7 replies to this topic

[JimmyBond]

We know Bond 20 will be a fairly hard edged Bond film(well, we dont know for sure, but it sure seems like it will be), so what would the producers do for Bond 21?

Lets say Bond20 does poorly at the Box office(hope not, but just as an example), the producers may want to go to familiar territory, and since the Moore films were more or less successful, its a possibilty.

On the other hand, the most likely thing to happen in Bond20 will be big(like Brosnans last 3) and make a sizeable profit, in that case, Bond 21 might strive for more hard edged realism.

So, what do you guys think? I myself feel they should push on with the hard edged Bond. Brosnan proved he can be mean(any number of scenes in TWINE prove this) and ruthless. In the end though, its not my decision but the producers.

[JimmyBond]

Of course we cant predict the tone of Bond21. Bond 20 on the other hand does sound like its gonna go down the TWINE path, with its tone. Which in itself was like Living Daylights(in tone of course). Lets look at what we know of Bond 20(not much, admittingly):

Bond beats the villian at some sort of game(presumably a card game).

Bond crosses swords with a Bond girl(presumably, a sort fight..I hope )

Two elements that would work in a serious toned film or a lighter toned Roger Moore type film. Then we got to remember that P&W are writing #20, and they were responsible for the change from TND's action to TWINE's action/thriller plot.

[RossMan]

I'd like to see them more like the Dalton films, grittier, realistic, Flemingish, and a darker, brooding Bond. I enjoy the farfetched movies like TSWLM or YOLT but how many different world domination plots can they make up( and how many times can we ask the question, "why doesn't the villain just kill Bond right there instead having these elaborate schemes set up to get him") And with Austin Powers movies coming out regularly, it would be better for the more serious, down to earth Bond.

[ShockTroop22]

Although Bond should always have his classic one lines (i.e. That depends on your definition of safe sex etc.). It has to be said...
EON should NEVER (i dont care if i should "never say never"), NEVER EVER turn the Bond series into straight out comedy... It would be a terrible idea and would being going head to head with Austin Powers. And it has to be said, Mike Myers and Jay Roach are a hell of a lot funnier than Neal Purvis and Robert Wade are.
So i agree with the earlier post the Bond should either stay as he is, or go for a more Fleming'ish approach.

[Simon]

I would hazard a guess that the mood or trend of the series would be determined by the lead actor. So following that maxim, I would say that so long as Brosnan is at the helm, we can continue to enjoy the current style of output.

Since there aren't too many Bond actor potentials for following Brosnan's reign, they will probably search for the right look and acting ability, and then swerve the films to the actor's strengths. Not too new an observation since history plays that one out. So it is probably a redundant question until we see who steps in to the shoes next.

What I would say is to go for one particular style within a movie and not try to appeal to absolutely everyone with suggestions of grittiness, moments of brutality and episodes of campy laughs. Make the good film and the success will follow, don't just follow the marketing checklist.

[zerozeroseven]

The last three Bond films have been huge hits. From what we've seen in those three, the producers don't seem to be taking too many chances, and this will probably continue in Bond 20 and 21. I expect the same fun action and world domination plots (they do not seem to run out of these however unlikely they may be), more extravaganzas like GF, TSWLM, YOLT, TND, and GE. I know they won't show us outright humor like in TMWTGG. I expect the same amount of laughs as the last three and roughly the same amount of realism. They've found a successful mix. I'd love to see a gritty, serious License to Kill or FRWL, but it's a financial risk. They'll change gears if Bond 20 fails, but it won't. They changed gears after Moonraker to make it more real and FYEO was a better film, but it made less money than Moonraker. I think they'd prefer to make more money. Which is OK. The movie will still be great.

[James Page]

Good thread!!!

I think the scale of the movies starts at Moonraker and ends at License To Kill.

I lilked the pitch of TWINE, but for me, Bond should stick to the pitch of The Living Daylights. Serious, good action, and some laughs thrown in too (but not too many!). Maybe the style TLD with a couple of extra women thrown in would be best?

[zencat]

I'm not sure we can make a prediction about the tone of Bond 21 because, as you pointed out, it depends on the boxoffice performance of Bond 20...and I not sure we know yet the tone of Bond 20. Hard edged? A face-changing machine sounds like it might be a bit more fantastic to me.

For me, I like the tone of Goldfinger, TSWLM, Octopussy, and GoldenEye... Slightly fantastic plots with a heavy dose of Bondian wit, but not at the expense of the tension.