› ›

Where does Bond go after Craig?

1…425426428430431…683

Comments

  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 7,507
    Excellent post @peter
    Agree 100%
  • BirdlesonBirdleson
    edited December 2023 Posts: 2,161
    I’d rather it be passed on. Despite a few successes (success in this case measured by my own standards, not commercially) , maybe three or four, I am not very happy with the directions they have chosen to take this character in over the past 20 or so years. Even the films I enjoyed, such QUANTUM, were going places I wasn’t happy with.
  • muzz100muzz100
    Posts: 82
    I’d like to see some classic elements crafted into a modern-ish story. We’re nearer to a Cold War reality than in decades. Despots like Bond villains all over the place. The world is now enough..? The biggest issue as usual will be casting Bond. I really hope they don’t muck about with the character’s essence. It’s what distinguishes him from the rest. As has been debated ad infinitum, obvs.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Thanks, @Mathis1 !

    @Birdleson — who do you think, a person, people, or entity, could take on the universe of James Bond and deliver films more up your alley?

    I just can’t fathom there being anyone who wouldn’t just destroy the character via over-saturation (trying to milk whatever they can via tv series and spin offs of lesser characters that just aren’t too interesting without the main character of James Bond)?

    Would they, could they, deliver anything resembling the film-Bond we’ve come to love through the ages?? I don’t know I have faith in any other producers outside of this family.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited December 2023 Posts: 6,306
    peter wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Yes. I have tremendous respect for Barbara. She was, after all, in charge of the truck sequence of LTK. I'm sure she asked Cubby for his advice as well.

    Meanwhile, Gregg oversaw the plane/truck sequence for SP.

    Let's just say Gregg should continue to follow his aunt's lead, for now. She is more seasoned.

    Agreed @echo ... I'm a huge hockey fan, and I love hearing the stories of how how Mario Lemieux drafted Sid the Kid as an 18 year old.

    He insisted that Crosby live with he and his family during the hockey seasons (until he turned 21, but I think Sid actually lived with him for a few more years after)). Sid was now part of the family and had daily chores and babysat Lemieux 's younger kids when he and his wife went out to dinner.

    On the hockey front, Mario came out of retirement and then played for a few more years with Crosby, nurturing him all the way...

    And now, Crosby at 36, is still my favourite player, and the man I would choose to lead any of my fantasy teams. He is the consumate leader, yet incredibly humble (I've had the honour of meeting him several times), who has won all the Hardwear. It was because of Lemieux's nurturing and teaching that Crosby grew into this future-hall-of-famer.

    My long winded point is that Gregg has been getting more and more responsibility on each Bond film, he's being nurtured properly, and, when one, or both, of MGW and Barbara retires, he will be ready as he's been an engaged pupil under their tutelage.

    And @007ClassicBondFan, I have a feeling the last thing EoN want is to strike a tone that will remind audiences of Craig.

    In some ways, this new era will have to be tackled in a similar fashion to when Moore took over the role; they couldn't force a Connery-lite, so the new James Bond would have to stand on his own two feet, and pave his own way-- which LALD did brilliantly.

    I think the same basic philosophy applies to the new era.

    Wow. I'm from Pittsburgh originally, and my sister was a huge hockey fan, so I understand the analogy.

    I think it would be a huge mistake for the Broccolis to sell the franchise. There is nothing like it in Hollywood, and likely will not be anytime soon. Here I give full credit to Cubby and Harry for maintaining creative control.

    As soon as you get the revolving door of executives in charge (because it's always revolving), it will inevitably end up like a Marvel/Harry Potter. And any sharp attorney will figure out a workaround to gain creative control.

    It's like George Lucas negotiating the toy rights for Star Wars. The studios didn't care back then but the studios sure do now. And Cubby and Harry were a decade ahead of that. It's because they locked down control then that Barbara and Michael have it now. That was foresight.

    As someone who has been through the ups and downs of a family business, I can say there is nothing quite like a family business. You end up caring more about the profits and losses, the credits and debts, because they impact you personally, unlike if you are a salaried employee.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    As someone who has been through the ups and downs of a family business, I can say there is nothing quite like a family business. You end up caring more about the profits and losses, the credits and debts, because they impact you personally, unlike if you are a salaried employee.

    Thanks for the reply and adding insight @echo !! I think this last point is a really important one to factor in. There is real skin in the game when this is your family business (and your father’s legacy). This DOES mean something!!

    The faceless corporation vs the Broccoli/Wilson family is no comparison in my eyes. One has real skin in the game, the other wants to squeeze profit from every lemon it has rotting in the drawers…
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,428
    peter wrote: »
    As someone who has been through the ups and downs of a family business, I can say there is nothing quite like a family business. You end up caring more about the profits and losses, the credits and debts, because they impact you personally, unlike if you are a salaried employee.

