others have had three of their four wheels blown off and are barely moving forward.
  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    Posts: 556
    mtm wrote: »
    Daltonforyou wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON.
    Huh?
    What is your definition of "making a movie"? Creating a first draft? Being head of production? Directing? Making a movie - especially a blockbuster - involves many, many people, from light technicians to the ones in charge of catering to the people involved in the creative process (director, editors, DOP, actors, composer, extras etc)

    Have you ever wondered why no pieces of fan fiction have been made into a feature movie? Making a big budget action blockbuster is not as easy as for example making a 'Blair Witch Project' kind of film, where only a handful of talented people are needed.

    I'm sure there are a lot of us that think we have ideas, whether it being an idea for a setpiece, some cool lines or whatever, and these are great, but in the grand scheme of things they are just bumper stickers that will never be attached to the luxury car.

    Forgive me if I sound too much like one of those populists or a vindictive, but the difference between us and Eon is we didn't receive an inheritance of a James Bond film franchise, a rolodex of contacts in the film industry and millions of dollars and loans from banks and studios to finance blockbuster films with. Not to say Barbara and Mike couldn't do it on there own, but it certainly helps.

    They've also had training on the job since 1964 and are award-winning film producers, which is also something which makes them much more qualified too.
    I'm so fed up of hearing how terrible they are. They've made so many films I love and have watched countless times. If you think you can make better films then go for it.

    I never said they didn't receive training. I like most of their films since '95. But to answer the question of "why doesn't everyone on this forum make movies like Bond?" I give you my answer. It's hard, and Barbs and Mike got their foot in the door easier than most.
  • BMB007BMB007
    Posts: 564
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @Peter -- I don't believe anyone on this site believes they can make a better Bond film than EON.

    Oh, I don't only belive that I could make a better Bond film than EON. I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON. And by that I don't necessarily mean better than CR or SF. I mean better than EONs average since BB & MGW took over.

    Ok do it. Download FadeIn and write one. ~100-120 pages. I'll give you notes.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    mtm wrote: »
    Daltonforyou wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON.
    Huh?
    What is your definition of "making a movie"? Creating a first draft? Being head of production? Directing? Making a movie - especially a blockbuster - involves many, many people, from light technicians to the ones in charge of catering to the people involved in the creative process (director, editors, DOP, actors, composer, extras etc)

    Have you ever wondered why no pieces of fan fiction have been made into a feature movie? Making a big budget action blockbuster is not as easy as for example making a 'Blair Witch Project' kind of film, where only a handful of talented people are needed.

    I'm sure there are a lot of us that think we have ideas, whether it being an idea for a setpiece, some cool lines or whatever, and these are great, but in the grand scheme of things they are just bumper stickers that will never be attached to the luxury car.

    Forgive me if I sound too much like one of those populists or a vindictive, but the difference between us and Eon is we didn't receive an inheritance of a James Bond film franchise, a rolodex of contacts in the film industry and millions of dollars and loans from banks and studios to finance blockbuster films with. Not to say Barbara and Mike couldn't do it on there own, but it certainly helps.

    They've also had training on the job since 1964 and are award-winning film producers, which is also something which makes them much more qualified too.
    I'm so fed up of hearing how terrible they are. They've made so many films I love and have watched countless times. If you think you can make better films then go for it.

    I hear you on all of this. Cubby, and his proteges have given me sixty years of enjoyable films and it is tiring to hear how clueless they are, and how "Babs" needs to go... "Babs" doesn't care..."Babs" loves Craig... "Babs" doesn't want to continue... Hey, a reoccurring theme: it's all "Babs's" fault...

    Meanwhile the series is in the best shape it's been in since the Connery Era.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 23 Posts: 16,413
    Daltonforyou wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Daltonforyou wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON.
    Huh?
    What is your definition of "making a movie"? Creating a first draft? Being head of production? Directing? Making a movie - especially a blockbuster - involves many, many people, from light technicians to the ones in charge of catering to the people involved in the creative process (director, editors, DOP, actors, composer, extras etc)

    Have you ever wondered why no pieces of fan fiction have been made into a feature movie? Making a big budget action blockbuster is not as easy as for example making a 'Blair Witch Project' kind of film, where only a handful of talented people are needed.

