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
Yep, I love Indy too; as you say, he's much less perfect than Bond. Indeed in a few of his film you could say that he actually fails in the climax, but only wins by default because the villains mess up.
I agree that's an issue with the original TV version of M:I, because the heist usually went perfectly and there wasn't much interest to be had. But in the film version it goes down the route of the plan quite often going bad, which means that Hunt and team have to go the Bond route and think on their feet. And sometimes that means that the climax features another clever plan which the audience haven't been told about and works as a big reveal, which never takes away any suspense.
I don't know if Bond should do that particularly as that's another series' purview, but I don't know if I hate the idea of Bond thinking up plans beforehand. He's done it occasionally in the series.
LALD has the single best non-working gadget gag.
I hope with Bond 26 that they bring in some new writing blood, like they did with George Macdonald Fraser for OP. Whatever other flaws there are in that film, the story is strong.
For all I know, it did actually happened in SPECTRE with Q's gadgets turned out to be useless while he's on a car chase with Mr. Hinx.
SPECTRE for me had the potential to be like that with the manipulation of World Intelligence through a mole inside a British Government in Max Denbigh, a la From Russia With Love/ Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy Le Carre kind of thing, but it's just got botched with some another personal elements and haunting from the past kind of thing again, just got messed up.
It's more a complaint with Jack Reacher. On the other end you also have Jason Bourne and Jack Bauer who always seem able to get out of situations by how fast/skilled they are as agents to the point where they are almost indestructible (if I'm honest Craig's Bond in SP drifted towards that a bit, whereas in his first three films he often struggled a bit more physically, which I think was interesting to see). The main point though is that compared to his American counterparts who are usually one step ahead in these stories and always able to get out of a situation (often pre-planning things whether the audience knows or not), Bond's a much more imperfect character in that way.
I don't think it's something they should fundamentally change. Again, it's one of the things that separates Bond from these characters, and at best it makes Bond much more human. It may even be something they'll lean into like they did with Craig's first films (certainly if they take any inspiration from The Batman, the two franchises often taking leads from each other, we could get a version of the character more flawed and outright prone to mistakes).
Absolutely, Roger Moore riding around Venice in his gondola, essential "blunt instrument" Bond.
I guess you’re being sarcastic, but yes, that was blunt instrument stuff. He’s getting shot at, throwing knives into peoples’ chests and getting involved and reacting to action. He’s not being surgical and elegantly intelligent here, he’s using blunt force. That’s not a complaint, just an observation.
He even gets knocked out a hundred times by those henchmen.
The villains even knew his weakness for women.
https://deadline.com/2023/07/actors-strike-sag-aftra-picket-signs-1235432253/
The last time the actors went on strike was 1980, and it lasted three months.
The last time they went on strike while the writers were also on strike, was 1960.
Some people are whispering that it’s their time again to hit the streets.
If this does happen, the industry will be a mess, and; they’ll be quite a period, post strikes, that will have long lasting repercussions (delays of films, both big and small, other projects, hundreds of them, will no longer see the light of day, there’ll be a scramble for productions to swallow up crews and rental spaces…)
I was actually posting this more to make (EDIT) a note on how this could further bung-up Bond developments (as well as other favourite films/series/franchises), 😂. But thanks so much for well wishes and positive thoughts!!
I think it’s inevitable they’ll get rid of at least one of the current team. My guess is Kinnear and Whishaw (who’s already indicated he’s done with the role). Q will be recast (I think it’ll be a woman next time), but Tanner will not.
As for Fiennes and Harris, I think at least one of them will return, if not both. Fiennes would seem the most likely since there’s obviously precedent for the 'M' actor returning after a reboot. Though he’ll just be referred to as 'M' from now on.
As for Harris, I think the Moneypenny role will either be retired, or she’ll be rewritten to become the new Chief of Staff. If the character isn’t called Moneypenny, she’ll be given a new one letter codename. The flirtatiousness of her relationship with Bond will be dialled back, but she’ll continue to be Bond’s closest ally in the service (Moneypenny and Tanner merged into one basically).
I could see the two representing something of an angel and devil on Bond’s shoulders. 'M', the intimidating authority figure who occasionally orders Bond to do things that go against his own moral judgement, and Moneypenny (or whatever her name is) the more sympathetic confidant. Or maybe that's a bit cheesy.
