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
Yes, and I’ve never liked that either. But that was Moore era comic relief shenanigans wasn’t it? For the most part, anyway. And then there was that LTK cringeworthy uncle Q in the field.
He was also on the field in TLD for helping Koskov defect.
I don’t mind the MI6 crew being out on the field so long as it works for the film. In SP it really felt tacked on, especially since Moneypenny and Tanner were literally doing nothing but following M and Q who both at least had something notable to do,
It felt more prominent than it actually was because the story kept cutting back to London in the second act, too.
Perfect
I also have a theory that recurring themes, locations and physical objects are used to try to create a cohesive whole to a dastardly hodgepodge story arc. SPECTRE was a joke in regards to the plot and story, and sadly, but truly, 'NTTD' wouldn't have happened had Craig not agreed to accept a massive paycheck -can't blame him there.
Now, if we go back and watch SPECTRE, the ending will feel corny. That was supposed to be the end. I just hope 'NTTD' will have enough standalone elements.
So, at the end of the day, we're the ones who are drinking the Kool Aid.
Yes this. I’ve had enough of London. It appears everywhere, not just Bond, it’s appeared in Marvel films, in Gerard Butler action vehicles, in MI, in Bourne, it’s even been in Tom Cruise’s The Mummy for goodness sake, it’s the current go-to in blockbusters (because of UK tax relief I suppose?) and it’s so uninspiring now.
The world is a big place, there are loads of places they could set a new movie, something we have not seen before.
When i read this it makes me wish sometimes Craig should have left after Skyfall.
It’s almolst as if they were out of ideas after that film
The way many seem to gripe about how this Scooby gang became a staple in Craig’s run is very exaggerated.
Indeed. A few solid, veteran actors, who'd be grateful of paycheck every few years.
Tanner was driving the car on the way to CNS while Moneypenny was shouting "they have seen us Reverseeeeeeeeeeee".
Excellent post!
My fears are that NTTD is DAD in disguise. It's the Craig era equivalent, the natural conclusion to his reign, when EON lose their way (as they have occasionally done in the past), when the trend has been to push the boundaries that little bit more. A bit more excess, a bit more action, a bit more gadgets, a bit more of everything overall, thinking this is the only way to go.
Then the harsh backlash, the negative critics, the Fleming fans claiming Bond has lost its way, and then EON go for another reboot after excess - OHMSS/TLD/GE/CR style. New actor, and at the same time trying to somehow go back to basics again. Reign back what they have got carried away with.
NTTD should have been that film, but this looks more and more like OTT generic action Bond again. SP part 2 at best, and DAD part 2 at worst.
The warning signs were there right from the off with the new title. Now the trailer is starting to confirm those fears.
Probably safe to say it’s not movie gold idea as Boyle stated
I’m starting to agree. After multiple viewings of the trailer it’s looking more of the same
I thought the trailer would be a tense espionage FRWL type.
If I had to guess this will be 60-70% similar to Spectre. Looks to be more of the same. It’s too much of a sequel to garner critical acclaim
Define "under performs"?
I think we're in store for a change regardless of how well NTTD does. The same way we have been for every other previous era.
Indeed. DAD was Brosnan’s biggest hit at the box office, and yet EON changed gears anyway with the next actor.
The shots that looks a bit familiar is London and matera one's.
So It's a blend of both we are getting more fresh and less familiar scenes.
shelved?.. no - maybe a short hiatus, but never shelved.. the Bond franchise is going on 60 years and the series, and character have reached cultural icon status.. James Bond is never going away..
i personally feel we are in for a drastic turn regardless with Bond 26 - or whenever 007 #7 takes over.. i dont think they'll try to duplicate the direction they went with Craig.. i think right now, the sensibility of the cinema going public would mean probably a Bond film that feels a bit more "light" in tone.. i am not talking about a return of campy fluff or anything like that - but perhaps something more akin to TND or GE more than these character study Bond films of Craig era.... but we'll see..
i just want to get back to Bond films every 2-3 years, no more of this 4-5 year nonsense - thats too damn long.
Whatever happens with NTTD, I seriously doubt the next film will be much lighter in tone. If anything it will go darker, back to basics, reigning it all back in again. This is usually what happens when EON get stuck with a new direction to go in.
true... i mean it also depends on who the actor will be too - as i think they will generally adjust the tone of the films to suit the sensibilities of the actor.
LTK set the template for Craig's Bond, and to a lesser extent Brosnan's Bond too. It's just that with LTK, as a one-off stand-alone film (at that time) it felt fresh and new.
Bond going rogue and personal missions has been to death since then, where we are all now tired of it. EON need to rethink after this film, and go back to the simpler, straight-forward, stand-alone missions again.
I think two things can only change that: if NTTD flops hard or if there’s a change in guard. I think because the series has made big hits, particularly CR and SF, that it’s made EON comfortable to keep doing that until it backfires financially. As critically decisive as SP was, it’s still one of the highest grossing films of the Bond series. So it’s no surprise they’re not dropping it.
but probably one of the least profitable when you factor in what it cost to make and market.. if you believe the reports from Sony/Columbia
SP's PD was $300m (est.)
NTTD's PD is $250m (est.)
it'll be interesting to see where NTTD's total box office ends up.. i think with what they've spent, only being around $50m less than SP - anything less than what SP took i believe is troubling.... bottom line, as long as it turns profit (which it should) everyone wins, everyone's happy, but thats a number i'll be paying attention to for sure.