Where does Bond go after Craig?

15455575960682

Comments

  • edited May 2021 Posts: 4,617
    Some good points here. The issue is that we live in a World surrounded by digital tech and, obviously, we expect Q to supply even more amazing , cutting edge tech. So how do script writers in future not overly rely on this tech (and how does Bond not overly rely on it?). SF created a nice explanation but it can't be used all of the time. I don't envy future script writers having to deal with this issue.( I keep thinking of how MI handles this better but I know I will become annoying.)
    PS having Bond working "pre-007" for a smaller dept would deal with this issue but not long term.
  • Posts: 3,327
    patb wrote: »
    There is some kind of back lash re tech and people are embracing analogue in some areas and not just old farts (cassettes trendy now!) so SF was ahead of the trend. We do need a new Bond who relies on his whits and IQ rather than more gadgets. It also encourages lazy script writing as you just use tech to explain stuff (DNA on the ring in SP for example) and a better informed audience just see that and think "what?!" Also, sorry to bring up MI again, but some of the best scenes within the franchise are when the tech fails. More knowledgable Bond fans than me can point to scenes where Bond's tech has failed?

    SP car chase. Most of the gadgets didn't work.
  • Posts: 1,632
    Yes ! That was terrific.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,590
    Q's wristwatch failed Bond in the Dynamite comic 'Solstice'. He activates the remote detonator to blow a safe, but is blinded by the stun flare function instead, nearly getting shot in the process. Back at MI6, Bond mentions the failure, to which, Q goes off at him, declaring it 'user error'. Bond uses the watch later on against a baddie, confirming the malfunction.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    QBranch wrote: »
    Q's wristwatch failed Bond in the Dynamite comic 'Solstice'. He activates the remote detonator to blow a safe, but is blinded by the stun flare function instead, nearly getting shot in the process. Back at MI6, Bond mentions the failure, to which, Q goes off at him, declaring it 'user error'. Bond uses the watch later on against a baddie, confirming the malfunction.

    The comic "Hammerhead" also has a smart car turn against Bond, but that is more manipulation than malfunction.
    The comics are interesting when it comes to technology and why I think a futuristic approach could work. As with all things Dynamite, those ideas are used to varying degrees by the different writers, but they generally take place in a kind of "5 years into the future" world, where you have high-tech prosthetics, smart cars, holographic displays and visors, slightly futuristic weapons and so on. Nothing major that has implications that make the world unrecognizable, but enough to keep the audience on their toes and present interesting and new problems to Bond, who is more often than not the target and victim of this technology and not it's user. They are - of course - comics. So maybe there is more of a built-in acceptance of these things.

    Hints of interesting tech use can also be found in Carte Blanche. The way Deaver incorporates it is often infuriating, but the general technological concepts used are interesting - for example a way allied agents use smartphones to identify each other or a car chase/shadowing sequence seen through the eyes of MI5 operators using London's video surveillance system. Although that second one would probably be a bit too Bourne for a Bond film.
  • The comics are interesting when it comes to technology and why I think a futuristic approach could work. As with all things Dynamite, those ideas are used to varying degrees by the different writers, but they generally take place in a kind of "5 years into the future" world, where you have high-tech prosthetics, smart cars, holographic displays and visors, slightly futuristic weapons and so on. Nothing major that has implications that make the world unrecognizable, but enough to keep the audience on their toes and present interesting and new problems to Bond, who is more often than not the target and victim of this technology and not it's user. They are - of course - comics. So maybe there is more of a built-in acceptance of these things.

