› ›

Where does Bond go after Craig?

1…639640641642644

Comments

  • delfloriadelfloria
    Posts: 1,845
    mtm wrote: »
    I don't think they will either, just tweak the thing, as you mentioned and aim at as many as possible. Turning a demographic off it just doesn't make any sense.

    To be honest I think NTTD already has quite a lot of that: Bond isn't horrendously sexist at any point in it really, doesn't do anything which anyone would describe as outrageously toxic or misogynistic. The character has already been tweaked, and all of these folk who get angry at the idea of him changing didn't even notice.

    You must be joking. As a Bond fan I noticed the changes setting in with Quantum and found them truly unsettling. As I've said before , Craig made a good Bond but his universe was a disaster, from my point of view.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited September 20 Posts: 4,480
    delfloria wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I don't think they will either, just tweak the thing, as you mentioned and aim at as many as possible. Turning a demographic off it just doesn't make any sense.

    To be honest I think NTTD already has quite a lot of that: Bond isn't horrendously sexist at any point in it really, doesn't do anything which anyone would describe as outrageously toxic or misogynistic. The character has already been tweaked, and all of these folk who get angry at the idea of him changing didn't even notice.

    You must be joking. As a Bond fan I noticed the changes setting in with Quantum and found them truly unsettling. As I've said before , Craig made a good Bond but his universe was a disaster, from my point of view.

    While not a complete disaster for me, I understand your thoughts. It could have been better. I think EON got a bit hotheaded when they got the Blofeld and Spectre rights back. If they are honestly going to try a long story arc again, I imagine that they have learned their mistakes with DC’s. Maybe film a film back to back maybe.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,851
    I'm sure we all remember those horrendously sexist, outrageously toxic, and misogynistic films.

  • delfloriadelfloria
    Posts: 1,845
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    delfloria wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I don't think they will either, just tweak the thing, as you mentioned and aim at as many as possible. Turning a demographic off it just doesn't make any sense.

    To be honest I think NTTD already has quite a lot of that: Bond isn't horrendously sexist at any point in it really, doesn't do anything which anyone would describe as outrageously toxic or misogynistic. The character has already been tweaked, and all of these folk who get angry at the idea of him changing didn't even notice.

    You must be joking. As a Bond fan I noticed the changes setting in with Quantum and found them truly unsettling. As I've said before , Craig made a good Bond but his universe was a disaster, from my point of view.

    While not a complete disaster for me, I understand your thoughts. It could have been better. I think EON got a bit hotheaded when they got the Blofeld and Spectre rights back. If they are honestly going to try a long story arc again, I imagine that they have learned their mistakes with DC’s. Maybe film a film back to back maybe.

    Eon definitely got over their skis while trying to shoehorn the existence of Spectre into the earlier Craig films not to mention the Brofeld nonsense. For me the films just seem to be off after CR. Sure there are Bondian moments throughout them that ring true but just not enough for my taste in 007 adventures.
  • ZekidkZekidk
    Posts: 3,257
    CrabKey wrote: »
    I'm sure we all remember those horrendously sexist, outrageously toxic, and misogynistic films.
    Best of the bunch.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 20 Posts: 16,133
    CrabKey wrote: »
    This kind of thing CrabKey wrote demonstrates what I mean about some folks not noticing that he's already changed.

    That's the point. People have noticed.

    Why were you getting hyperbolic about the next Bond if your point was about the last one then? You seem to think he’s going to change rather than that change having happened.

    You missed my point that the change has happened. To extrapolate that into the change continuing to a ridiculous degree that he becomes celibate is like saying that Roger’s Bond stopping smoking would develop in his successor into a Bond who would become an extractor fan and remove all smoke from any city he entered.
    I saw a good quite recently that criticism suffers from inflation; the more one criticises, the less valuable those criticisms become.
  • TroyTroy
    Posts: 342
    mtm wrote: »

    You missed my point that the change has happened. To extrapolate that into the change continuing to a ridiculous degree that he becomes celibate...

    He did become virtually celibate in QoS
  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    Posts: 1,186
    CrabKey wrote: »
    This kind of thing CrabKey wrote demonstrates what I mean about some folks not noticing that he's already changed.

