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
oh i know.. i was just speaking in terms of faithfully adapting the movies with their corresponding book titles.. a few are pretty faithful adaptations with little differences here and there, but others are just a hodgepodge - or sometimes just straight up remakes, like AVTAK being very similar in plot to GF.
There's obviously many reasons why YOLT couldn't follow the source material closely, namely that it was out-of-sequence with OHMSS, plus the producers wanted to follow up TB with an even bigger spectacle. I won't go into detail on YOLT as it's been covered elsewhere, but will add that DAF took a deviation when Cubby and the studio first had the idea of a follow up to GF with Gert Fröbe reprising his role. What happened next was Americans being screen-tested and signed up for the role of 007, and the story evolving with the inclusion of a Howard Hughes type character based upon one of Cubby's dreams. Though the movie still retained elements of Fleming, it again deviated from the source material. TSWLM was the exception as Fleming himself only sold Eon the title and not the story, so they were duty-bound to come up with a completely new adventure for Bond. What happened after was what began the detachment from Fleming. With the exception of short stories being interwoven into the movies, they began to feel less and less like a Fleming creation and more like a cheap parody. Dalton tried his best to get back to Fleming but it seemed US audiences had already started to turn their backs on Bond. Without any real Fleming books left to adapt, the producers had to come up with their own ideas with somewhat mixed results. Enter Sony and their acquisition of CR.
Things have always been personal for Bond in the last 15 years. The emotional connections and the personal implications are probably Craig’s biggest departures from the past. In the end it all depends on the execution. Here Swann seems to be the main emotional core of the film, which is intriguing if u ask me.
That's my only niggle of doubt really. I would dearly love to have one film for Craig that referenced nothing from the past, didn't focus on introspection and an internal journey, ect.
Hey ho, I know I am in the minority and will still be there on opening day. It's not the the Bond I grew up with and loved..but it's still Bond.
Glad I'm not the only one.
Anyway, I'm sure the film will still be an enjoyable watch. I am just ready for a more 'old school' Bond adventure now. Baggage free, if you will.
If they installed Nomi just to save „the old white male“ and to show how much better everything is when things are handled by female characters (SW8, anyone?) then I‘ll leave the cinema right away. I highly appreciate tough, smart female characters - but not if they are just that because every male character and especially James Bond are turned into incompetent idiots (again: SW8).
So I hope they will just all be well written and rock the screen together. If this is the case, I am sure NTTD will make up for lots of things that failed or backfired in SP and Craig will leave on a high note and I will be leavibg the cinema as a happy Bond fan.
What little we know of the plot, I don't really like.
Bond coming out of retirement following a romance with Madeleine just doesn't grab me. I do like that it's Felix who recruits him back. I'll have to reserve judgment until I see the film.
I do feel however, Safin could be one of the great villains of recent years. At least I certainly hope so.
Clearly I’m in the minority, but I actually hope this is the case. I think it also makes a good commentary on the whole female/alternative 007 idea. You can slap the 007 title on whoever, and they may be a great character in their own right, but at the end of the day there’s only one James Bond.
As I’ve said before, I liken Craig’s arc to The Dark Knight trilogy, and I think this will be his TDKR, in the sense that we see an aging Bond walk away (or die) to pass the torch to his successor, then we reboot again in Bond 26 with a new actor as James Bond 007.
I love the uniqueness of Craig’s arc with not just the continuity, but passage of time as we watch him evolve from the brash, arrogant rookie of CR to the seasoned veteran of SP (I’m of the belief that there’s actually a significant time jump between QoS and SF) and the opportunity to have a definitive end to the narrative of his tenure is a unique and exciting possibility, and one we probably won’t see again in this franchise for some time.
FYEO uses lots of Fleming material, from the novel itself and LALD, so I don't know why you mentioned that.
Whenever Cubby strayed too far, he went back to the books usually with the next film.
FYEO, TLD, OP and LTK are perfect examples of taking a Fleming short story, or Fleming scene, and weaving it into a storyline.
It’s like they’re afraid to
I can’t see it ever going backwards, in which case I think people either need to get on board or perhaps consider new hobbies. There are people on here and elsewhere who have been miffed for the last 13 years. I find it odd.
As for the gunbarrel, I’m hopeful it’s done traditionally for NTTD. I think the trailer shot may have been made just for the trailer; I get that feeling especially because it came after everything else + the title. We’ll see though; the gunbarrel has been through a lot of experiments since DAD.
Is it odd really? Please elaborate.
Personally I have never got aboard the Craig era; I just don't see what everyone else is seeing. At this point I'm really just indifferent with the new film, and besides a few elements I'm curious about (locations and Nomi for example), it's not a film I'm all excited about.
