After watching Spectre, which I enjoyed, but had some issues with, I fear that the franchise is drifting back toward the days of camp. I feel like a future event(s), and there are man possibilities, needs to get Craig's Bond back to his demeanor in Casino Royale: cold, brutal, lethal, charismatic and charming; yet human. How do you guys feel?
Bond needs to reboot again to the Casino Royale version
#1
Posted 08 November 2015 - 05:09 AM
#2
Posted 08 November 2015 - 05:30 AM
Starring Andrew Garfield, no doubt.
#3
Posted 08 November 2015 - 05:31 AM
I thought SPECTRE struck just the right balance between the gritty and dramatic seriousness of the previous Craig films and the playfulness of some of the later Connery films. If they can maintain that tone for the foreseeable future without veering too far back in either direction, I don't think there will be any need for another tonal "reboot."
#4
Posted 08 November 2015 - 05:34 AM
#5
Posted 08 November 2015 - 05:45 AM
I'm all for a dynamic character, but the Bond of CR is a far cry from the Bond of SP. Agree with Coco1997, definitely sensing a feel of the latter Connery movies. If there is one movie Spectre seemed like, or reminded me of, I would go with "Never Say Never Again." There was a special here in the U.S. on Encore (I believe), and Craig said he felt the need to go more Moore style "gags," because they felt that's what people wanted. Turning Craig into Roger Moore 2.0, or older version Bond of Connery is a horrific idea. Daniel Craig needs to be his "own" Bond. Not an assimilation of Bond's past. I bet Martin Campbell (if he's honest) doesn't like the direction they're going. Maybe the critical response will cause a course change back toward CR waters?
#6
Posted 08 November 2015 - 06:16 AM
I'm all for a dynamic character, but the Bond of CR is a far cry from the Bond of SP. Agree with Coco1997, definitely sensing a feel of the latter Connery movies. If there is one movie Spectre seemed like, or reminded me of, I would go with "Never Say Never Again." There was a special here in the U.S. on Encore (I believe), and Craig said he felt the need to go more Moore style "gags," because they felt that's what people wanted. Turning Craig into Roger Moore 2.0, or older version Bond of Connery is a horrific idea. Daniel Craig needs to be his "own" Bond. Not an assimilation of Bond's past. I bet Martin Campbell (if he's honest) doesn't like the direction they're going. Maybe the critical response will cause a course change back toward CR waters?
The negative critical reaction towards SPECTRE has had very little to do with the 'tone,' though. Most of the criticism I've read has been directed at the pacing and basic premise of the film.
People have been clamoring for the films to "lighten up" ever since CASINO ROYALE. I don't think that necessarily means Joe Q Public wants the series to return to the slapstick-style comedy of some of the Moore and Brosnan films. There was always a sharp wit and cleverness about the humor employed in the Connery films (and even in some of the Moore films) and that's what the next Craig film (and future films in the franchise) should aim for.
#7
Posted 08 November 2015 - 09:30 AM
(Sorry... I saw the title of the thread and it was the first 'Casino Royale' that came to mind at that moment)
#8
Posted 08 November 2015 - 10:40 AM
Enough with the reboots. That's all.
#9
Posted 08 November 2015 - 11:52 AM
I would love if Martin Campbell got another shot at introducing the next Bond, the guy that just knows how to do it, with style and substance.
I got agree with @tdalton, that it would be interesting to see Rupert Friend as 007, it's possible he and Campbell would make an interesting movie.
It's exciting just to imagine the possibilities that could happen with it.
#10
Posted 08 November 2015 - 06:00 PM
Craig (or any future Bond) will never revert back to old man Connery or Moore. Trust me, Spectre has nothing in the way of moon buggies, slide whistles, double taking pigeons or even making erection jokes with Madonna. Those days are long past and there is no more evidence of this than this latest entry.
