Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

Hopefully no wacky Q if he returns


32 replies to this topic

#1 Colossus

Colossus

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1490 posts
  • Location:SPECTRE Island

Posted 21 November 2006 - 09:23 PM

If in Bond 22 Q comes back along with Moneypenny, i hope that they make him more like Armorer in Dr. No and Q in From Russia with Love where he just walks in M's office and gives the gadget without any wacky antics especially since M is there, they both have to be disciplined, bringing some legitimacy to it. I always liked and miss the pre-Goldfinger gadget man.

#2 Judo chop

Judo chop

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7461 posts
  • Location:the bottle to the belly!

Posted 21 November 2006 - 10:29 PM

I imagine they'll be back in the next outing. My thought is that the 3 films Craig is to do (or at least the first 2) will slowly unfold the character, as well as his supporting cast, including Q and MP.

'Wacky' should never be allowed to describe anything put in Craig's way. Cleese's Q... No. I think the old Desmond Q of the 60's would work. Craig could play off that and still keep the edge he established in CR.

#3 Von Hammerstein

Von Hammerstein

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 570 posts
  • Location:Newark, De

Posted 21 November 2006 - 10:42 PM

Yes the frustrated, civil servant Q of Goldfinger and Thunderball. "I never joke about my work, 007" is the best version of Bond's foil.

#4 Daddy Bond

Daddy Bond

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2052 posts
  • Location:Back in California

Posted 21 November 2006 - 10:48 PM

Agreed. :)

#5 Mr_Wint

Mr_Wint

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2406 posts
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 21 November 2006 - 11:08 PM

If in Bond 22 Q comes back along with Moneypenny, i hope that they make him more like Armorer in Dr. No and Q in From Russia with Love where he just walks in M's office and gives the gadget without any wacky antics especially since M is there, they both have to be disciplined, bringing some legitimacy to it. I always liked and miss the pre-Goldfinger gadget man.

I dont understand what you are trying to say. As I see it, the character 'Q' has always been 100% serious and disciplined, from FRWL to TWINE! Maybe they should let James Bond be more disciplined and show Q more respect... nah that sounds boring :)

#6 AgentPB

AgentPB

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 407 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 21 November 2006 - 11:19 PM

Anybody else think that we might have already met Q in the defibrillator scene? The one who took charge in the bad jacket? What was he given credit for in the credits? I bet somebody would have noticed had it been Q but hey no hurt in trying!

#7 Mister Asterix

Mister Asterix

    Commodore RNVR

  • The Admiralty
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 15519 posts
  • Location:38.6902N - 89.9816W

Posted 21 November 2006 - 11:26 PM

I’m for taking the cue from Fleming and drop the name Q altogether. Stick with Q-Branch and Major Boothroyd aka the Armourer.

#8 shady ginzo

shady ginzo

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 346 posts

Posted 22 November 2006 - 12:35 AM

this is a flight of my imagination, but when I first saw Daniel Craig's bond smirking in one of the TV spots (the brief clip is infact his reaction to his conversation with Vesper on the train) it immediatly planted in my mind a flashback to Q scenes of the past, with bond playfully ammused at one of the Quartermaster's contraptions.

Having said that, after watching Casino Royale and being widly impressed by it, I can't say I would want Q to return, same for Moneypenny.

It now seems clear that their absence was a deliberate separation from bond films of old, Both characters served as "light relief" in the cinematic interpretation of Bond and such light heartedness would have been detremental to Casino Royale's plot, where humour is employed much more effectivly elsewhere (I'm talking about that torture scene)

I am enjoying this new era of Bond, and whether you see it as Bond 0, Bond Series 2 or plain old Bond 21, I personally would only accept Q back in a serious functional role which would hint towards the Q/Bond relationship and as for Moneypenny, I still think her removal was unneccesary initially but now Villiers has her role, I would like to see him in a few more films.

Edited by shady ginzo, 22 November 2006 - 12:38 AM.


#9 Colossus

Colossus

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1490 posts
  • Location:SPECTRE Island

Posted 22 November 2006 - 07:40 AM

[quote name='Mister Asterix' post='653761' date='21 November 2006 - 15:26']
[mra]I

#10 Double-Oh Agent

Double-Oh Agent

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4325 posts

Posted 22 November 2006 - 08:48 AM

Anybody else think that we might have already met Q in the defibrillator scene? The one who took charge in the bad jacket? What was he given credit for in the credits? I bet somebody would have noticed had it been Q but hey no hurt in trying!

I saw that man as just a doctor at MI6, not as Q. To me the guy who served in the Q/Maj. Boothroyd capacity was the mustached guy who put the chip in Bond's arm and scanned it.

#11 Sanjuro007

Sanjuro007

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 54 posts

Posted 22 November 2006 - 09:02 AM

Q should be a curmudgeonly old(er) Merlin to Craig's Bond. There should be humor, but it should come naturally in his interaction with Bond, not from forced gags.