    I'm sure there are a lot of us that think we have ideas, whether it being an idea for a setpiece, some cool lines or whatever, and these are great, but in the grand scheme of things they are just bumper stickers that will never be attached to the luxury car.

    Forgive me if I sound too much like one of those populists or a vindictive, but the difference between us and Eon is we didn't receive an inheritance of a James Bond film franchise, a rolodex of contacts in the film industry and millions of dollars and loans from banks and studios to finance blockbuster films with. Not to say Barbara and Mike couldn't do it on there own, but it certainly helps.

    They've also had training on the job since 1964 and are award-winning film producers, which is also something which makes them much more qualified too.
    I'm so fed up of hearing how terrible they are. They've made so many films I love and have watched countless times. If you think you can make better films then go for it.

    I never said they didn't receive training.

    You decided not to mention it though.
    Sorry, I get grumpy with all the producer bashing.
  • Colonel_VenusColonel_Venus
    Posts: 579
    BMB007 wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @Peter -- I don't believe anyone on this site believes they can make a better Bond film than EON.

    Oh, I don't only belive that I could make a better Bond film than EON. I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON. And by that I don't necessarily mean better than CR or SF. I mean better than EONs average since BB & MGW took over.

    Ok do it. Download FadeIn and write one. ~100-120 pages. I'll give you notes.

    We were talking about BB's and MGW's roles since 1995. They don't write. They produce.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited August 23 Posts: 8,399
    In many ways The Living Daylights is the perfect bond film in that it encapsulates the day in the life, breezy bond adventure with just enough of the Moore Over-The-Top cheese, and just enough of the Daniel Craig grounded grittiness. It has quite a complex plot, and well drawn characters, with a little bit of room for subtle introspection (and even a dash of fleming) but never enough the break the rules of a standard bondian romp. They really did get the balance just right, and especially during the final fight when Kara is driving alongside the plane, the way that is shot with the wind whiping her hair around feels very modern. I think if Bond 26 tries to be more like a standalone bond adventure, finding a balance between the deconstructionist arc of Craig and the breezy dna the series is known for then The Living Daylights is a pretty good place to start.
  • Since62Since62
    edited August 23 Posts: 1,630
    Nay. I call for a Bond who's so damaged that he's suicidal. Everything he does is calculated to destroy the villain and their plan AND to obliterate Bond, too, but, by a series of unforeseen and unlikely events and surprises, Bond survives. So, by the end, he's so amazed and astounded that he's loony. THAT would differ from what we've seen to date with any of the Bond actors. No easy thing, producing something different from any of the styles or tones seen to date.
  • ZekidkZekidk
    edited August 23 Posts: 3,276
    Daltonforyou wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON.
    Huh?
    What is your definition of "making a movie"? Creating a first draft? Being head of production? Directing? Making a movie - especially a blockbuster - involves many, many people, from light technicians to the ones in charge of catering to the people involved in the creative process (director, editors, DOP, actors, composer, extras etc)

    Have you ever wondered why no pieces of fan fiction have been made into a feature movie? Making a big budget action blockbuster is not as easy as for example making a 'Blair Witch Project' kind of film, where only a handful of talented people are needed.

    I'm sure there are a lot of us that think we have ideas, whether it being an idea for a setpiece, some cool lines or whatever, and these are great, but in the grand scheme of things they are just bumper stickers that will never be attached to the luxury car.

    Forgive me if I sound too much like one of those populists or a vindictive, but the difference between us and Eon is we didn't receive an inheritance of a James Bond film franchise, a rolodex of contacts in the film industry and millions of dollars and loans from banks and studios to finance blockbuster films with. Not to say Barbara and Mike couldn't do it on there own, but it certainly helps.