    That's the point. People have noticed.

    Yeah, Bond's death overshadowed this but people have noticed it anyway.

    The good news is that he's dead and buried so the next Bond may be different.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,133
    Troy wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    You missed my point that the change has happened. To extrapolate that into the change continuing to a ridiculous degree that he becomes celibate...

    He did become virtually celibate in QoS

    I kind of think shagging a beautiful girl is the opposite of celibate. I take your point, he only had time for one, but it was a pretty short film! :)
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,756
    Troy wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    You missed my point that the change has happened. To extrapolate that into the change continuing to a ridiculous degree that he becomes celibate...

    He did become virtually celibate in QoS

    What about Strawberry Fields?
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,087
    My understanding is that the recent Bond films weren't going to simply add love scenes for the sake of having them. Not unless they were meaningful, would there be any. I prefer that to cheap and meaningless moments finagling their way into the scripts.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited September 20 Posts: 3,833
    I wouldn't mind if in Bond 26 we have something like Bond being called into M's office while he's with a girl in bed. They can do something different with it that shows us something about this Bond though. Perhaps instead of the usual scenario of him telling Moneypenny that he'll be there in an hour and not 30 minutes, or him just cheekily strutting out, we could cut to later that night/early in the morning where Bond, now fully dressed, coldly walks out on while the girl's asleep, presumably never to see her again. If the actor plays it well we could get something like a brief look back at the girl, or just a hint of Bond maybe feeling a bit bad.

    It's something we hear of Bond doing (I guess that's what he does with Paris prior to the events of TND, and that's basically what he does in Fleming's TSWLM). But seeing it on film in that way could be interesting. Personally, I'd love for the ending of a Bond film someday to involve Bond having to walk out on the love interest like that. In fact, it'd be a nice contrast if we saw Bond doing it once earlier in the film, albeit more in a more detached with a one night stand, and then at the very end with the Bond girl he's developed feelings for.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,182
    007HallY wrote: »
    I wouldn't mind if in Bond 26 we have something like Bond being called into M's office while he's with a girl in bed. They can do something different with it that shows us something about this Bond though. Perhaps instead of the usual scenario of him telling Moneypenny that he'll be there in an hour and not 30 minutes, or him just cheekily strutting out, we could cut to later that night/early in the morning where Bond, now fully dressed, coldly walks out on while the girl's asleep, presumably never to see her again. If the actor plays it well we could get something like a brief look back at the girl, or just a hint of Bond maybe feeling a bit bad.

    It's something we hear of Bond doing (I guess that's what he does with Paris prior to the events of TND, and that's basically what he does in Fleming's TSWLM). But seeing it on film in that way could be interesting. Personally, I'd love for the ending of a Bond film someday to involve Bond having to walk out on the love interest like that. In fact, it'd be a nice contrast if we saw Bond doing it once earlier in the film, albeit more in a more detached with a one night stand, and then at the very end with the Bond girl he's developed feelings for.

    That's interesting. I would think at the end it would have to be for her safety or whatever.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited September 20 Posts: 3,833
    echo wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    I wouldn't mind if in Bond 26 we have something like Bond being called into M's office while he's with a girl in bed. They can do something different with it that shows us something about this Bond though. Perhaps instead of the usual scenario of him telling Moneypenny that he'll be there in an hour and not 30 minutes, or him just cheekily strutting out, we could cut to later that night/early in the morning where Bond, now fully dressed, coldly walks out on while the girl's asleep, presumably never to see her again. If the actor plays it well we could get something like a brief look back at the girl, or just a hint of Bond maybe feeling a bit bad.

    It's something we hear of Bond doing (I guess that's what he does with Paris prior to the events of TND, and that's basically what he does in Fleming's TSWLM). But seeing it on film in that way could be interesting. Personally, I'd love for the ending of a Bond film someday to involve Bond having to walk out on the love interest like that. In fact, it'd be a nice contrast if we saw Bond doing it once earlier in the film, albeit more in a more detached with a one night stand, and then at the very end with the Bond girl he's developed feelings for.

    That's interesting. I would think at the end it would have to be for her safety or whatever.

