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
As far as I'm aware the Bond swell hasn't been utilised in years? I'm talking specifically about the section starting at 00:27 seconds and then again at 01:14 seconds.
Sounds like a pretty standard few notes of the Bond theme they’ve used in that track to me. I don’t know about it being used to denote danger or a threat recently. Off the top of my head that swell is used as the musical cue at the end of CR and SF, although specifically for Bond. And the beginning of SP.
But honestly, I’m really not very musical and it’s not something I’m knowledgable on.
https://www.mensjournal.com/entertainment/next-james-bond-secret-weapon-jokes-puns-quips
Fine for discussion, but I’d take it with a big grain of salt at this time.
It would be a match made in heaven, for Bond to come roaring back after his death with a triumphant TSWLM style romp.
We can only hope. :D
It’s too early to say for sure, but here’s my two pence on it: I think the next film is more likely to lean into the classic elements of the Bond formula than Craig’s early ones did. But to some extent that’ll come with rebooting the franchise again and reintroducing Bond, and these more traditional elements were there by the end of the Craig era anyway. They’ll put some sort of spin on them though. I think quips and a certain level of outlandishness (even campiness) have always been there in Bond and always will be. While I think the films are fundamentally escapism, under BB and MGW’s tenure there’s been a conscious effort to integrate a sense of modern day elements into these stories, and usually it’s centred around the villain (ie. GE’s post Cold War themes are there in Travelyan’s backstory/motives, Carver’s a spin on a modern day Murdoch type mogul, TWINE involves a plot about oil, DAD is about North Korea, and I won’t even go into everything the Craig era did with its stories). I think that influence and creative impulse will be there again when crafting the villain/story. I don’t believe there’ll be a conscious effort to ‘depoliticise’ Bond in today’s world in that sense, nor do I believe it’ll be shoehorned in for relevancy. It’s just about creating a good Bond villain and caper. I think they’ll continue to try and put Bond in different situations which test him personally as a character, just as the Brosnan and Craig films did.
None of this is specific, and I can just as easily imagine Bond 26 having a more low key espionage driven FRWL or TLD type story, or maybe something more like GE or TND with its megalomaniac villains and world dominating threats. Or indeed something surprising! But I don’t put much stock in claims the next Bond film will be ‘quippy and campy’, or that it has to be something very specific in order for it to be successful. It’s too broad a thing to say anyway, and Bond takes its own direction. Before a point it’s not something we can know.
Yep, it’s very much the middle aged people in boardroom approach. Get the kids onboard by doing x or z. No specifics either. May as well determine what to do with the next Bond film by using an algorithm.
Careful, Amazon may be reading this and might get certain ideas now haha.
I’d be surprised if to some extent this wasn’t one of the issues EON have with them!
Apart from Shaun, I'm not sure he's ever made a film which has fully succeeded to be honest. I can see what he's going for, but he never quite makes it if you ask me.
Humor is fine as long as it's well-written and delivered the right way. So much during the Moore years was silly, rather than clever or witty. And if often undercut the believability of the character.
As for plot, I hope we can move beyond the megalomaniac villain with world ending plans. "Quick, find the bomb or the virus before the timer reaches 00.7." Or "the computer has run amuck." Or, "I have set up traps everywhere because I know where Bond will be every second."
Where Bond needs to go next is not where he has been.
I get it. I find his films kind of video-gamey in tone and detached TBH.
I always get that feeling that Edgar Wright would feel more at home directing a Bond spoof than an actual Bond film. Maybe something like Johnny English. It's the kind of film that gives him full opportunity to do his thing.
Yeah it feels like he's aping a style rather than actually naturally using it as if it's who he is.
However, to be honest, I doubt they will go in a lighter direction, sadly.
Also I realized this year it will be 4 years since the last movie and we still do not have the slightest bit of official information. And I thought the wait after DAD felt long...
One of the main reasons I've always loved Bond is because of his masculine sexist traits. Connery and Moore's Bond was the archetypal sexist, womanising, yet gentlemanly, secret agent.
The first woke Bond was Timothy Dalton. His Bond was in reaction to the AIDS crisis in the 1980s and he was portrayed as a one woman type of guy. That portrayal was ditched in the Brosnan era but Craig's Bond was a one woman type having strong feelings/falling in love with Vesper and Madeleine. Unlike Craig's Bond, Connery and Moore's Bond would never get in a shower to comfort a crying woman. They'd be in there with other things on their mind. ;)
I've always felt the definitive James Bond is the Cubby Broccoli era 1962 to 1989 (accepting Dalton's Bond was less promiscuous ). The Connery/Moore version is the universal standard image of the very confident, often arrogant, promiscuous man with a licence to kill. It's almost guaranteed that version of Bond will never return because times have changed and people like James Cameron view the original movie version of Bond as representing toxic masculinity. I would argue that is perversely why Bond was a success. He wasn't meant to a do-gooder boy scout! I think James Cameron doesn't get the nature of Bond and why it's appealing to many book readers and film goers.
Bond is essentially a 20th century sexist womanizing hero. He's not ideally suited to the 21st century because women are no longer dependent on men for resources and don't want to submit to them. This is why it was reported someone in Amazon's film department didn't think Bond was the hero!
Moore had his tender moments as well, most notably with Octopussy and Stacey. Arguably it made his portrayal more rounded.
I think Moore's Bond would have done actually. More specifically John Glen's MooreBond. He turned more human and romantic and lived in a slightly more realistic world where he could be more respectful towards women and show an emotional side and wasn't quite as predatory. Bond's character was changing since the mid-70s really.
He's supposed to be a bit of a bastard, and I'd say some of the gags by the 70s were an intentional self-parody where we're supposed to be laughing at this portrayal of a swoonsome secret agent whose feet all the ladies faint at, and it is fun. But part of the longevity of Bond is its ability to re-tool those aspects over time: at first his ladykilling is quite serious, then it becomes a joke as audiences become more aware, then it becomes more romantic, then later treated dramatically etc. - that's a strength of Bond; that's the nature of it and why it continues to stay appealing to film goers, because it changes to keep up with them. You can't make a 60s film now and expect people to pay money to see it.
I'd argue the character of Bond has never been unrecognisable even if he has changed over time, I certainly wouldn't say we've had any 'boy scout' versions.
As I've said before. James Cameron needs to take a long look in a mirror about saying anything negative about ANYTHING. Both as an artist, and more importantly as a human being.
I’d say try having Bond in a new film trick a woman into sleeping with him by rigging a deck of cards. Or have him force himself on a woman after she says no. See how well that plays with the majority of general audiences and how much they’d see him as a womanising, gentlemanly secret agent. On the flip side I think eyebrows would be raised if Bond were completely sexless in the next film, or didn’t have a bit of cruelty to him.
Well, before it was ‘woke’ it was ‘PC culture’. Before that I don’t know - liberalism? Counterculture? But with Bond criticisms have always been there with the character. Even Diana Rigg raised opinions about how inherently sexist the concept of Bond girls were in 1969.
But yes, by TSWLM Moore’s Bond became more humanised. I can definitely imagine a scene with his Bond similar to the shower one in CR.
I mean gosh, even by '69 he's running after Tracy and wiping her tears away.
Very true. The countercultural/PC/Liberal/woke mob clearly got Bond that time.