    Before rolodexes there's the script. At least some kind of draft or treatment. And I have yet to read, or find, a forum member script - fan fiction - that I would actually love to be a blueprint for a Bond movie. That's not to say that fans don't have great ideas (there are plenty of threads) though, and that's not to say that I think the established pair, Purvis and Wade, are great screenwriters. I found the first draft for SP - the Irma Bunt one - downright awful and there's probably a reason why other professional writers are hired to rewrite and add some spice to their work.

    So by all means, point me in a direction to prove your point. I don't mind reading another 120 pages, as long as it is formated (Final Draft etc)
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 23 Posts: 16,413
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    BMB007 wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @Peter -- I don't believe anyone on this site believes they can make a better Bond film than EON.

    Oh, I don't only belive that I could make a better Bond film than EON. I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON. And by that I don't necessarily mean better than CR or SF. I mean better than EONs average since BB & MGW took over.

    Ok do it. Download FadeIn and write one. ~100-120 pages. I'll give you notes.

    We were talking about BB's and MGW's roles since 1995. They don't write. They produce.

    I guess you know MGW has written them before that though, and contributed story ideas since.
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    In many ways The Living Daylights is the perfect bond film in that it encapsulates the day in the life, breezy bond adventure with just enough of the Moore Over-The-Top cheese, and just enough of the Daniel Craig grounded grittiness. It has quite a complex plot, and well drawn characters, with a little bit of room for subtle introspection (and even a dash of fleming) but never enough the break the rules of a standard bondian romp. They really did get the balance just right, and especially during the final fight when Kara is driving alongside the plane, the way that is shot with the wind whiping her hair around feels very modern. I think if Bond 26 tries to be more like a standalone bond adventure, finding a balance between the deconstructionist arc of Craig and the breezy dna the series is known for then The Living Daylights is a pretty good place to start.

    Yeah I don't entirely disagree: TLD, and other films in the same sort of tone (I might say GE, SF, SP) hit the sweet spot for me in terms of silliness and grit, and some drama and tension in there too.
  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    edited August 23 Posts: 556
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Daltonforyou wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON.
    Huh?
    What is your definition of "making a movie"? Creating a first draft? Being head of production? Directing? Making a movie - especially a blockbuster - involves many, many people, from light technicians to the ones in charge of catering to the people involved in the creative process (director, editors, DOP, actors, composer, extras etc)

    Have you ever wondered why no pieces of fan fiction have been made into a feature movie? Making a big budget action blockbuster is not as easy as for example making a 'Blair Witch Project' kind of film, where only a handful of talented people are needed.

    I'm sure there are a lot of us that think we have ideas, whether it being an idea for a setpiece, some cool lines or whatever, and these are great, but in the grand scheme of things they are just bumper stickers that will never be attached to the luxury car.

    Forgive me if I sound too much like one of those populists or a vindictive, but the difference between us and Eon is we didn't receive an inheritance of a James Bond film franchise, a rolodex of contacts in the film industry and millions of dollars and loans from banks and studios to finance blockbuster films with. Not to say Barbara and Mike couldn't do it on there own, but it certainly helps.

    Before rolodexes there's the script. At least some kind of draft or treatment. And I have yet to read, or find, a forum member script - fan fiction - that I would actually love to be a blueprint for a Bond movie. That's not to say that fans don't have great ideas (there are plenty of threads) though, and that's not to say that I think the established pair, Purvis and Wade, are great screenwriters. I found the first draft for SP - the Irma Bunt one - downright awful and there's probably a reason why other professional writers are hired to rewrite and add some spice to their work.

    So by all means, point me in a direction to prove your point. I don't mind reading another 120 pages, as long as it is formated (Final Draft etc)

    If you're looking for Joe-Blo on the internet to produce a Casablanca, then good luck. My point is that which you mentioned about money. If you had all the money in the world to throw at a top script writer ( and many others) you would have nice blueprint.


    My other question is why are others on a James Bond forum, if they're bothered by debate and discussion of Eon, Barbara Broccoli, Michael G. Wilson? We're allowed to nitpick and reproach actors, directors and writers, but Eon is sacred, which you're aren't allowed to dissent from.