    While I agree with you about a more natural acceptance of sci fi elements in comic books, I think that the Dynamite comics testify well, as you point out, of the success of a slightly futuristic approach. It reminds me of the tech used by MI6 in QoS and, android henchwoman aside, of the Bond 17 treatment. I think it could be a solid basis for the next movies. With a sleek and elegant aesthetic conceived by the production designer team, this could give a both classic and at the same time profoundly different feel to the next era.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,590
    I noticed the gadgets in the comics seemed more futuristic. The technology itself across the comics - mostly feasible, but the appearance of many of them look too sci-fi for a Bond film. They work fine in the comics but would need to appear more recognizable on screen. Their sci-fi look is more toned down in the video games.
  • Posts: 4,617
    It's not co-incidence that Lucas gave the key characters swords. (ridiculous when you consider the context of tech). He did so as he realised that hand to hand fighting (rather than just shooting each other) is so much more exciting and engaging for the viewer. Tech gets in the way regarding the viewer being able to relate to and empathise with the hero and tech creates quick and easy solutions which negate a build up of suspense and excitement. IMHO the tech issue is a key problem for Bond moving forward.

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,428
    Chris McQuarrie’s enigmatic reply to a Twitter post referencing an article saying he should do the next Bond film:



    (He said ‘I have never been a hard guy to find’ for reference: he tends to delete them!).
    Makes him sound more open to the idea than I’d have imagined.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,306
    I'd like to see PWB or Emerald Fennell take a crack at a script where the Bond girl is revealed as the main villain (Nena Blofeld?). A better-realized version of TWINE, as it were...
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,585
    patb wrote: »
    It's not co-incidence that Lucas gave the key characters swords. (ridiculous when you consider the context of tech). He did so as he realised that hand to hand fighting (rather than just shooting each other) is so much more exciting and engaging for the viewer. Tech gets in the way regarding the viewer being able to relate to and empathise with the hero and tech creates quick and easy solutions which negate a build up of suspense and excitement. IMHO the tech issue is a key problem for Bond moving forward.

    And you are coming upon one SF's themes (and one of the reasons I love that film so so much). Though you are discussing the "viewer's" response, so much of what you say is also relative to SF and its villain's needs. As much as technology allows Silva to do a great many things, the one thing it can't satisfy is the need to make killing down and dirty and deeply personal. The end of the film is brilliant. All that tech crap is tossed aside and it's down to brass tacks. Many people say that Silva 'accomplished" his mission in SF, but he did not. He needed a personal kill. While on one hand, Silva has disdain for the old methods of killing (all that running around, so dull, so dull), on the other he is obsessed with killing M "on the ground." Fascinating stuff.

    Sorry about the slightly off-topic rant, but @patb got me excited. LOL
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited June 2021 Posts: 5,970
    "Everything gets watered down to the most anodyne and easily consumable version of itself."

    This line alone is the reason James Bond should stay with EON, and will. I've always said that other studios would end up creating a "cardboard cut-out" version of the James Bond series.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I don t like Amazon one bit, but I don t care if EON sells, either. I think both Barbara and Craig have played out their roles.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,638
    I had a dream last night that Bond was in the middle of a war with Goldfinger and Blofeld. Christoph Waltz was back. A possible future movie? I could see them both coming back in a modern day setting.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,306
    I hope not. Goldfinger is the one villain they cannot hope to cast better. They shouldn't even try.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,638
    echo wrote: »
    I hope not. Goldfinger is the one villain they cannot hope to cast better. They shouldn't even try.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if they did bring him back to the movies again. We’re in a period of nostalgia for old movies. Richard Maibaum tried at least thrice too bring him back (DAF, OHMSS, OP).
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited June 2021 Posts: 4,585
    talos7 wrote: »

    The more I think about it, the more I am irked that Logan felt a need to insert himself into this conversation, as though only Amazon would threaten EON's family-like dynamic. ANY company (whether it be Disney, Apple, or Comcast) that purchased MGM could conceivably upend EON. Actually, I think Amazon is less likely to insert itself into EON's business than Disney or Comcast would have. He's sounding alarms for the sake of sounding alarms.
  • Posts: 9,848
    mtm wrote: »
    Chris McQuarrie’s enigmatic reply to a Twitter post referencing an article saying he should do the next Bond film:



    (He said ‘I have never been a hard guy to find’ for reference: he tends to delete them!).
    Makes him sound more open to the idea than I’d have imagined.

    I have wanted McQuarrie since 2015!
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,428
    Risico007 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Chris McQuarrie’s enigmatic reply to a Twitter post referencing an article saying he should do the next Bond film:



    (He said ‘I have never been a hard guy to find’ for reference: he tends to delete them!).
    Makes him sound more open to the idea than I’d have imagined.