#11
Posted 08 November 2015 - 11:34 PM
No more reboots, let's just keep on moving, even if Spectre is more "campy" than previous Craig movies, I would like to keep this current history and just move on with the story (and tie up loose ends with the end of Spectre). They've moved on before after incredibly campy (even if some are good and classic to more serious Bonds without rebooting before). Think YOLT-> OHMSS, or MR-> FYEO, AVTAK-> TLD.
So no, I don't want a reboot. What I could live with is 1) A one off "Period Piece", 2) Daniel Craig and Lea Seydoux basically starting a family (with her and their possible child being murdered by Blofeld, etc..) and then Bond coming back into service 3) Daniel Craig saying "no thanks...it's been fun guys, and a good ride, but I don't want to do another Bond", and then starting with a bang with a new actor (with the events of CR-Spectre having happened as this universe's "history").
#12
Posted 09 November 2015 - 02:12 AM
While I would rather not see another reboot, I agree that Spectre did have shades of the Moore Bond that I was less than thrilled to see. Craig's Bond has naturally evolved over the course of the four movies and should be allowed to continue to evolve without become a shadow of another actor's Bond.
I hope the producers keep that in mind as they plan the next film.
#13
Posted 09 November 2015 - 02:56 AM
I bet Martin Campbell (if he's honest) doesn't like the direction they're going. Maybe the critical response will cause a course change back toward CR waters?
That would be the same Martin Campbell who made GE - one of the most traditional Bond movies of them all?
Campbell did a great job with CR, but that's because that was the script he was given, so I'm not sure he should get as much credit as he seems to get for the "new direction." EON, regardless of how we feel about them, should get the bulk of the credit. It was their decision to base the script off the spirit of the novel, so that includes Bond getting his knackers whacked with a carpet beater and Vesper Lynd dying.
With moments such as those, there's not a lot of room for Boris, Minnie Driver singing and Joe Don Baker and his flabby tattoo...
#14
Posted 09 November 2015 - 03:29 AM
Good point about Campbell planattack. If they did go back to the CR formula, I do believe Campbell would be the perfect choice to fulfill the reincarnation of Craig's CR Bond. It would be really interesting to poll hardcore Bond fans (like on our board, for instance) and see which Craig persona they prefer? CR, QS, SF or SP. To me, SP took a quantum (no pun intended) leap backwards, toward Mooredom. It was like his gritty, intense personality was trying to get through (in certain scenes, like wIhen he first walks into his lair room, after putting on a ruse attitude, he gets that CR demeanor. Then, fade to Roger Moore tonality. Bottom line: trying to mix Roger Moore's bond and Daniel Craig's CR/QS Bond is like creating a Jekyll/Hyde paradox. Fans are like, "is he like Moore? Is he CR Bond?" I think it distracts people's attention, or it did mine. At many points, he takes out Spectre henchman without giving a thought. Then he struggles with "Oberhauser." It's like Bond isn't quite sure who he is. Although Craig's acting is ultra great, I blame the writer's and director for not clearly defining this film's Bond. I think only DC could make the movie enjoyable with this kind of direction.
#15
Posted 09 November 2015 - 05:02 AM
I wouldn't mind a new actor and Waltz returning. A YOLT kind of story but with a new actor.
#16
Posted 09 November 2015 - 10:07 AM
I thought SPECTRE struck just the right balance between the gritty and dramatic seriousness of the previous Craig films and the playfulness of some of the later Connery films. If they can maintain that tone for the foreseeable future without veering too far back in either direction, I don't think there will be any need for another tonal "reboot."
Couldn't agree more. I really enjoyed the balance that SPECTRE provided, and would like to see them continue in this direction!
#17
Posted 09 November 2015 - 10:12 AM
If James Bond reboots again in just over 10 years of doing it for the first time in it's then 44yr history, it spells a bad future for the franchise. We don't deserve, or need, this franchise to feel the need to reboot every time an actor takes on the lead. James Bond needs to regain a sense he is the same character as they did before, not keep changing everything we come to take on and accept.