    All of us here love James Bond and what the character and the world means. We're all on the same team. But we should recognize there's others on this forum who have a differing opinion on which the direction the books or films should take next and not take it as a personal slight.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,399
    When people talk about just making a contemporary, relevant Bond film which doesn't pull too far in any particular direction but strikes a good balance, I think of The Living Daylights. That film is very contemporary, but it is subtle about the way it goes about it. Bond's sex is toned down because of the crisis, but it isn't drawn attention to (bond still gets his end away). The love interest is more fiesty (her getting her way about taking the cello) but not in a way that screams "I am woman, hear me roar". The plot and locations are tied to real life geopolitics, but they don't undermine the sense of adventure. The henchman uses a Walkman to strangle his victims because they were popular at the time, and the score from Barry feels much more energised and lively. Everyone is just working on their a game, including Glen, and I think this is what we need most of all for Bond 26 - A general sense the contemporary setting that people can pick up on without being too in your face about "making a statement" or being different.
  • BMB007BMB007
    Posts: 564
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    BMB007 wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @Peter -- I don't believe anyone on this site believes they can make a better Bond film than EON.

    Oh, I don't only belive that I could make a better Bond film than EON. I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON. And by that I don't necessarily mean better than CR or SF. I mean better than EONs average since BB & MGW took over.

    Ok do it. Download FadeIn and write one. ~100-120 pages. I'll give you notes.

    We were talking about BB's and MGW's roles since 1995. They don't write. They produce.

    Oh that's even more ridiculous then. Do you think you can coordinate an international production with a nine-figure budget, with hundreds (thousands?) of people on payroll? Actually look into what a producer does. You might learn something!
  • ZekidkZekidk
    Posts: 3,276
    Daltonforyou wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Daltonforyou wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON.
    Huh?
    What is your definition of "making a movie"? Creating a first draft? Being head of production? Directing? Making a movie - especially a blockbuster - involves many, many people, from light technicians to the ones in charge of catering to the people involved in the creative process (director, editors, DOP, actors, composer, extras etc)

    Have you ever wondered why no pieces of fan fiction have been made into a feature movie? Making a big budget action blockbuster is not as easy as for example making a 'Blair Witch Project' kind of film, where only a handful of talented people are needed.

    I'm sure there are a lot of us that think we have ideas, whether it being an idea for a setpiece, some cool lines or whatever, and these are great, but in the grand scheme of things they are just bumper stickers that will never be attached to the luxury car.

    Forgive me if I sound too much like one of those populists or a vindictive, but the difference between us and Eon is we didn't receive an inheritance of a James Bond film franchise, a rolodex of contacts in the film industry and millions of dollars and loans from banks and studios to finance blockbuster films with. Not to say Barbara and Mike couldn't do it on there own, but it certainly helps.

    Before rolodexes there's the script. At least some kind of draft or treatment. And I have yet to read, or find, a forum member script - fan fiction - that I would actually love to be a blueprint for a Bond movie. That's not to say that fans don't have great ideas (there are plenty of threads) though, and that's not to say that I think the established pair, Purvis and Wade, are great screenwriters. I found the first draft for SP - the Irma Bunt one - downright awful and there's probably a reason why other professional writers are hired to rewrite and add some spice to their work.

    So by all means, point me in a direction to prove your point. I don't mind reading another 120 pages, as long as it is formated (Final Draft etc)