I find it odd people would stick around. There are series’ I’ve more affection for than some people here show for Bond but I’m nowhere near a forum, let alone on a daily basis. The idea of those people engaging on a daily/weekly basis on a forum is just odd. If I found myself engaging in something I largely don’t care for, on a daily basis, I’d be having a word with myself.
Speaking for myself, if there hadn't been countless of threads that allowed discussion about the older films, the books and any other Bond related topics, I probably wouldn't stick around. But since there are threads like these, there are enough topics that keeps me returning to the forum on regular basis.
If you really don't like the direction of the series that much, why waste your time here. Fair enough go into the threads that interest you but turning up in ones that don't just to pour negativity into the discussion, well.....
Nobody dislikes constructive criticism like many here contribute but just coming on a thread to continually bitch about the same old thing, time to get a life me thinks.
Don’t think I addressed you directly. I was talking about those who love wanking on about ‘awful’ it all is, despite everything they dislike having been a fixture for the last 13 years. Sometimes you’ve got to accept that when Daddy said he was going for a pack of fags 13 years ago... he ain’t coming back.
That's true. Although to be fair @Torgeirtrap doesn't fit into that pathological behaviour pattern. Thankfully, the one who did, got kicked out after almost a year of trying to make us all insane. The mood here has been so much better, one can easily discuss such matters (read three or four entries above) without losing one's grip on things and screaming through one's lungs ;)
Now @FoxRox posed an interesting question about them sticking to continuous arcs for next actors. What do you guys guess it'll happen?
I think so too. The Vesper affair held it all together. They can't replicate that.
i would've prefered stand alones starting with Bond 23 which turned out to be SF, and as is, it was damn near perfect, even down to the last spoken words of the movie "are you ready to get back to work?" "with pleasure M... with pleasure." to me that meant FINALLY back to business as usual - back to formula as it were.. but then SP came along and tried to tie everything back and here we are...
but at the same time, i don't let what i want as a fan dictate whether i am going to enjoy the next film.. i would like the films to be standalones, they aren't - oh well - lets carry on and see what the story holds.. thats my mentality..
i think some people, especially in other fandoms (*cough cough* Star Wars) get so sidetracked by their own expectations of where they want to story to go, and where they think it should go - that if it doesn't go as they expected it, they get immediately turned off to the movie - like if it's not 100% catered to their every desire, it sucks.... storytelling isn't like ordering a steak at restaurant lol.
you must've missed when i clarified my original statement - i copy and pasted it below..
the only thing i am worried about B26 at this point is When... im going to enjoy DC's last film then worry about who will take over afterwards.. but i am curious if they'll try to fast track B26 to meet the 2022 60th Anniversary - or if they'll simply use that point in time to introduce the new James Bond, then have B26 in 2023.
We're very much on the same wavelength. The entitlement expressed by fans really puts me off at times. I rather approach a film on its own terms, otherwise I'm just setting up the film to fail if it doesn't meet my criteria. DAF was never in any capacity meant to serve as a follow up to OHMSS, and yet so many fans are guilty of grading it on that criteria that they set the film up to fail from the first frame.
At least during the build up to SF, it sounded like a Bond film I didn't want. After the very dour QOS, I wanted a breezier, sexier, very jovial Bond adventure where Craig can let loose in a more traditional Bond manner. SF clearly wasn't that, and yet it turned out so good at what it did that it's highly ranked on my Bond list. It taught me to at least give an installment a chance to play on its own terms and judge it for how it did well. Even though the foster brother angle wasn't what I would have ever wanted, I would have at least embraced it if the filmmakers were able to crack that story in a way that made it compelling. That didn't happen at all, which is too bad because I at least want the filmmakers to succeed in making the films work.
I have my own ideas on how I'd like to see Bond, Star Wars, and any big franchise play out, but that doesn't mean I'm going to outright dismiss others' idea of how it can go about so long as it's compelling. Turning Luke Skywalker into a depressed recluse was not what I had in mind, but by God the filmmakers and especially Mark Hamill pulled it off so well that it's part of what makes it my favorite of the new Star Wars films.
@Birdleson you have encapsulated my feelings perfectly here, too.
I didn't think you did, either – I was just curious what you meant. ;-)
There's a big chance that continuous arcs are here to stay. Now that EON have been fully invested in that with the Craig era, it wouldn't surprise me that's where they'll want to go with the next actor too. It's a bit unfortunate if they do; standalone missions was one of the elements that made Bond interesting to me in the first place.
As DC have confirmed you just need to make a good film and say rubbish to the whole continuity thing. Perhaps, after Craig has left EON will revert to the stand alone mission. They've tried the continuity thing once, badly, and got burnt by it. I think the whole continuity, connected universe is just phase, and really only the MCU has got right. It will pass.