    Oh yeah. Could even be a nice spin on the old 'the henchman comes back to kill Bond for the last scene' trope we get in GF, LALD, DAF etc. We get to the final bit of the film where Bond is on leave with the girl, perhaps at a nice hotel, but the henchman sneaks in to try and assassinate Bond while the girl is asleep. Bond has a fight where he defeats them, but soon realises there will be others coming for them. We see him calling an MI6 Station 'clean up' crew or something (or perhaps the ally of the film who'll inevitably do a Mathis type clean up job) and tells them to take the girl into protection and hide the body of the henchman. We get a moment where Bond looks at the girl sleeping in bed, maybe leaves a letter, and afterwards he leaves the hotel as a van pulls up and the clean up crew jump out. Bond theme slowly begins to play as he walks back to his Aston Martin and drives off.

    Just freewheeling. It's something we've not quite seen before anyway, and I like the Fleming-esque bittersweetness in there of Bond's profession always cancelling out any chance he has at a normal life/relationship. If Bond walking out on a girl is something we see him doing early in the film with a random one night stand before being called onto a job, it'd be a nice contrast/perhaps bit of character growth to see Bond doing that with a girl he cares for in order to protect her (or at least looking a bit remorseful about doing this).
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,133
    I always really like that "Champagne for one" scene with Solange in CR: that's a lovely bit of Bond coldness.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited September 20 Posts: 3,118
    Yeah, that is a great moment. The whole Solange sequence is pretty damn great, tbf. There was a guy over on AJB back then who was convinced that it was actually CraigBond who'd tortured and killed Solange. He made a decent case for it, but no one really bought it. Including me, although I could see his argument, tbh!
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,133
    Ha! I've never thought of that but I guess you could take it that way. He's the last person we see her with, it cuts away and then she's dead. He could be ordering champagne for himself as he tortures her!
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 3,833
    Haha, love that. Not sure I'm quite seeing that myself, but I sort of understand how someone can argue that (at expense of misreading certain things in the film I suppose, but oh well).
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited September 20 Posts: 3,756
    Film Bond can be cruel towards women, he once did that with Andrea Anders and briefly, with Tatiana, and given of how Bond treated Vesper in the film for the first half, it's kinda possible, he did pumped her for information, but although, I will admit, not to the point or extent of killing her, Bond never have a will to kill a woman, even his way of killing Elektra was against his will and felt sympathy towards her.

    He did not done that towards Solange.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,851
    @mtm -- I saw a good quote recently that criticism suffers from inflation; the more one criticizes, the less valuable those criticisms become.

    Sounds like good advice you'll probably want to follow.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,756
    Might help

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 20 Posts: 16,133
    007HallY wrote: »
    Haha, love that. Not sure I'm quite seeing that myself, but I sort of understand how someone can argue that (at expense of misreading certain things in the film I suppose, but oh well).

    I quite like misreading the films sometimes: I reckon there's an argument that Bond could be a KGB in FYEO: he seems to give the Russians every chance to get the ATAC: he even recovers it for them! :D
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @mtm -- I saw a good quote recently that criticism suffers from inflation; the more one criticizes, the less valuable those criticisms become.

    Sounds like good advice you'll probably want to follow.

    Sure. Seems like a reply which makes sense doesn't it.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,344
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    My understanding is that the recent Bond films weren't going to simply add love scenes for the sake of having them. Not unless they were meaningful, would there be any. I prefer that to cheap and meaningless moments finagling their way into the scripts.

    Aren't most of moments between Bond and women on screen cheap and meaningless?
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,233
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    My understanding is that the recent Bond films weren't going to simply add love scenes for the sake of having them. Not unless they were meaningful, would there be any. I prefer that to cheap and meaningless moments finagling their way into the scripts.

    Aren't most of moments between Bond and women on screen cheap and meaningless?