    If you're looking for Joe-Blo on the internet to produce a Casablanca, then good luck. My point is that which you mentioned about money. If you had all the money in the world to throw at a top script writer ( and many others) you would have nice blueprint.
    Oh, so being the producer with all the money in the world? And where does "being a Bond fan" help or fit in exactly, if you outsource everything that's creative to someone else? "Hey, studio posse, here's a shitload of money, go make a Bond movie that's better than what EON can come up with."
    Daltonforyou wrote: »
    My other question is why are others on a James Bond forum, if they're bothered by debate and discussion of Eon, Barbara Broccoli, Michael G. Wilson? We're allowed to nitpick and reproach actors, directors and writers, but Eon is sacred, which you're aren't allowed to dissent from.
    I like this question. Clearly some things are more sensitive to some, than other. Some take things too personal, and some are just letting off steam, I guess. Nothing should be sacred, not even BB and/or EON. As long as people behave civilized and there's no name calling. The things is... the longer the wait for the next Bond movie, the more frustrated many of us will get. And then fingers are pointed and questions asked. If we don't hear anything at all for the next three years, a riot in here will probably occur.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 23 Posts: 16,413
    Daltonforyou wrote: »
    My other question is why are others on a James Bond forum, if they're bothered by debate and discussion of Eon, Barbara Broccoli, Michael G. Wilson? We're allowed to nitpick and reproach actors, directors and writers, but Eon is sacred, which you're aren't allowed to dissent from.

    So a contrary opinion to yours isn't allowed then.
    Folks discuss whether they like what Roger Moore, Daniel Craig etc. did, but they don't claim they weren't professional or entitled to hold their jobs through their talent or ability.
  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    edited August 23 Posts: 556
    mtm wrote: »
    Daltonforyou wrote: »
    My other question is why are others on a James Bond forum, if they're bothered by debate and discussion of Eon, Barbara Broccoli, Michael G. Wilson? We're allowed to nitpick and reproach actors, directors and writers, but Eon is sacred, which you're aren't allowed to dissent from.

    So a contrary opinion to yours isn't allowed then.
    Folks discuss whether they like what Roger Moore, Daniel Craig etc. did, but they don't claim they weren't professional or entitled to hold their jobs through their talent or ability.

    Is this not the opposite of what i just expressed?

    And yes, theres a lot of members who rag on actors or directors for lack of talent or ability so don't give me that. Clearly you're the one who doesn't like contrary opinion.

    BMB007 wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    BMB007 wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @Peter -- I don't believe anyone on this site believes they can make a better Bond film than EON.

    Oh, I don't only belive that I could make a better Bond film than EON. I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON. And by that I don't necessarily mean better than CR or SF. I mean better than EONs average since BB & MGW took over.

    Ok do it. Download FadeIn and write one. ~100-120 pages. I'll give you notes.

    We were talking about BB's and MGW's roles since 1995. They don't write. They produce.

    Oh that's even more ridiculous then. Do you think you can coordinate an international production with a nine-figure budget, with hundreds (thousands?) of people on payroll? Actually look into what a producer does. You might learn something!

    I believe any member here is capable of that task, eventually. Obviously they would have to work their way up to it, just like Barbara and Mike did. Of course there's a difference between being in that position and being competent.
  • delfloriadelfloria
    edited August 23 Posts: 1,860
    peter wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Daltonforyou wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON.
    Huh?
    What is your definition of "making a movie"? Creating a first draft? Being head of production? Directing? Making a movie - especially a blockbuster - involves many, many people, from light technicians to the ones in charge of catering to the people involved in the creative process (director, editors, DOP, actors, composer, extras etc)

    Have you ever wondered why no pieces of fan fiction have been made into a feature movie? Making a big budget action blockbuster is not as easy as for example making a 'Blair Witch Project' kind of film, where only a handful of talented people are needed.

    I'm sure there are a lot of us that think we have ideas, whether it being an idea for a setpiece, some cool lines or whatever, and these are great, but in the grand scheme of things they are just bumper stickers that will never be attached to the luxury car.

    Forgive me if I sound too much like one of those populists or a vindictive, but the difference between us and Eon is we didn't receive an inheritance of a James Bond film franchise, a rolodex of contacts in the film industry and millions of dollars and loans from banks and studios to finance blockbuster films with. Not to say Barbara and Mike couldn't do it on there own, but it certainly helps.

    They've also had training on the job since 1964 and are award-winning film producers, which is also something which makes them much more qualified too.
    I'm so fed up of hearing how terrible they are. They've made so many films I love and have watched countless times. If you think you can make better films then go for it.