DC's 007 universe is working, and even if/when he goes it should be maintained and not fearful that nobody could follow in his footsteps.
Because we all know Roger Moore killed the franchise after following the then definitive Connery. Actors changing the face of James Bond is possibly the ONE thing audiences and studios accept to keep the character alive in his world, and that needs to be continued and confidence shown with no more reboots to "play it safe".
#18
Posted 09 November 2015 - 10:42 AM
The irony of Spectre is that Daniel Craig is miscast as Bond in it, what with the Moore/late Connery touches. The interesting question now is what direction the producers take with Craig's fifth Bond. Back down to Earth like FYEO, or outlandish like 1967's YOLT (the irony being that a Shatterhand/Garden of Death story comes from the YOLT novel.)
Edited by Professor Pi, 09 November 2015 - 10:43 AM.
#19
Posted 09 November 2015 - 11:02 AM
I don't really agree with the perception that SPECTRE was "too Moore" or too light-hearted. Sure, there are some lighter moments, but overall, it's still relatively steeped in realism, compared with about three-quarters of the other movies.
As for another reboot, I honestly don't see what that would achieve. They can't simply do CASINO ROYALE all over again.
SPECTRE will take hundred of thousands at the global box office - and while the producers would undoubtedly appreciate a smoother production process for BOND 25 - I can't imagine they'll be rushing to change too much.
#20
Posted 09 November 2015 - 01:50 PM
I hope we never see another reboot. I liked "Casino Royale" just fine, but as a rule, I am not interested in "How Bond Became Bond." For that matter, I wish they'd skip the "origin stories" in superhero films and get straight to the good stuff, but especially with Bond, the more you "peel away the layers," the less interesting he becomes. Bond works best as a fully-formed figure with an air of mystery to him. It's fine to wonder, "Wow, what makes a man like that?" But it's almost always disappointing when the answers are given.
Anyway, returning to "the Casino Royale version" would not be a reboot, but a re-tread. A proper "reboot" brings something new to the table.
When Craig's successor shows up with a new take, I hope they handle it just like the "soft boots" for Moore, Dalton and Brosnan. "See this new guy? He's Bond now. Let's go!"
#21
Posted 09 November 2015 - 07:08 PM
I hope we never see another reboot. I liked "Casino Royale" just fine, but as a rule, I am not interested in "How Bond Became Bond."
I don't have a problem with a reboot but now is not the time. In another 20 years (god I will be close to 70!) it would make sense, but for the next actor perhaps two I don't think we need to do it.
#22
Posted 10 November 2015 - 03:07 AM
#23
Posted 10 November 2015 - 03:34 AM
It is written.
#24
Posted 10 November 2015 - 07:13 AM
What exactly would another reboot mean?
Starting again with Bond becoming Bond? Please, donĀ“t.
Starting with a fresh actor? Like they always did? Okay.
#25
Posted 10 November 2015 - 08:57 AM
Sometimes I think that I'd like to see Martin Campbell return for another Bond film. Then I remember Green Lantern.
#26
Posted 10 November 2015 - 09:47 AM
I couldn't agree more with this post. I think a lot of us are reading more into SPECTRE as a return to "your parent's Bond" than there actually is. Yes, there are nods to the classic era, and not just in the humour, but that's all they are. The film remains a Daniel Craig Bond film - tough, hard hitting and well acted all round.Just because there's a bit more tongue in cheek humor and classic elements this time around doesn't take away his humanity in the least. SPECTRE oozes Fleming's Bond. Those who disagree should re-read Fleming. I felt this film was the closest of the last three films to the tone of Casino Royale, a blend of all the best past elements of Bond.
Craig (or any future Bond) will never revert back to old man Connery or Moore. Trust me, Spectre has nothing in the way of moon buggies, slide whistles, double taking pigeons or even making erection jokes with Madonna. Those days are long past and there is no more evidence of this than this latest entry.