    Thanks for the reply and adding insight @echo !! I think this last point is a really important one to factor in. There is real skin in the game when this is your family business (and your father’s legacy). This DOES mean something!!

    The faceless corporation vs the Broccoli/Wilson family is no comparison in my eyes. One has real skin in the game, the other wants to squeeze profit from every lemon it has rotting in the drawers…

    Great posts as per usual Peter! I tend to agree; I don’t see a better alternative out there and I think what MW and BB have achieved over the last 30+ years is nothing to be sniffed at.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,638
    peter wrote: »
    @delfloria , I have read through some bad scripts, and it's true that within the first few pages you do see a story falling off the rails, and Act I is the "easiest" part to writing a script (Act II is usually the place where many scripts come to die).

    But unlike you, I didn't feel anything "off" about the films after CR. I didn't think they were perfect films either, but I'm okay with that, because I've never watched a film that is perfect (I could go through my favourites of all time and see things that are glaring, and that includes such greats as Godfather I and II, Raging Bull, hell, Casino Royale has got a few things in it I'd love to correct, lol!).

    But when I look at the big picture, and what EoN has done over the past thirty years, I think it's amazing-- and I wasn't a big fan of one of their eras. But no matter if I was a fan, or not, I could see the hugely successful series they were building around their actor, and each of these films really did have enough for me to enjoy to keep coming back.

    Meanwhile, in that same time, we saw new film series being born, then burning out a few years later.

    But Bond kept going, finding ways to bring in the older fans and picking up millions of new ones on the way.

    Nothing is perfect, and every venture make mistakes and while we witnessed the rise and fall of MCU, of the new STAR WARS era, of FAST and FURIOUS, XXX, BOURNE, and DC, and older series sputter and die, like DIE HARD, ALIENS under Scott, LETHAL WEAPON unable to find it's footing in a crowded marketplace, BOND kept moving, pivoting, adapting. And this IS thanks to the stewards and the team they bring onto their productions.

    In an ever-changing and volatile environment, I'm in awe that EoN has been this successful (the odds weren't in their favor, not the way the industry is run today. EoN is this "creaky, old" entity with only one main character in its stable, and this character was created in the 50s(gasp!), and the film series itself started in the 60s (which in this day and age in the film industry, might as well be a few hundred years ago)).

    I wouldn't want anyone getting their hands on James Bond. They'd over saturate him and kill him inside of 10-15 years. This family knows what they are doing to make unique films with class and style and action and thrills, that separate it from the others. For such an "old" character, he does still feel and look fresh as a daisy compared to the ugly series coming out today.

    And with this new era about to begin, James Bond will look like the most energized as well.

    Great look at things @peter we are truly one of the luckiest fandoms in the world. Sometimes I think that the MCU fans are a bit blind to the series' too much, too fast, with no breathing room. Star Wars, there's no pleasing. If you aren't the original trilogy, (minus ewoks), one half hates you for being too similar, or hates you for being too different to it. DC went wrong with studio interference, and a leader (Zack Snyder) who was known to be too controversial. With down right cultists who think he could do no wrong. And the other half who hates him no matter what he does. James Gunn isn't much different. I can't comment on the other series you mention. I know that I criticize EON (and IFP) a bit to much, but, they know what to do to keep people coming back.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    mtm wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    As someone who has been through the ups and downs of a family business, I can say there is nothing quite like a family business. You end up caring more about the profits and losses, the credits and debts, because they impact you personally, unlike if you are a salaried employee.

    Thanks for the reply and adding insight @echo !! I think this last point is a really important one to factor in. There is real skin in the game when this is your family business (and your father’s legacy). This DOES mean something!!

    The faceless corporation vs the Broccoli/Wilson family is no comparison in my eyes. One has real skin in the game, the other wants to squeeze profit from every lemon it has rotting in the drawers…

    Great posts as per usual Peter! I tend to agree; I don’t see a better alternative out there and I think what MW and BB have achieved over the last 30+ years is nothing to be sniffed at.

    Thanks @mtm !! Any alternatives would be fatal, I fear. And, yes, EoN’s achievements, the consistency, and the worldwide box office love for their product is truly remarkable… Like really, really remarkable!
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    peter wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    As someone who has been through the ups and downs of a family business, I can say there is nothing quite like a family business. You end up caring more about the profits and losses, the credits and debts, because they impact you personally, unlike if you are a salaried employee.

    Thanks for the reply and adding insight @echo !! I think this last point is a really important one to factor in. There is real skin in the game when this is your family business (and your father’s legacy). This DOES mean something!!

