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
Nolan comes out and says he wants to helm Bond, but only if he gets to start fresh.
Then, the next month, the Bond producer steps out and says he's not afraid to drop the current lead and start fresh.
Interesting.
I'm not sure where the source is now but Nolan said he had already met with producers awhile ago.
"You must introduce me to your occulist"
Yeah, he's bags of fun. I think he smirked once alone in his car.
What does he know of fear? "All there is" - puke.
Even the resurrection line, which should be said with knowing brio comes out flat. His "banter" with Q is delivered just as monotone and devoid of life.
And again, you can't say there are no thrills and fun based alone on the trailers we've seen. You are simply reacting to what little has been shown. Let's see if you are right later on. And to prove my point, think back to the torture scene in CR if you think he can't smile and laugh in the face of danger.
You're a strange man craigrules. I must have missed the humor in that.
Erm, no. There's nothing in my post that suggests that. I love OHMSS the way it is.
Again, no. Please stop this. Just because I said I'd like a happy ending with Bond getting the girl for SF, it doesn't mean I want every film to have one. It worked for OHMSS, CR, QOS, yeah, and there were reasons in the film.
But I hope there isn't a reason for SF because we haven't had Bond getting the girl for 2 films, and it won't be fresh anymore to not have that if they do it too much. Do you see my point now?
Since SF is meant to be more of a classic, 60s themed Bond film, I think a happy ending with him getting the girl would work in the context of the film, and since we haven't had one for a while, I don't see what'd be wrong with one.
My point exactly. That's the problem. The movies are being shaped around the surly attitude and limitations of the current actor.
But Henry is right - we will see.
But its the mixing up of the formula ie Bond marries for love is the reason the film succeeds. Its one of the reasons along with the direciton and cast that the film is so well acclaimed. For once we have an adult story with characters we care about.
If that is taken out what do we have?
bond finds Blofeld, infiltrates his hideout, sleeps with women, escapes, goes back with an army, kisses girl iin final reel.
Just like any other Bond film. But thats what you want. Cookiecutter Bond...
Wow, we agreed on something? And I agree with you and everyone who thinks he should walk off with a babe in tow this time. If we assume that Eve is with him on that rooftop as what little we know of the script is indicating, it'll be her in his arms at the end if it's going to happen. I will be disappointed myself if that doesn't happen. Unless of course (I shudder at the thought but don't exactly buy it) that M is his mother and he's grief stricken again. That would be something to legit complain about.
If they do that, then it'll be worse than last years anniversary film, and we all know how that was.
Oh, and just remember what you said in that post
If you go into the film having already made your mind up on what you want from it or unable to take it on its own accord then you are setting yourself up for disapointment.
I accept people who go in with an open mind and dont like it but have little time for those who have made their mind already because they have a narrow view of what they want and are unable to adapt.
I will and will duly be as disappointed as I've indicated. I want a happy ending too, I agree with TLR that the ending needs to be more upbeat this time. The clapperboard says Eve's with him. I can only hope. But that won't necessarily make or break the movie, what comes before will dictate that. I loved the happy ending in LTK even though many think it wasn't appropriate, yet many of those same people loved the rest of the film just like I did. Something like that.
And now we have - what? - two 'serious' Bond films with no gadgets, fewer one liners and very few shagged birds - and you guys are complaining already? Gimme a break.
A bit? He's the most serious Bond along with Craig (LTK is probably the most serious film in the series), and like you said, he still had fun at times. Daltons films are the perfect example of a middle ground. Which I hope SF has.
Just because I want a few gadgets, Bond getting the girl and maybe a one liner or two, it doesn't mean I want a cookie cutter Bond film packed with cliches.
And there are gadgets in SF, Bond gets laid and there seems to be some funny lines/scenes. Bad luck mate ;)
Bond only had Kara and maybe the girl on the yacht in the beginning. And TLD is brilliant and a top 5 movie IMO. It isn't everything.
@TLR- Looks like there's plenty of room for a middle ground in SF. That's what I want too.
SF hasn't been released yet and some of you talk as if you've seen the film. Craig and every Ine has praised the script, the talent involved infront abd behind the camera is the best assembled for any Bond film. Craig has gone above and beyond what he should be doing without seeking recognition. If anything, Craig has shown nothing but respect, gratitude abd massive amounts of appreciation and commitment to the series and as much as Bond is bigger than Craig, Craig is an actor, a bloody good one at that and can easily live without Bond, hell it took some convincing for him to take on the role in the first place.
On top of all of that, Craig IS an extremely popular Bond, had broken new ground (Olympics anyone?) and with the recent MGM financial crisis that happened do you honestly think Craig is that motivated abd driven by a massive pay rise?? Give the man more credit. He just wants to get on with doing his job abd that's act and to put on an excellent performance as he always does.
Forget Nolan abd you can also forget about Craig leaving because he's not leaving any time soon. He's still relatively young and delivers as the main protagonist of the series.
SF looks fantastic so far and already has a massive buzz surrounding it and I look forward to discussing wether Craig's Bond should or shouldn't have laces in his shoes when we all see on set pics of him fir Bond 25 8-|
I think to remember, that you are one of those real big fans. You should know better then suspect that. Like I said - twice, but nobody cares to listen - he would not demand a sum, that would worry the prods or drive them to any measures such as this.
