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
With Fiennes in the role, I do not think it will revert to being quite as brief as the Connery/Moore eras.
I do hope that they are at least creative with the supporting cast within reasonable bounds. I want them to be used well. But it is Bond's arena, the field, and as we have seen from 3 Craig films, he's grown as an agent. The man needs to resolve things pretty much solo, with just a little help from his friends and allies, at the right time.
I love M in Goldeneye and TND. I like that bit in the PTS of TND a lot. Always makes me laugh. (And it's funny because she and that actor played the leads in a romantic comedy in the UK, for years, called As Time Goes By.) The audience in the theater cheered at the end of that PTS, I remember. Still one of my favorite Bond films.
From the a, b, and c choices a few posts above - I am fine with b. M doesn't have to be so limited any more. Though that doesn't mean M needs to be actually in the field with Bond, though. I think we will get some good interaction between M and Bond in Bond 24, and possibly more background on M, and maybe seeing M in other places than his office. But I don't see him shooting his way out with Bond somewhere ... I really hope not.
The one thing I really want them to get rid of is the obvious ear piece for Bond. [-X
Oh, and the ending? I'm happy ending the film with that - as long as the previous scene right before it, shows Bond with the main Bond girl happily doing something private together. ;)
I want to know the cinematographer probably more than anything else right now.
I want to know the main Bond girl.
I want to know the main villain.
I especially want to know the script is truly finalized!! :)
But after that, whenever we get to the point where EON is giving the tiniest bit of info about the story ... many months from now ... I will be trying to sniff out if Quantum is involved. Let alone Blofeld. I do think that it is not necessary to have either in Bond 24. But with EON now having the rights to use Blofeld, I wonder if they will try to get it into this next one.
As for Quantum - if they are going to bring it back at all, I believe this is the time to do it. I just want it done in a smart, interesting way. I have my doubts about Logan originally writing Quantum in for Bond 24 ... and that would be too great a change in the script to do at this point, in my opinion (totally not in the profession, so I am just going by my gut feeling as to the feasibility of that). Also, having Bond 24 be a stand alone film and not a two story arc may count Quantum out. They could wrap Quantum up entirely with this film, though, if they really wanted to. Hmmm.
It is all intriguing and we are all getting a bit impatient for real news. They have given the new M a good back story and I feel like we will learn more about him.
As soon as we know the actor hired for the main villain, the Blofeld speculation will swirl strongly again.
It feels like we are getting to the first top crest in a rollercoaster, about to drop down and hold our breath as we plunge into a series of dips, twists, and bumps as Bond 24 heats up and real news begins ... I'm ready. :-bd
If it were up to me, and I'm ambitious here, I'd write a script that not only brings back Quantum, but would be revealed to have an even darker organisation behind it, known as SPECTRE. Imagine, in the final act of the film, Bond travelling to Japan to find a certain Dr. Shatterhand we suspect he is the big bad compared to whom Greene was but a maggot. Bond will, however, soon discover that Dr. Shatterhand is a man born as Ernst Stavro Blofeld...
I am unsure about Bond 24 utilizing the character. Mendes won't continue with Bond 25 (well, at least I firmly believe that at this point) but he could still end the film, say the last 15 minutes of it, leaving a tantalizing clue pointing to Blofeld. It depends upon if that is where the producers want Bond's story to continue. With Craig on board for Bond 24 and Bond 25 ... just think: he could finish his era doing battle with Blofeld. Not a bad way to go out! :D
You see, they have the rights to Blofie now; why not use him then? Of course many people dislike that idea because when they think Blofeld they think Dr. Evil. I'm fairly convinced they would never go for that type of Blofeld now. Fleming himself had a totally different Blofeld in mind too. The Blofeld we know is the product of Dahl and Gilbert's imaginations, but in fact Charles Gray's Blofeld came closer, physically, to Fleming's Blofeld. Still, our pal ESB could be a menacing character, even today. Had Silva not been Silva, he might have been Blofeld too for all I care. All we need is someone to look in the eyes and feel the cold chills. Not a flamboyant maniac but a stoically calm, brilliant mastermind, always planning behind the shadows.
There is a secret message for Bond inside the bulldog. "Trust no one. Especially not Mallory."
*Mr Deepvoice*
"In a world... where knights have traded swords for guns
[insert quick gun barrel shot]
en horses for dogs
[insert bulldog breaking in a 100 pieces, revealing the hidden message]
and armour for tuxedos
[insert shot of a well dressed Craig, reading the note]
it's good to know there's is still one man who can do what it takes.
[insert several shots of Bond deep-sixing Mallory, Q and MP]
Daniel Craig
is
Ian Fleming's James Bond
in
THUNDERBULL
And this time, James Bond takes . out . the . trash!
[insert Bond eating falafel on top of the entire MI6 office's ruins]
And I hope the bulldog makes an appearance when we get a brief glimpse of Bond's new apartment. Perhaps he has it guarding the loo.
Okay, 2 more days to wrap up discussing the character of M.