    I hear you on all of this. Cubby, and his proteges have given me sixty years of enjoyable films and it is tiring to hear how clueless they are, and how "Babs" needs to go... "Babs" doesn't care..."Babs" loves Craig... "Babs" doesn't want to continue... Hey, a reoccurring theme: it's all "Babs's" fault...

    Meanwhile the series is in the best shape it's been in since the Connery Era.

    Usually you don't go to extremes but to negate the idea that Broccoli has possibly cooled in regards to her commitment to Bond after shepherding her legacy Craig series is surprising. All of us can feel burned out or feel fulfilled after completing what we feel is our personal stamp on a character or franchise. It's not her fault, it's just a statement of what MIGHT have happened in regards as to why they are slow walking the start of the next film. I'm just saying this is a possibility along with contractual hurdles, arrangements, and agreements with Amazon. Of course, it is just as possible they want a longer pause while the audience forgets that they killed off 007 in NTTD.

    I don't prescribe to the idea that there is a continued/shared DNA of EON dating back 60 years which transfers to each generation of EON personnel. Each producing team has their own background, personal preferences and style of working though the product they are making shares the same background and resources.
  • BurgessBurgess
    edited August 23 Posts: 380
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    In many ways The Living Daylights is the perfect bond film in that it encapsulates the day in the life, breezy bond adventure with just enough of the Moore Over-The-Top cheese, and just enough of the Daniel Craig grounded grittiness. It has quite a complex plot, and well drawn characters, with a little bit of room for subtle introspection (and even a dash of fleming) but never enough the break the rules of a standard bondian romp. They really did get the balance just right, and especially during the final fight when Kara is driving alongside the plane, the way that is shot with the wind whiping her hair around feels very modern. I think if Bond 26 tries to be more like a standalone bond adventure, finding a balance between the deconstructionist arc of Craig and the breezy dna the series is known for then The Living Daylights is a pretty good place to start.

    TLD is my favorite Bond film—nay—one of my favorite films. It’s not objectively the best but I agree that TLD has all the elements future Bond films from GoldenEye to No Time To Die adopted and remixed. For me, TLD is the start of what we can consider the modern Bond film—even at over thirty years old!

    If memory serves me correctly, Barbara—and the Broccoli family as a whole—seemed to have a similar creative and personal relationship with Dalton that they have with Craig. There definitely seems to be some mirroring of focus and direction with both eras.

    EON still hasn’t quite found the right balance between the Dalton/Craig portrayal of Bond and the fantastical elements from Moore and Connery. If they can get that alchemy right, then that will be the best run of Bond films ever. That would be pure magic.

  • BMB007BMB007
    edited August 23 Posts: 564
    BMB007 wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    BMB007 wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @Peter -- I don't believe anyone on this site believes they can make a better Bond film than EON.

    Oh, I don't only belive that I could make a better Bond film than EON. I belive pretty much anyone here could make a better Bond film than EON. And by that I don't necessarily mean better than CR or SF. I mean better than EONs average since BB & MGW took over.

    Ok do it. Download FadeIn and write one. ~100-120 pages. I'll give you notes.

    We were talking about BB's and MGW's roles since 1995. They don't write. They produce.

    Oh that's even more ridiculous then. Do you think you can coordinate an international production with a nine-figure budget, with hundreds (thousands?) of people on payroll? Actually look into what a producer does. You might learn something!
    I believe any member here is capable of that task, eventually. Obviously they would have to work their way up to it, just like Barbara and Mike did. Of course there's a difference between being in that position and being competent.

    This is a wildly different claim than the one initially made!

    I don't understand why many are devoted to writing real person fanfiction, and engaging in insider baseball hypotheticals.

  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,807
    Arguing with success. No future in it.

  • WhyBondWhyBond USA
    Posts: 69
    There is no other options to take Bond. We have had and seen it all. There is just no more ways to innovate the character and if you do it's not Bond anymore. The only thing they can do is make a great spy action flick and see where it leads.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,807
    So game over. Or not game over.



    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSI2d5MzNEw07kOXIQVZgru8jbsxj80hMn8Mw_fUPpD05Y-17El

Sign In or Register to comment.