I am more sure now then when I read it first, that this is just a little writers twist of what MGW has said. The context is probably right, but he wrote it to make it sound, like the axe is already over DC*'s head. That I strongly doubt. He spoke in general and maybe not even about DC.
I don't mind Bond getting laid. But the Moore style where all Bond has to do is just give some brainless chick a lounge lizard lear and it's off to the bedroom is just so outdated and cliche it's beyond stupid. That's why Mike Myers has all that cash.
Dear actonsteve,
Thank you for your very kind letter of 8/14.
I will do my best.
Hoping we'll see you at the lake this year. Love to Emma and the kids.
Sincerely,
Your Old Friend
VeryBond
What does Nolan have to do with any of this? And why wouldn't he be able to direct in the future?
That's not really Craig though, it's the producers and Danny Boyle. He just happened to be Bond at the time.
Bond 25? Yeah I can see him doing 2 more, but it really depends on how fast they get the films out. Craig is how old, 46, 47? I don't think any Bond actor should carry on past 50. I don't think we should be predicting how many he'll do because we have no idea what will happen in the future.
SF looks good, definetly, but like you said, we can't judge it until we've seen the film. Him delivering is just your opinion (I don't disagree with it though).
And I just noticed something else. Does anybody know the "source" of this information? Where was it published? Think about it with a cold head instead of jumping right away into it.
By the way:
Two sons involved in Bond production from what I know. Search for the following names on the title sequences of the previous 3 or 4 films: David G Wilson and Gregg Wilson.
I'm sorry, but I don't like when people say things like this, even though you have the right to express your opinion. What if I were to tell you this:
"well you emo lovers can watch Titanic and leave Bond to lovers of kick ass entertainment".
"Twenty million?" squeaks Brosnan with seemingly genuine surprise, before embarking on a prolonged rebuttal. "Oh no! Rubbish! Oh for God's sake! Bollocks! No way! No, it was a handsome round figure, of maybe £10m, or something like that. Given what the films make, it's a spit in the bucket. I wasn't being greedy. The age issue? Bollocks to that, too."
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/men-of-the-year/home/-hall-of-fame/pierce-brosnan-2005-james-bond-interview
I agree about the emo part, which is one, if not the biggest problem I have with Craig's two first movies. I really hope that Craig gets the girl for once and that the melodrama is dropped. I do, however, disagree that Craig guarantees emo movies only. I am confident that he can do classic Bond well. He is a good actor and has convinced me in some scenes in CR, QOS and the SF trailer. If I'm wrong, and his presence automatically makes the movies similar to like CR & QOS (thus bending the franchise to fit him), I want him sacked after SF. But I really think Craig can do really well as the classic, cinematic Bond (and I think he will, SF seems to be a smash). Just please stop making emo movies and make Bond fun again! IMO the melodrama fits better in Titanic and Moulin Rouge.
I'm enjoying it. You've got the big Craig fans going into defense mode and saying SF will be amazing, Craig will carry on for ages, etc. Then you have the Craig haters saying that they hope he does get axed, he's an emo, SF will be crap, etc. Then you have reasonable people in the middle of it all.
Fun to read.
I mentioned Nolan because someone was insinuating that because Nolan had met with the producers earlier and mentioned things being a matter of timing and then linked it to Wilson's comments in the article. That is pure bs to me.
Do you think if Craig wasn't popular as Bond and the films didn't strive for more than silly, juvenile nonsense that this would have happened?? Of course it wouldn't.
Um Craig is 43 or 44 and has had the same look since his late 20s. Moore was 45 when he took on the role and at 50 Tom Cruise is running around doing all types of crazy action abd Liam Neeson is 60 and still believably kicking ass. I'm not saying Craig should be in the role until he looks like a pensioner but his look isn't going to drastically change over the next 10 years and more importantly he's that good enough if an actor to sell being Bond to the audience.
Well Craig's success, creative influence and popularity as Bond is a clear indication of him delivering but yes, SF looks awesome and we just have to wait and see the final product.
Ah, ok, I agree with you there, although I would like Nolan to direct a Bond in the future.
If anyone else was Bond it still would've happened. They did it because Bond is a British icon and the Olympics were in London, and they wanted publicity for the new film.
Just because Craig is popular and successful it doesn't mean it'll be good. Not sure about his creative influence either since he was forced to write QOS scenes and that film is a mess imo. But yeah it does look like it'll be good and we just have to wait and see.
He hasn't looked the same since his late 20s, and he's aged a fair bit since CR I think. Liam Neeson does action well, but he still looks too old to play James Bond, which is what could happen to Craig is he carries on too long. I don't think he'll be Bond for the next 10 years either. I can see him doing a 4th film, maybe a 5th and 6th if they get them out in time. Craig is smart and if he looks too old in 2016/17 or whatever, he won't stick around for the sake of it, when he knows there are younger actors who can do just as good.
True just reading this stuff reminds me of politics. People have their opinions and will stick by them no matter what. And in the scheme of things we have no power- so it's just arguing for the sake of arguing.