    In what ways? How does cheap and meaningless apply to:

    Honey?
    Tatiana?
    Jill (apart from playtime after defeating Goldfinger in Round One? I don’t find playtime cheap, nor meaningless. It’s two adults having fun and letting off steam in Miami).
    Pussy (apart from @CrabKey ’s favourite scene ( 🙃 just a joke))?
    Domino?
    Paula?
    Fiona?
    Helga?
    Aki?
    Kissy?
    Tracy?
    Tiffany?
    Solitaire?
    Andrea?
    (Goodnight… I can see it more).
    Anya?
    Holly?
    Melina?
    Octopussy?
    Stacy?
    Kara?
    Pam?
    Lupe?
    Natalya?
    Paris?
    (Wai Lin shouldn’t have been a love interest)
    Elektra?
    Christmas?
    Jinx?
    Frost?
    Solange?
    Vesper?
    Camille?
    Severine (some may argue both cheap and meaningless, but I’m on the other side of the argument; plus she has value to Bond to “meet (her) employer “…)
    Madeleine?

    I may not love some of the way women were depicted (especially in the 70s), but there’s some meaning to seduction and most are not cheap.

    So I don’t understand why you state that “ most of moments between Bond and women on screen cheap and meaningless?”

    The women play an important function, from the books and into the films. Just nowadays they’re given the weight and respect they deserve (they can be sexy without being mindless; they can have important jobs without wearing short-shorts and wearing tank tops three sizes too small)…


  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,344
    peter wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    My understanding is that the recent Bond films weren't going to simply add love scenes for the sake of having them. Not unless they were meaningful, would there be any. I prefer that to cheap and meaningless moments finagling their way into the scripts.

    Aren't most of moments between Bond and women on screen cheap and meaningless?

    The women play an important function, from the books and into the films. Just nowadays they’re given the weight and respect they deserve (they can be sexy without being mindless; they can have important jobs without wearing short-shorts and wearing tank tops three sizes too small)…

    Intelligent women can have meaningless flings too. The level of intelligence has nothing to do with it.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,233
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    My understanding is that the recent Bond films weren't going to simply add love scenes for the sake of having them. Not unless they were meaningful, would there be any. I prefer that to cheap and meaningless moments finagling their way into the scripts.

    Aren't most of moments between Bond and women on screen cheap and meaningless?

    The women play an important function, from the books and into the films. Just nowadays they’re given the weight and respect they deserve (they can be sexy without being mindless; they can have important jobs without wearing short-shorts and wearing tank tops three sizes too small)…

    Intelligent women can have meaningless flings too. The level of intelligence has nothing to do with it.

    Of course intelligent women can have affairs and flings— I never said otherwise.

    So, listen, I’m not going to play chase with you. You said something that seemed wildly inaccurate again. I asked you to clarify. I even gave you a list.

    You avoided @Mendes4Lyfe (again. This is a reoccurring theme with you, isn’t it? Pontificate and make word-salads, then, when questioned, you shift the narrative and whip up a little chaos. You’re like a certain person running for president).

    Sigh.

    Have a good weekend Mendes, lol.
  • Colonel_VenusColonel_Venus
    Posts: 566
    Entertainment reporter Jeff Sneider has also heard the Chazelle rumour from his sources, but Sneider believes Chazelle is not ready to direct a Bond film:

    https://www.youtube.com/live/pFegD2p8D58?si=zXC4e7YOrsVEETUF&t=3137
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,159
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    Entertainment reporter Jeff Sneider has also heard the Chazelle rumour from his sources, but Sneider believes Chazelle is not ready to direct a Bond film:

    https://www.youtube.com/live/pFegD2p8D58?si=zXC4e7YOrsVEETUF&t=3137

    His source seems to be the point of origin for the rumor.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited September 20 Posts: 8,344
    peter wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    My understanding is that the recent Bond films weren't going to simply add love scenes for the sake of having them. Not unless they were meaningful, would there be any. I prefer that to cheap and meaningless moments finagling their way into the scripts.

    Aren't most of moments between Bond and women on screen cheap and meaningless?

    The women play an important function, from the books and into the films. Just nowadays they’re given the weight and respect they deserve (they can be sexy without being mindless; they can have important jobs without wearing short-shorts and wearing tank tops three sizes too small)…

    Intelligent women can have meaningless flings too. The level of intelligence has nothing to do with it.

    Of course intelligent women can have affairs and flings— I never said otherwise.

    So, listen, I’m not going to play chase with you. You said something that seemed wildly inaccurate again. I asked you to clarify. I even gave you a list.

