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
"of, relating to, or characterized by theatrical or extravagant style, expressing playful irreverence or knowing amusement:
a campy send-up of romantic operettas."
That’s what they want you to think…
Another Oscar-winner in the franchise ranks.
https://screenrant.com/james-bond-26-cold-war-best-reboot-plan/
That decade was so unique, and interesting and just plain cool, that having a modern filmmaker try and create an authentic 60s backdrop would just feel false.
Plus, would I want to see another actor pretend he's back in the 60s, when I have the genuine article with Connery dominating the world in the role of James Bond?
There is no actor walking the planet today that could compete with 60s Connery. The poor guy would be set up for immediate failure.
Cynicism aside, I could more see a period Bond done as a television adaptation of the original novels rather that an event motion picture.
Another issue with a television series of this sort is the fact that we already have adaptations of many of the novels with the films. Actually a few of them are arguably better than the source material. Not sure if I'd personally want to see a faithful adaptation of GF. As much as I love Fleming's novels I'd argue the film version is superior because of the liberties it took with that book.
It would also never fully satisfy fans or general viewers I think. The films by and large are able to evoke that spirit of escapism and adventure which are fundamental to the novels. I get the feeling a television series would be a lot slower and more cerebral. There'd be a few modern revisionist nods to the period (think Mad Men) that I think would annoy some fans.
It just wouldn't be authentic.
A direct TV series adaptation of Fleming used to be something I wanted to see. I'm a fan of Mad Men so I guess a part of me liked the idea. It's something I've gone off of over time for the reasons I wrote though, but I get why some people are fond of the concept.
But yeah, I think film is the best medium for Bond, and set in modern times at that (and yes, by EON). I don't think a TV series would ever drum up the same level of excitement or be quite the 'big event' that something like SF was back in 2012. Or indeed any of the other big Bond films. Even nowadays. I just don't think a small scale series would capture that spirit of fantasy in Fleming's novels. Flawed as the films can be, I don't think it'd ever match up.
Yes, 100% agree. Eon know that Bond has survived because the character and stories etc. evolve with the times. They will never go back to a 60's setting.
The line between homage and pastiche is dangerously thin in the world of Bond
God no I agree with @peter this is the dumbest idea I have ever heard.
Sorry no it wouldn’t work for a variety of reasons
Now, to have the spirit of that era drive a character in the 21st century, that would be interesting. And I’m talking about having a 50s kind of guy living in todays world, without the obvious jarring no-no’s we all know.
Not opposed to a period set prestive-TV Bond series to cover the novels though. But the films, IMO, must be "five minutes in the future", as they say.
I'm fine with a contemporary Bond, but tired of stories about chips, stolen hard drives, bots, computers, things that shoot beams from space, etc. Which is why I like CR and QoS. While there is much to like in NTTD, the Safin destroy the world thing felt old.
The challenge going forward will be to write stories that are fresh instead of variations of what we've seen before.
I think there's some people that literally want to go back to the 60's. Wouldn't be my preference but I'm not aggressively opposed to it.
Probably, but I just wonder if those same people wouldn't be equally satisfied if they just had a 60s style rather than actually setting them in the 60s. Especially if the latter was done in same style as the Craig movies, just set in the past.
Was that what Man from Uncle was like? Never seen it.
Man from Uncle was tapping into more of an early-60s European chic aesthetic that the Bond films never really associated with. I guess if they wanted to portray a more stylised, retrospective version of the 60s with all the recognisable iconography, then it would look something like that. But it wouldn't be authentic to the actual 60s Bond films.
I really would like a Bond film that exclusively looks forward as the kick-off. You can do it like they did with CR and then the rest of Craig: Start off completely bare-bones, no gadgets, no Moneypenny and Q, some poking fun at the old catchphrases, but honestly, just ignore many of them; and then you gradually re-introduce and re-fit these things as you find your footing with this new Bond. But for a first film of a new actor, give me a new car (I swear to God, if they do any of the old Astons again...), a new gun, a new type of villain and threat, maybe even some mild structural experimentation with the film itself and make Bond feel like a 30-something actually living in this world. Sure, make him a bit more conservative in his attitudes. Bond has always been and he needs to be with the job he's doing, I guess. But don't have him be someone fallen out of his time. This isn't Captain America. Bond wasn't frozen in 1962 and is only now re-awakening.
@LucknFate You always have to make it personal, chap.
Trying to be smart? I'm obviously referring to the modern age, not the 60s. It's all relative, eh?