As for a reboot - I can't see the point. If you think about it, every time a new actor assumes the Bond role there's a sort of re-boot of the character at least. And that's all that's likely to happen. There's no need to re-cast everyone and re-start everything once Craig retires - just let "Bond 7" take up where Craig left off, and lets see how things develop.
#27
Posted 10 November 2015 - 10:04 AM
Agreed about the humour - the late Connery/early Moore bits stand out in SPECTRE only because they are in a Craig Bond film and seem unexpected. (The ITN reviewer described the film as "surprisingly funny" - but only I think in comparison with say QoS or SF. CR had humour, and the 1962-2002 films had a lot more, even the early Connery movies.)I don't really agree with the perception that SPECTRE was "too Moore" or too light-hearted. Sure, there are some lighter moments, but overall, it's still relatively steeped in realism, compared with about three-quarters of the other movies.
As for another reboot, I honestly don't see what that would achieve. They can't simply do CASINO ROYALE all over again.
SPECTRE will take hundred of thousands at the global box office - and while the producers would undoubtedly appreciate a smoother production process for BOND 25 - I can't imagine they'll be rushing to change too much.
As for the future direction - say Bond 25 - if it is a follow on from SPECTRE we could be looking at similar themes to OHMSS and the novel YOLT - neither likely to mine seams of camp humour. (Though admittedly Bond's remark to Blofeld in the novel YOLT about putting his geyser on broadway with Noel Coward writing the show and Irma Bunt as a she-devil did make me chuckle!)
Finally, we should remember that both Daniel Craig and Sam Mendes shared a common liking of the film LALD and the mid to late Connery/early Moore era - actually one of my favourite periods - so it always seemed possible that some of that style might pop up in a Craig Bond film at some point. His Bond has been on a journey of re-introduction, but that journey will soon be at an end. It's possible it will come full circle - another lost love, one way or another, before a final confrontation with a villain he came across so many times and yet, until now, he never saw.
#28
Posted 10 November 2015 - 01:45 PM
I'm in agreement with Guy and SecretAgentFan on this one. There are many precedents for "fresh starts" with new actors that didn't rewind Bond's life to Day One on the job and in the process erase a lot of history we know and love. Whatever virtues it may have, the Craig Reboot has hopelessly muddled any attempts to draw a "through-line" from Dr No to 2015. The pieces simply do not fit. Another reboot would only further complicate things by erasing the Craig era, too.
What seems to be at the root of this discussion is the question: Is the "Classic Bond" formula something to run towards, or away from? The Craig tenure has been all about "becoming Bond," with little teases here and there of the formula elements we remember, but always with edges yet to be smoothed, surfaces yet to be polished. Look folks, he hasn't yet learned not to fall in love. He doesn't care yet whether the drink is shaken or stirred. A girl has to teach him how a real tuxedo should be cut. He doesn't get a gunbarrel sequence until the end! But now he's had one, so he's officially Bond, right? Wait, no he isn't; he doesn't get one until the end of this next one, either. A couple years later and look, he's back again, but wait, now he's burned out and old and they want to put him out to pasture. Did we miss his whole career? He's got the Aston Martin in storage, so maybe we did. But no, we're just now meeting Moneypenny and Q and a male M, so maybe he's just starting after all. Yep, there's the gunbarrel at the end, so he's just starting. Only he's old already, hmm. Aha, 2015 and he's back again and it finally feels more like a traditional Bond. Yawn. Time for a reboot!
Almost ten years spent moving towards being more like the Bond we remember and now that he's here, we can't agree on whether that's something we actually wanted, after all. Somehow that figures...
#29
Posted 10 November 2015 - 04:22 PM
I'll be honest, after the wringer of Skyfall, I was glad to have the lighter elements. Other than a clunky bit with M towards the end, the humour never felt forced and never felt omni-present or having a bird do a double take or something.
it was nice to have Bond actually do a pretty decent job of things and being...kinda human.
#30
Posted 10 November 2015 - 09:11 PM