By the way, I'll just throw out these questions for consideration: :>
~ Is it a good idea to have M be a woman once again, after Fiennes tenure ends?
~ How long do you think Fiennes will play M? Only during Craig's era? Which may be only 2 more films. Will he - or should he - continue with the next Bond actor?
~ Do you want to see M now go through his own story arc, over the course of the next films? Do you want that to be a part of the plot, or just a minor reference if anything at all?
~ Do you want this M to be married or stay single? (I do not think we know if he is married yet, not specifically).
It is Monday morning here. Off to a new work week. Hope all of you have a good week. Thanks for chipping in with further thoughts about M.
Cheers! :-bd
1.) I think Dench did very well in proving herself to be a worthy M, as she immediately shows in GE that she does have the balls to send a man out to die to get the mission over with. I wouldn't see a problem with introducing a new, female M at some point in the future, but now that Fiennes has taken the role, I'd prefer it to be male-driven for a while.
2.) Which leads me to this: even though Dench was introduced as the new M at the same time Brosnan was shown as the new Bond - going through his four films together - I could see Fiennes carrying it on after Craig departs. He is only 51 years old (currently), and if he really handles himself well in B24 and B25, I'd love to see him continue on with a brand new Bond.
3.) I'd prefer M to simply be M. We already know a good bit about the new M: the military background, previous job roles, his ability to fight, etc. Again, if little tidbits of information are revealed about M throughout the next two films, that's fine with me, but I don't want any more M-centric films to happen, especially after SF.
4.) Again, this really won't matter to me, because I'm indifferent about it if they handle it nicely. We see that M is married in CR (he's subtly shown in bed next to her when she gets the call about Bond signing in using her name and password) and we know that he has died by the time Bond breaks into M's flat in SF. If they want to show us more about M's life in a subtle manner like that, then I'll have no complaints. Just don't show me M having a barbecue with his family, then his wife is kidnapped, then he and Bond have to team up to get her back or something ridiculous like that. Keep M a main character without forcing him to play a huge role throughout the entirety of the adventure.
I wholly understand not wanting M to become a huge part of the plot or for us to be given a lot of glimpses into his family or personal life. I think Judi's M being married, and then widowed, was subtly and nicely handled. I'd like info done in a similar way to that, too. I would like snippets of info, from time to time.
If things go overboard, way OTT, like the BBQ kidnap scene you came up with, Creasy, we could have a Bond film turn into Taken 3 for pity's sake. :-O
Below are the current discussion questions, to put them on this new page:
1 ~ Is it a good idea to have M be a woman once again, after Fiennes tenure ends?
2 ~ How long do you think Fiennes will play M? Only during Craig's era? Which may be only 2 more films. Will he - or should he - continue with the next Bond actor?
3 ~ Do you want to see M now go through his own story arc, over the course of the next films? Do you want that to be a part of the plot, or just a minor reference if anything at all?
4 ~ Do you want this M to be married or stay single? (I do not think we know if he is married yet, not specifically).
I'll give more of my thoughts on these in a little while.
Thanks!
Glad we're in agreement, though! Honestly, they could tell us nothing about the new M, or everything, because if the latter is handled in the same fashion M's marriage (and the death of her husband) was, then I would never complain. Subtle hints to past experiences, his marriage (or lack thereof), kids, schooling, etc. can be done like that, giving the fans who chew up all of the pieces of dialogue even more backstory into the character.
Here's to hoping for a smart rewrite, polish, and proper spirit now that the script is finalized for Bond 24. There will probably be a couple of changes when actually shooting, but at least the main story is not approved and on the page and shooting can begin in a few months. Exciting times ahead! And I sincerely hope that M plays a good supporting role, with interesting camaderie/conflict with Bond, and a glimpse every so often into his personal life or at least more of his personality.
But I rather hope that Mendes keeps six Bond posters on the wall of his study somewhere ~
The Over The Top "Nooooooo!" do NOT go there again:
Moonraker, Die Another Day, and A View To A Kill (it had its moments, but still some poorly judged scenes)
...and The Sublime:
Casino Royale, The Spy Who Loved Me, Skyfall, and For Your Eyes Only.
Just my opinion, of course. B-)
Note: From Russia With Love is one of my favorites and perhaps should be on his wall, too. But I feel that Bond 24 is going in a lighter (hopefully slightly and balanced lighter) tone.
The matter of M's gender should not be an issue for me. They need to write M as a great character and then cast the role accordingly. Male or female, doesn't really matter though I must admit that having the male M back in charge feels closer to Fleming.
I think Fiennes may very well be carried over to the next Bond. I doubt they will reboot; I believe they'll merely recast 007. Lee, Brown and Dench all got 2 or 3 Bonds under their command, so why not.
I'd prefer if M could 'simply' be M for a number of films. He may be pivotal to the story but I don't think M should get his own story arc or at least not anything beyond the flimsiest of arcs. I don't mind M fighting a bit or red tape over the course of a few films or being put under severe political pressure, but nothing personal any more, please.
Don't know about M's private life... I suppose I don't really need to know either. ;-)