    I have wanted McQuarrie since 2015!

    Me too: I'd be surprised if he did it, but I guess in that business you never say never to any job!
  • I'd love to see McQuarrie get the job. This next phase of Bond is very exciting. I think we'll get a film every three years too.
  • Posts: 1,632
    Where does Bond go after Craig ? B-e-y-o-n-d...As in, "It's Bond, and Beyond"

    Yeah, I know, meaningless. Still, I post this little goof with the expectation that the films will return to being one-off adventures. Oh, sure, some connections, such as M, Moneypenny, Q, etc., but they're wrapping up a long-term story arc, and repeating something like that doesn't seem likely, in terms of story-telling. What would they do ? Make another origin, personal background, aching-heart over the woman loved ? It worked out very well, but repeating it would not serve well. Were there another long-term story arc coming, perhaps something villain-wise, but even that might come off all too familiar and recent.

    At any rate, back to TSWLM poster -- it was a GREAT one ! I truly loved the artwork and style in the TB, YOLT, OHMSS, DAF, LALD and TMWTGG posters (and movie tie-in book covers), but TSWLM went with a similar set-up, but a different artistic style. Great fun, and great anticipation ! The poster conveyed the film was going to get back to a BIG, GRAND, EXOTIC adventure !

    I would be quite happy to see that -- either the TB-through-TMWTGG or TSWLM -- again come Bond 26. Not merely as an homage, but as fun ! The "modern style" of the image focused very strongly on the faces of the main character(s) has been going on for decades now...
  • Posts: 121
    There is still a chance Craig will return for a 6th movie, right?
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,428
    Mr_Beach wrote: »
    There is still a chance Craig will return for a 6th movie, right?

    Never say never...
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    edited June 2021 Posts: 4,247
    I've always felt if Craig's era was an era of standalone adventures, it would have been easier for him to return. Because his 6th Bond film might undermine or alter something in NTTD, like SP did to SF. And Craig won't have the time to wait for a script that keeps NTTD intact.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    It's time to move on.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    Denbigh wrote: »
    It's time to move on.

    Bitter truth. Sadly, I agree. Even if I will really miss him. I guess the reason for more Craig is, we all think five Bond films aren't enough for Craig's Bond, since he's very good at it.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    It's time to move on.

    Bitter truth. Sadly, I agree. Even if I will really miss him. I guess the reason for more Craig is, we all think five Bond films aren't enough for Craig's Bond, since he's very good at it.

    Completely agree mate. For the time we've had Craig as Bond, I feel almost short changed that we've only had 5 films. He's my favourite Bond and he still looks believable as Bond, I'd love to see another film from him, but @Denbigh is right it's time to move on I think.
    I just hope when Eon cast a new actor in the role and begin a new direction with the series, they're true to James Bond the character
  • Posts: 9,848
    the issue here and why I rarely talk about post Craig is well 2 reasons

    1. I am the stereotypical popcorn movie goer... the last period piece I saw was Little Women and usually most actors come from period piece or British theater which yeah no idea
    2. I love Craig but sadly so many of my choices are either too old or make me feel old (Nicholas Holt would be good but man being older then the actor playing bnd weirds me out a bit)
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    It's time to move on.

    Bitter truth. Sadly, I agree. Even if I will really miss him. I guess the reason for more Craig is, we all think five Bond films aren't enough for Craig's Bond, since he's very good at it.

    Completely agree mate. For the time we've had Craig as Bond, I feel almost short changed that we've only had 5 films. He's my favourite Bond and he still looks believable as Bond, I'd love to see another film from him, but @Denbigh is right it's time to move on I think.
    I just hope when Eon cast a new actor in the role and begin a new direction with the series, they're true to James Bond the character

    Yeah. The next Bond has to win fans over in his first 10mins. Anyway, introducing a new Bond has never been EON's problem. They know how to craft arresting opening Bondian scenes for new actors.
Sign In or Register to comment.