    The faceless corporation vs the Broccoli/Wilson family is no comparison in my eyes. One has real skin in the game, the other wants to squeeze profit from every lemon it has rotting in the drawers…

    Great posts as per usual Peter! I tend to agree; I don’t see a better alternative out there and I think what MW and BB have achieved over the last 30+ years is nothing to be sniffed at.

    Thanks @mtm !! Any alternatives would be fatal, I fear. And, yes, EoN’s achievements, the consistency, and the worldwide box office love for their product is truly remarkable… Like really, really remarkable!

    Edit: @MaxCasino , thank you, great post…!
  • 007ClassicBondFan007ClassicBondFan
    Posts: 2,270
    Though to play the devil’s advocate sometimes I don’t think corporate/studio influence isn’t entirely bad in some cases. Let’s not forget that Cubby and Harry cast John Gavin as Bond before David Picker of United Artists made a last minute attempt to lure Connery back. Argubly that was the right call.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited December 2023 Posts: 13,820
    True, still UA likely would have demanded Connery regardless for profits in the short term, even if the ideal British actor was pursued by Eon at the time. To me of course Connery was the right call as you touched on @007ClassicBondFan. So yes in that case corporate influence saved the day likely. (Unless they would have made a more straightforward and somewhat less jokey film with John Gavin.)

    And the point is sound that there's a balance to be made for art versus profit. In recent times, I think for the studio-Eon dynamic the opposite is true and Eon deserves credit for keeping the train on the tracks. Regardless, the Bond producers are in it for the long run.

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,188
    Before Connery was brought back, John Gavin had the role all the way up until it was just a few weeks before shooting. The filmmakers were pretty well set on what the tone of DAF was regardless of who played the part.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,820
    Yeah I see a confidence to execute some things with Connery as pleasing the audience, versus establishing a new actor in the role. Again, the balance in play.

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,409
    Can I propose a hypothetical scenario?

    Let's say Oppenhiemer wins big on oscar night and Barbara and Amazon see dollar signs and announce they are fast-tracking Nolans grand 300 million dollar Bond action spectacle into development for a November 2026 release, would you be excited by this news or would you prefer to wait for a toned down retooling from EON similar to how they have done in the past, even if it means potentially waiting until 2028 for it to arrive?
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,428
    Any news of a new Bond film would be exciting, but the excitement would be tempered if Nolan was associated with it for me.
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    edited December 2023 Posts: 1,103
    So far, there are 4 ways to continue the Bond franchise (according to fans) that i'm aware of:
    • Bring Bond back to the 1950's.
    • Return to the original continuity.
    • Make film adaptations of the continuation novels.
    • Bring Christopher Nolan as the director.
    To be honest, i'd prefer the second ;).
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,220
    TheSkyfallen06 wrote: »
    So far, there are 4 ways to continue the Bond franchise (according to fans) that i'm aware of:
    • Bring Bond back to the 1950's.
    • Return to the original continuity.
    • Make film adaptations of the continuation novels.
    • Bring Christopher Nolan as the director.
    To be honest, i'd prefer the second ;).

    “ Original continuity “? So, considering Bond is always set in the current day, does that mean we cast an actor who is in his late 80’s or early 90’s to continue the Connery / Lazenby / Moore continuity? Or how about a 70 something actor to go back to the Dalton / Brosnan.

    My point , based on Bond taking place in the current day , and a much younger actor being cast, that the new incarnation will have its own continuity.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited December 2023 Posts: 5,970
    talos7 wrote: »
    TheSkyfallen06 wrote: »
    So far, there are 4 ways to continue the Bond franchise (according to fans) that i'm aware of:
    • Bring Bond back to the 1950's.
    • Return to the original continuity.
    • Make film adaptations of the continuation novels.
    • Bring Christopher Nolan as the director.
    To be honest, i'd prefer the second ;).
    [...] the new incarnation will have its own continuity.
    And I think that's the best option.

    I'd find returning to the original continuity a rather pointless exercise because unless you're outright signalling to your audience that this James Bond is within the same continuity as the first five actors, then no-one's really gonna know and to signal this in the first place would just feel like its trying too hard like a lot of superhero films do at the moment with using "old times" as a quick trip to the bank. Even if it was done as a small nod to the fans, is it really worth it?