    You avoided @Mendes4Lyfe (again. This is a reoccurring theme with you, isn’t it? Pontificate and make word-salads, then, when questioned, you shift the narrative and whip up a little chaos. You’re like a certain person running for president).

    Sigh.

    Have a good weekend Mendes, lol.

    I said aren't most of Bond's relationships cheap and meaningless? To which you said "nowadays they're given the weight and respect they deserve, they can be sexy without being mindless", i never mentioned anything about intelligence before that so I didn't shift any goalposts - you brought that up on your own.

    To me, how much weight, respect or intelligence the women are given is completely irrelevant to the types of relationships bond has with them. I thought his status as a serial womaniser was widely accepted, but apparently there are people who take issue with this? The things you learn being a part of sites like these never ceases to amaze.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited September 20 Posts: 9,233
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    My understanding is that the recent Bond films weren't going to simply add love scenes for the sake of having them. Not unless they were meaningful, would there be any. I prefer that to cheap and meaningless moments finagling their way into the scripts.

    Aren't most of moments between Bond and women on screen cheap and meaningless?

    The women play an important function, from the books and into the films. Just nowadays they’re given the weight and respect they deserve (they can be sexy without being mindless; they can have important jobs without wearing short-shorts and wearing tank tops three sizes too small)…

    Intelligent women can have meaningless flings too. The level of intelligence has nothing to do with it.

    Of course intelligent women can have affairs and flings— I never said otherwise.

    So, listen, I’m not going to play chase with you. You said something that seemed wildly inaccurate again. I asked you to clarify. I even gave you a list.

    You avoided @Mendes4Lyfe (again. This is a reoccurring theme with you, isn’t it? Pontificate and make word-salads, then, when questioned, you shift the narrative and whip up a little chaos. You’re like a certain person running for president).

    Sigh.

    Have a good weekend Mendes, lol.

    I said aren't most of Bond's relationships cheap and meaningless? To which you said "nowadays they're given the weight and respect they deserve, they can be sexy without being mindless", i never mentioned anything about intelligence before that so I didn't shift any goalposts - you brought that up on your own.

    To me, how much weight, respect or intelligence the women are given is completely irrelevant to the types of relationships bond has with them. I thought his status as a serial womaniser was widely accepted, but apparently there are people who take issue with this? The things you learn being a part of sites like these never ceases to amaze.

    Dude, I asked :

    In what ways? How does cheap and meaningless apply to:

    Honey?
    Tatiana?
    Jill (apart from playtime after defeating Goldfinger in Round One? I don’t find playtime cheap, nor meaningless. It’s two adults having fun and letting off steam in Miami).
    Pussy (apart from @CrabKey ’s favourite scene ( 🙃 just a joke))?
    Domino?
    Paula?
    Fiona?
    Helga?
    Aki?
    Kissy?
    Tracy?
    Tiffany?
    Solitaire?
    Andrea?
    (Goodnight… I can see it more).
    Anya?
    Holly?
    Melina?
    Octopussy?
    Stacy?
    Kara?
    Pam?
    Lupe?
    Natalya?
    Paris?
    (Wai Lin shouldn’t have been a love interest)
    Elektra?
    Christmas?
    Jinx?
    Frost?
    Solange?
    Vesper?
    Camille?
    Severine (some may argue both cheap and meaningless, but I’m on the other side of the argument; plus she has value to Bond to “meet (her) employer “…)
    Madeleine?

    You brought up something I discussed in conclusion, but—

    You avoided answering my question.

    I gave you a list of women that I don’t think were relationships that were meaningless, nor cheap, to Bond, after you had said:

    “Aren't most of moments between Bond and women on screen cheap and meaningless?”

    So, once again, @Mendes4Lyfe we fail to connect because you avoid answering questions and shift goalposts and discuss something else entirely.Your words: aren’t most moments between Bond and women on screen cheap and meaningless.

    I disagree with you and asked point blanks how are the moments with the following list, cheap and meaningless.

    I’m quite tired of this game you play. So let’s be adults and end this “conversation “ here, shall we? Just get your last word in, and move on, lol.
Sign In or Register to comment.