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
Which I hope they won't, but in the current context, there's a danger this might happen.
Which context?
I love all your completely definitive statements about the future. ;)
I don’t want him as Bond, by the way.
I actually like him. He was great in Call Me By Your Name. Not Bond material anyway.
Five years later:
"The TIMOTHÉE CHALAMET Appreciation thread - Discuss His Life, His Career, His Bond Films"
Context is: Covid + the Bond producers aren't getting any younger and the Films are huge tasks taking their toll + Craig is done + Corporate takeover of many franchises from the 20th century for profit.
I myself would understand the team wanting to bow out on a high, and laugh at the corporate making a lamb slaughter of your old baby.
Now, I love Sir Ridley Scott, and he is still at it. I hope they follow his direction and keep at it (despite the harsh critics) until they drop.
I'm not in favor of making Bond's death a tradition, but there's nothing to stop it becoming one if future actors enjoy comparable success to Craig. It might revoke NTTD's uniqueness as "the one where Bond dies," but why would it make Bond's death in NTTD lose meaning or emotional punch? That death is only the death of Craig's version of Bond. It doesn't apply to any previous or future Bond and their films--and vice versa. The tragic love story in OHMSS isn't robbed of meaning or emotional punch by the tragic love story in CR.
You’ve just made me worried that the next time I watch OHMSS and we have the love montage set to WHATTITW, or when Lazenby chokes out through his tears at the end the phrase WHATTITW, I’ll be taken out of movie and reminded of Craig taking missiles to the face
I'm a bit worried that when the Blu-ray is released of NTTD, and I'm in the process of enjoying it, I'll hear the hear the melody of WHATTITW, be reminded that the Craig era timeline has erased the events of OHMSS in favor of Brofeld and Madeleine, and I'll suddenly feel the urge to pop in that Bond film instead. Then I'll realize that perhaps OHMSS is the superior film and Fleming's plot is the superior story.
If that happens, it could take years for me to get through another viewing of NTTD.
minute mark, so you’ll only be losing 10 mInutes of your life each time you attempt to sit through it. Or you could skip forward from around 8 minutes to 11, and then you’re golden until the last 10 minutes of the film, at which point you might as well stick it out as it will be too late to start watching OHMSS.
So if a run is successful the most likely scenario to end it is to kill off Bond? You’re comparing apple and oranges. Killing off Bond is a far more bigger thing than presenting Bond being in love. And besides, how many years passed between OHMSS and CR? I’m not saying he won’t die in the future. Maybe 50 years from now he will die again. I’m saying it won’t become a tradition, because the logic behind this notion is silly. Anyway there’s nothing bigger than sacrificing himself for the people you love, your family. You can’t go deeper in a film like this. They really went that far in NTTD and topping that would be almost impossible in the near future, and by near future I mean a couple of eras.
Haha! Good point!
Actually I'm really looking forward to watching them back to back.
I may do that this year around Christmas. Set aside some time to enjoy both in one evening.
TWINE.
Yes, I consider it a nicely done homage. Others consider it some form of OHMSS sacrilege....
If the actor is beloved enough for the producers to agree to his request for a grand send-off, than it's possible Bond will die again, especially if a decade or two has passed since the last death.
I don't think it's far bigger. It may not even be bigger, considering continuity. Tracy's death was still being referenced 20 years later, whereas Bond's death in NTTD will probably stay self-contained. Bond hasn't been killed off at all, just Craig's version of Bond.
Only 15 years passed between Bond finding the love of his life in CR and then finding it again in NTTD. After OHMSS the producers avoided personal stories for decades. Nowadays...
But the logic is straightforward. If it doesn't happen, it will be because the chances of the next few Bonds being as successful as Craig aren't very high and because the series might not be around for another six decades.
Sacrificing yourself for your country is arguably grander. If you think the ending of NTTD was perfection I can understand being defensive about any future Bond film tackling Bond's death. But I don't think any Bond film is perfect and one should never discount what future filmmakers might bring off. After OHMSS some fans probably said, "well, we don't need to see another Bond film with a tragic love story." Nevertheless...
I'm calling it: Bond 26 will be titled Missiles to the Face.
Or The Other Mr. Bond.
Starring Tom Holland and Timothee Chalamet. ;)
I don’t see any logic because sticking to a tradition based on the notion that every successful era should wrap up with Bond dying will lead to the point that no one would care about his death.
I disagree about the country bit… and it looks like the Broccoli disagree too. We are talking about global blockbuster events. No one would care if Bond sacrifices himself to save Queen and Country. Those are not the books. It’s not the 50s anymore.
But that's not logical either. If Craig-Bond's death isn't lessened by the fact that James Bond will return in the next film, why would it be lessened if another Bond died in a later film? Seperate continuities are separate continuities.
You sound very sure in speaking for everyone on earth, but patriotism is hardly dead across the planet. What relevance does sacrificing himself for his family have to global blockbuster events? If Bond sometime down the road sacrificed himself to prevent a massive war wouldn't that be more relevant in a global context?
LOL of the day. :))
Let’s not forget that Daniel’s five films have a higher per-movie average than even Sean’s. If we take DN out of the equation with NTTD’s projected final gross they’re basically perfectly equal, but NTTD lost roughly $150M because of COVID…
Bond in NTTD already died to save the world from an all out war. He even says it to Safin that Heracles spreading would’ve put the world on a battlefield, leading to billion dying.
And it’s not Craig’s Bond that would be lessened. It’s the hypothetical next future Bond death that would be lessened by Craig’s one. It’s not a matter of continuity, it’s a matter of concept. Recycling this concept all over again would lead to indifference. Again, you can’t compare Bond going rogue with Bond welcoming a definite death like in NTTD.
Oof. You know. I think you have a point there!
A hypothetical battlefield that's never drawn up onscreen. It's indirectly suggested next to the primary reason for Bond's self-sacrifice--protecting his family from the nano-bots he's infected with.
Concepts can be successfully reused though--the Bond series is proof of that. What matters is whether they're imagintively re-used across time or just regularly recycled. Bond falling in love with tragic results is an example of a "special" concept that has been successfully re-used without resulting in boredom. Until we see what a future creative team does with a concept, we can't know what its re-use will result in. That's all I have left to say on the issue.
That would’ve happened without Bond heroism that led him shot almost to his death, with little chances to survive anyway.
Bond felt in love three times in 59 years and two out of three love stories were direct adaptations. And half of this forum doesn’t agree about the success of the Swann love story. Let’s not pretend the past five SP never happened. Anyway I said everything I had to say. It’s plain obvious that Bond falling in love for a woman doesn’t even compare to Bond dying. The weight of this choice is unprecedented and it’s not directly taken from the books. It’s a brand new concept that was even brought to the table by the actor himself in the first place back in 2006 that hardly would generate in some kind of formula.
Maybe in the future they will toy with this notion again, like Fleming did in the books, maybe in 40/50 years they will do it again, but making the death of Bond - a definitive death Dan’s style, Logan style, Han Solo style, Iron Man style, Bruce Willis in Armageddon style - a tradition to wrap up every future era, and especially the upcoming one even if super successful, is something that’s not going to happen.
I don’t think we’ll get quite so defined a finish for a while, but I think the days of continuity across actors are probably behind us. The blockbuster landscape has changed a lot since then, and Barbara’s said that Bond can be any colour now. Might be harder for the audience to accept a race swapped Bond swanning into the same M’s office as the last guy. So, I could be wrong, but I imagine we’ll get a reboot each time from now on. Not a new origin story every time. But I think we’ll probably have different MI6 regulars and things like that, to make clear that each Bond is in a different world.
+1.