    In my eyes, starting afresh but avoiding an origin story. Is the way to go. EON have IO Interactive exploring the origins of 007 in their video game so when it comes to the films, just hit the ground running, and I think EON knows this is the right move.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,428
    I think the next one has to be the start of a story of some kind. Whether that means an origin for 007 or something else I'm not sure (although that's the most obvious place to start). but I'd be amazed if it's not a beginning in some sense of the word.
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    Posts: 1,103
    What i ment is that the next Bond should bring a blance between the gritty and the light. Kind of what the earlier Bond flicks did.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,220
    TheSkyfallen06 wrote: »
    What i ment is that the next Bond should bring a blance between the gritty and the light. Kind of what the earlier Bond flicks did.

    Absolutely…
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    TheSkyfallen06 wrote: »
    What i ment is that the next Bond should bring a blance between the gritty and the light. Kind of what the earlier Bond flicks did.
    Oh 100%
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    edited December 2023 Posts: 2,000
    Continuity ended with YOLT. Regardless, I like to think of Bond as ageless. The same Bond played by different actors each in their own time while conveniently ignoring the end of NTTD.

    For Bond 26, I don't need an origin story. No matter what the actor's (Bond's) age, bring him on and get with it. I also don't need a story arc as if it's episodic television. To be continued is a box. Let's get back to stand alone Bond films without recurring villains. The idea of Bond not being able to defeat Blofeld other than blowing up his latest multi-million dollar lair is tiresome. If we're going to have a fresh Bond then let's have some fresh villains and schemes.

    I don't think the new films need to recreate the Connery era, but it would be nice to have a Bond once again who plays the role as effortlessly as Connery did. No Bond since SC has been as engaging in the role as he was. Doesn't mean other Bonds weren't good; they just weren't as good as SC.

    As for a Nolan mega dollars production, forget it. It's less about huge budgets and set pieces than a great actor working from a well-crafted script. In these days of bloated and excessive films, less may prove to be more.
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    Posts: 1,103
    CrabKey wrote: »
    I don't think the new films need to recreated the Connery era, but it would be nice to have a Bond once again who plays the role as effortlessly as Connery did. No Bond since SC has been as engaging in the role as he was. Doesn't mean other Bonds weren't good; they just weren't as good as SC.

    The problem with that is that Connery did not just play Bond, he WAS Bond, HE IS what made the films so iconic in the first place.
    Trying to find a actor that portrays Bond as suave and tough as Connery would be too difficult, not to mention, today's masculinity standards differ very much from then.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2023 Posts: 16,428
    I would definitely like a story arc of some kind: to ignore that the films are part of a series would seem slightly obtuse. Fleming did it, the Connery films even did it to some extent. Bond fans have always reacted well to a sense of continuity, any mention of history, Tracy's death etc. is always seen as a positive. Different chapters, and not so complex that a new viewer can't pick up what's happening, but I'd like an arc of some kind going through. I liked that we saw Craig's Bond move through his career, from the start to the end- it's something even the books haven't done.

    Obviously I'd like an actor as good as Connery, Moore or Craig, who could own the role in the same way, but I feel like that kind of goes without saying doesn't it? None of us doesn't want that, do we?

    I also don't see any reason for a budget reduction. The Bonds haven't been showing any signs of losing money, and the cash is up there on the screen. It's not my money so I can hardly care too much, and the only way it would affect me is if they were put at risk because they became unprofitable, which they haven't.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,069
    Yeah, I would prefer standalone Bond films again. But if the story arc is planned properly this time and is consistent, I would welcome it too. But my preferred option, would be standalone Bond films, because it makes room for varieties of characters and if the tone is slightly changed, it won't affect it. If Craig's Bond films were standalone, the light moments in some of his films would have worked, but knowing the films are still a continuation of the gritty CR & QoS, the jokes felt out of place.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,475
    Standalones are easier on both the creators and the audiences. Everything gets to be taken one film at a time, things don’t have to be remembered and adhered to, people don’t have to worry about catching up if they missed a film prior, and typically there is more rewatch value. But given how most series are now, I don’t expect a return to this format anytime soon.
  • Colonel_VenusColonel_Venus
    Posts: 580
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Can I propose a hypothetical scenario?

    Let's say Oppenhiemer wins big on oscar night and Barbara and Amazon see dollar signs and announce they are fast-tracking Nolans grand 300 million dollar Bond action spectacle into development for a November 2026 release, would you be excited by this news or would you prefer to wait for a toned down retooling from EON similar to how they have done in the past, even if it means potentially waiting until 2028 for it to arrive?

    My excitement would be through ALL roofs!!
  • Junglist_1985Junglist_1985 Los Angeles
    edited December 2023 Posts: 1,033
    Just want to point out the budget for Oppenheimer, Dunkirk, Inception, Interstellar, and TDK (and more) were all in the $150 million ballpark. Why not a Nolan Bond in that range?
Sign In or Register to comment.