› ›

Where does Bond go after Craig?

1…642643645647648…681

Comments

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited September 20 Posts: 8,399
    peter wrote: »
    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.

    Well, for the record I would definitely consider bonds relationship with at least half the women on your list to be frivolous in nature, including Paula, Helga, Kissy, Solitare, Tiffany, Andrea, Holly, Stacy, Pam, Lupe, Paris (that's why she is mad at him in TND, because he bailed on her before), Christmas, Jinx, Frost, Solange, as well as some you didn't mention like Dents receptionist, Rosie Carver, Patricia Fearing, Inga Bergstrom, Molly Warmflash and many others.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited September 20 Posts: 9,509
    Oh brother … @Mendes4Lyfe , I asked, in what ways were these moments “meaningless” and “cheap”.

    Can you answer that? If not, move on.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,636
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Every time that I see that there are a lot of posts in this thread, I think a big announcement has been made. Sadly, it seems that a certain individual or two getting into the same arguments. At the risk of being booed or kicked off the site, I think it might be wise to shut down this thread for awhile. At least until we get some official news. Certain people's speculation has turned into fact in their minds. It may be time for this thread to take a break. Sorry to give my viewpoints.

    I'm resting my case for this. It's a shame, while I know I don't have to post or even look at the thread, I feel tricked every time. Some people just don't know when enough is enough. If you can't agree to disagree, then don't post on the thread. James Bond is for everyone. That is why this website (and others) started. If you can't respect others and go on your fictional viewpoints as fact, rambling and insulting others, leave the site. I'm sorry, but if shutting down the thread for a few days helps, please do it. We're to discuss the future of Bond, not drag others into the viewpoints of others staying in the past. Be civil with each other and remember that James Bond will return.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,993
    A discussion ends when it ends, not because someone decides it should and tells others to move on. Don't like it? Don't respond.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    CrabKey wrote: »
    A discussion ends when it ends, not because someone decides it should and tells others to move on. Don't like it? Don't respond.

    Or…. How about this:

    When others make statements and they’re asked what that means, to clarify their positions….And the question isn’t answered. I’d say that’s when a conversation is over, sir! Wouldn’t you agree?!!

    So, moving on….
    😂
  • ZekidkZekidk
    Posts: 3,276
    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.
    Some great thoughts in your post. Made me thnk of the introduction of XXX in TSWLM which was genious, everyone thinking it was the man who got called for. I'm hoping for some kind of guessing game with the next Bond. Sort of like the TLD PTS. The next Bond needs a great introduction, that's for sure.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Sort of like the TLD PTS. The next Bond needs a great introduction, that's for sure.

    TLD is my favourite PTS. It would be great to have the new Bond introduced in the midst of some wild action.
  • BurgessBurgess
    Posts: 380
    peter wrote: »
    Sort of like the TLD PTS. The next Bond needs a great introduction, that's for sure.

    TLD is my favourite PTS. It would be great to have the new Bond introduced in the midst of some wild action.

    I co-sign this!

  • Kojak007Kojak007
    Posts: 133
    peter wrote: »
    TLD is my favourite PTS. It would be great to have the new Bond introduced in the midst of some wild action.
    Actually, maybe I'm alone with this opinion, but I think TLD could serve as a model for Bond 26 in many ways. It does have some classic Bond elements, including fun gadgets and some decent humor, but also a relatively "grounded" and serious story. So, if done well, Bond 26 could please those who liked the more serious Craig era, but also those who missed the more "traditional" style of earlier movies.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Kojak007 wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    TLD is my favourite PTS. It would be great to have the new Bond introduced in the midst of some wild action.
    Actually, maybe I'm alone with this opinion, but I think TLD could serve as a model for Bond 26 in many ways. It does have some classic Bond elements, including fun gadgets and some decent humor, but also a relatively "grounded" and serious story. So, if done well, Bond 26 could please those who liked the more serious Craig era, but also those who missed the more "traditional" style of earlier movies.

    @Kojak007 TLD is an excellent template. Although, work the villains into something with bite.
  • Colonel_VenusColonel_Venus
    Posts: 579
    TLD is pretty good, but just like GE, it's a remix. Bond 26 needs to be big, beautiful and BOLD.
  • Kojak007Kojak007
    Posts: 133
    peter wrote: »
    TLD is an excellent template. Although, work the villains into something with bite.
    So you want Jaws back? Just kidding...😉
    Totally agree, the villains in TLD could have been a bit better. But other than that, the movie seems to be a good template as a starting point for a new era for many reasons.
    In general, I would love to have a movie in the style of GE for Bond 26, but I doubt that will happen (too over-the-top, I guess), so I think TLD as a template could be a bit more realistic at this point...

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 21 Posts: 16,413
    I love TLD but I agree I'd prefer a GE too: it's a bit more sophisticated than TLD. It works on a few more levels- you don't have anything like the tank chase in TLD, it's never quite bold enough to do a full-on sequence which plays partly for laughs in that way: you have to be a pretty assured director to carry that off. I think GE is a pretty cleverly-made film.
  • 007ClassicBondFan007ClassicBondFan
    Posts: 2,270
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    TLD is pretty good, but just like GE, it's a remix. Bond 26 needs to be big, beautiful and BOLD.

    What does “remix” even mean in this context?
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    So you want Jaws back?

    😂 @Kojak007 … !!!