I’d make an easy bet that it’s a recast from top to bottom.
More so than for any other iteration of Bond, keeping the cast from the Craig films would just stir more questions and fuel the “Bond is a code name” theory. I understand the desire of fans wanting to maintain the old tradition of the mi6 cast carrying over to the new era. This is the one instance where traditional must be put aside.
I don't see it as tradition. I see it as Barbara not being able to turn down Dame Judi Dench when she asked about CR. It was a one-time exception.
Connery to Lazenby to Moore to Dalton to Brosnan are all playing the same person. Tracy and Q are the proof. There's no tradition of carrying over the actors playing M or Q or anyone--because Bond is the same person--until Craig, which is a reboot.
We got a new Boothroyd from DN to FRWL but nobody thinks Connery rebooted in his second Bond. It's a recast, not a reboot. Same with Maxwell to Bliss in TLD. A recast.
It'll be interesting seeing what they do with the next MI6 team for sure. I think it'll be a complete re-cast but I suspect they'll also want to shake things up in other ways too. I'm sure the new M and a new Bond will have a different relationship compared to what we saw with Bond/the two M's in the previous era. If a Tanner character is kept I'm certain they'll want to do something different (ideally closer to the novels where the two are friends).
It'd be cool if they adapted Loelia Posnoby to give Bond a female ally in the Service rather than simply rewriting Moneypenny. I always felt their relationship in the novels was ripe for adaptation - slightly teasing on Bond's part, but with a warmth and mutual admiration there.
It would be a fun merging of the types of varying Q scenes of the past. A Q scene where he's prompted with Bond on the mission, and then later, a field scene where he delivers the equipment.
I like the idea of a gadget being completely useless. The Z3 came close in GoldenEye, but it was bartered for a plane.... I just worry it'd be too similar to the faulty glove in MI:GP.
I think they could make the next M black, imagine a fantastic actor in the role like Chiwetel Ejiofor or David Oyelowo. It would add an interesting but still faithful change to the character, especially with both actors only being in their 40's.
https://deadline.com/2023/07/writers-strike-hollywood-studios-deal-fight-wga-actors-1235434335/
So the long and short: actors may be on strike sometime today, but, whether they do or not is inconsequential; the studios are leaking that they want to “break” the WGA. Their intent is to not restart any dialogue with the writers union until they have “starved them out”. They see no reason to restart discussions until late October!!
This has got ugly.
As for Bond? Hang your jacket and take a seat. If the writers are going to be dragged out to deep water, and the studio sticks to their guns, there won’t be any kind of agreement until November!!!
(Unless the writers do “break” and submit to the demands of the studios).
I do think this is the studios bluffing. They want the WGA to blink, so they’re desperately throwing out word that they’ll be merciless, as if nobody knew that.
But because of streaming, @MakeshiftPython , they are loaded with content— which they didn’t have in previous strikes.
They are confident they can starve out the writers. And they haven’t even attempted any kind of dialogue.
They’re not bluffing this time. It’s an existential fight; they have to win this so the striking at the end of any collective bargaining agreement doesn’t become the norm in the future. They want to give other unions pause on this.
Once again, they’re loaded with content because of the streaming…
They're loaded with content, but any NEW content going forward will have to be unscripted, right? And most studios are apparently losing money in streaming services, so it could also be a losing battle for them to hold out. It all sucks. I'm sorry you're somewhat involved in it.
But my American friends on the picket line are now, 72 days into this, feeling the pinch… it’s squeezing them…
It’s a mess.
It’s hilarious how these studio execs think that these demands are “unfair”. Like, oh boo hoo, you’ll make less money to the point that you can’t afford a ninth yacht. Greed really is a disease.
Hard to imagine where this will lead. First time since 1960 where both actors and writers strike at the same time.
I remember the writers strike in 2007, which resulted in much shorter seasons for a lot of TV shows.
It doesn't look like this will be resolved soon.
@Kojak007 … We all hope for a quick resolution, but the studios really are looking to break strikers, and the easiest targets are the writers (so my guess is the actors and studios will reach compromises somewhat swiftly, and they won’t engage the writers for quite a while)…