    You and @mtm have a point with GE as well. Not my favourite by a long shot, but had elements I can admire and respect. It knew how to add crowd-pleasing moments. And yes, I think that Campbell had *that* swagger to pull off the tank sequence. But Glen did a great job capturing that Cold War spy feel in the first half of TLD that I love and appreciate (and Dalton looked damn fine as a sniper awaiting to take out whoever wanted to “stop” Koskov)…
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,399
    mtm wrote: »
    I love TLD but I agree I'd prefer a GE too: it's a bit more sophisticated than TLD. It works on a few more levels- you don't have anything like the tank chase in TLD, it's never quite bold enough to do a full-on sequence which plays partly for laughs in that way: you have to be a pretty assured director to carry that off. I think GE is a pretty cleverly-made film.

    What about the car chase into cello case scene?
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,413
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I love TLD but I agree I'd prefer a GE too: it's a bit more sophisticated than TLD. It works on a few more levels- you don't have anything like the tank chase in TLD, it's never quite bold enough to do a full-on sequence which plays partly for laughs in that way: you have to be a pretty assured director to carry that off. I think GE is a pretty cleverly-made film.

    What about the car chase into cello case scene?

    I don't think anyone was laughing out loud at that.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,152
    'Remix' in this context just means putting the emphasis on some elements and less on others. To me, anyway.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,216
    I think there will be a certain number of people who will see the inclusion of anything recognizable as Bond as being too derivative. Lol.

    I want classic Bond tropes presented in a fresh way.

    Top Gun: Maverick shows it can be done.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited September 21 Posts: 4,162
    I mean, TLD has a good bit of FRWL in it (the multiple villains, the villain's plot which involves using Bond/the Bond girl as a pawn, a third party playing both the Russians and British, the Cold War overtones etc.) So potentially a new Bond movie could use an even older one as a source of inspiration to bounce ideas from (heck, they could broadly adapt the broad plot beats of DN to a new film if they really wanted to, which could be cool).

    Worth saying I think every Bond film is unique/individual in their own ways, even if they use previous films as inspiration to whatever extent. 'Remixes' just comes with the nature of a formulaic series like Bond, and pretty much all of them past Connery's early films do it to some extent.
  • ZekidkZekidk
    Posts: 3,276
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    TLD is pretty good, but just like GE, it's a remix. Bond 26 needs to be big, beautiful and BOLD.

    I suggested this earlier in the thread:
    Zekidk wrote: »
    It opens in France with young James saying goodbye to his parents heading out on a climbing trip. They die, James is informed at the cabin or whereever. He goes outside and looks up at the mountain, Closeup of his eyes which is then transitioned into the eyes of adult James in combat gear wearing a skimask, looking up at a similar mountain, heading out on mission as 007. After the setpiece and right before the main titles he takes off his mask and we see the face of the new Bond for the very first time.
    Hmm... maybe that's a remix of NTTD and TLD.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,993
    I would enjoy seeing a Bond film that didn't borrow from previous films.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,789
    CrabKey wrote: »
    I would enjoy seeing a Bond film that didn't borrow from previous films.

    Yes, I agree.
    I would adapt the motel shootout of TSWLM, with Vivienne Michel opening the door when she's held hostage by the gangsters only to see a silhouette of a man in a raincoat in the middle of a rain, then he introduced himself as James Bond (new actor), then Bond was held hostage as he walked inside the motel, then Bond kicked the gangster pointing a gun at him, and the action starts.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited September 28 Posts: 3,789
    Would you rather retain the same old Bond formula of Bond as a Knight in a Kingdom to save a Maiden against the dragon like the classic films or Complex Formula along the likes of Goldfinger, Dalton films, TWINE, DAD, and Craig Films? This is for the next era of Bond films.

    Sorry @thedove 😁😅✌️

    There are some films where it's a formula of Bond versus the villain, the villain puts the leading lady in danger, Bond saves her and falls in love.

    But there are Bond films which this scenario doesn't happen.
  • Colonel_VenusColonel_Venus
    Posts: 579
    I used to love this guy but I am so happy now that he is gone...

    https://hollywood-elsewhere.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/img_1205-1-1229x1536.jpg
  • ZekidkZekidk
    Posts: 3,276
    Just rewatched the making-of featurette of 'Moonraker' to better understand why it's one of my favorite Bond-movies. It has Moore in his prime, John Barry, huge Ken Adam sets, the Meddings effects (nominated for an Oscar), some great dialouge, lensed beautifully, and had those wild action setpieces.

    In the beginning of the featurette Cubby said they wanted to do something that was extravagant. And MR sure is. So this is what I am looking for in Bond 26. It has to be...extravagant.
  • TuxedoTuxedo Europe
    Posts: 260
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    I used to love this guy but I am so happy now that he is gone...

    https://hollywood-elsewhere.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/img_1205-1-1229x1536.jpg

    Oh boy...
  • JustJamesJustJames London
    Posts: 216
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    I used to love this guy but I am so happy now that he is gone...

    https://hollywood-elsewhere.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/img_1205-1-1229x1536.jpg

    It’s his rebellion stage. Distancing himself from his Bond curated image of nigh on two decades. That’s why he looks like Gary Oldman having gotten dressed in the dark, in a charity shop, after a blow to the head.
  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    Posts: 1,368
    Well, Connery made Zardoz for a reason.

  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited September 29 Posts: 4,162
    All the Bond actors are/were… well, actors, and not James Bond. Outside of the role they looked/dressed differently (I’m sure people remarked at the time how odd it was seeing Connery without his toupee/not in a suit).

    Not sure why it would make any difference to how you view Craig as an actor. Pretty sure he’s always grown out his hair/beard and worn certain clothes between Bond films.
Sign In or Register to comment.