I wonder whether he should be played by a relative unknown, a known actor in England but unknown in America, or an internationally renowned British actor.

Also, should he be called Q officially? Should he be called the Armourer/Quartermaster of Q Branch? Or should they split the difference and make "Q" the nickname Bond comes up with during their first encounter?

Edited by Sanjuro007, 22 November 2006 - 09:04 AM.


#12 KM16

KM16

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 99 posts

Posted 22 November 2006 - 02:36 PM

I agree with the Major Boothroyd statement. But I hopefully wish they get Hugh Laurie or someone like him. Everytime I watch the show House M.D. now I can always picture him as Q giving Bond that serious manner with witty remarks to the side as if it's only natural, yet it's only faintly registered.

#13 RJJB

RJJB

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 475 posts

Posted 22 November 2006 - 02:51 PM

I really do not care if Q or Moneypenny are re-introduced. I got very tired of the obligatory scenes with the characters and I will hate it if the producers go back to a punchlist method type of movie making. They've made a fresh start. I hope they do not capitulate to some sense of tradition and take a few steps backwards.

#14 Red Barchetta

Red Barchetta

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1161 posts
  • Location:Seattle, WA, USA

Posted 22 November 2006 - 02:58 PM

I think Q should return, although in a serious role. John Cleese would be good, if he played it seriously, but he's already shown to be somewhat of a comic foil to Pierce, so he probably wouldn't work.

Maybe someone like Michael Caine? Or, is he wrapped up with Batman?

They should (re)introduce Q-Branch, and Major B., who Bond just starts calling 'Q'.

#15 killkenny kid

killkenny kid

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6607 posts
  • Location:Albany, New York

Posted 22 November 2006 - 05:38 PM

[quote name='Mister Asterix' post='653761' date='21 November 2006 - 18:26']
[mra]I

#16 Moore Baby Moore

Moore Baby Moore

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 101 posts

Posted 22 November 2006 - 06:15 PM

I liked the Q in Never Say Never Again, the geeky younger tech guy who gets giddy with excitement when he sees Bond and begs him to bring back "some gratuitous sex and violence." I wouldn't mind seeing Q revived in that capacity, being a younger guy who doesn't get out much and lives vicariously through Bond's adventures.

But if we must go for an older Boothroyd/Q, then I'd want to distance him as much from the previous versions as possible. Make him a former field agent, maybe even have him injured to the point where he can't serve anymore. Make him a mentor figure to Bond rather than a verbal sparring partner. Give him a fresh spin.

#17 booyeah_

booyeah_

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 881 posts
  • Location:United States

Posted 23 November 2006 - 03:19 PM

Q should be a curmudgeonly old(er) Merlin to Craig's Bond. There should be humor, but it should come naturally in his interaction with Bond, not from forced gags.

I wonder whether he should be played by a relative unknown, a known actor in England but unknown in America, or an internationally renowned British actor.

Also, should he be called Q officially? Should he be called the Armourer/Quartermaster of Q Branch? Or should they split the difference and make "Q" the nickname Bond comes up with during their first encounter?



I'm with you there 100%, humor should be avoided (I love Q as a serious technician with Bond not taking Q's work serious) but forced gags are a bit much and campy. I see no problem with Cleese or another British comedian (Rowan atkinson?) so long as they aren't goofy. Q is a fine title and makes sense considering S and M

#18 I Like Sharks

I Like Sharks

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 291 posts

Posted 25 November 2006 - 11:24 AM

The part of Q isn't what it was without Desmond Llewlyn or to a lesser extent John Cleese who would'nt fit into Craig's films. If they do bring back Q I agree it should be played straight, not so much as the Q we know but very low key-just some man handing out gadgets who dosn't really know Bond outside of his duties of supplying equipment when requested by M.

#19 Marquis

Marquis

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 456 posts
  • Location:North London

Posted 25 November 2006 - 11:31 AM

I'm hoping Casino Royale has been set as the template for the rest of the Daniel Craig era, in that we've now dispensed with the childish tomfoolery, and the films will have a much 'straighter' tone in all departments...i.e. no John Cleese rolling around in an inflatable jacket! I'm all for a little humour injected into proceedings, as long as it's well-written, sharp & witty.

#20 booyeah_

booyeah_

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 881 posts
  • Location:United States

Posted 25 November 2006 - 08:40 PM

I'm hoping Casino Royale has been set as the template for the rest of the Daniel Craig era, in that we've now dispensed with the childish tomfoolery, and the films will have a much 'straighter' tone in all departments...i.e. no John Cleese rolling around in an inflatable jacket! I'm all for a little humour injected into proceedings, as long as it's well-written, sharp & witty.



I always liked the Q scene from TND best, if thats considered straight.

#21 Blabbermouth

Blabbermouth

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 142 posts

Posted 01 December 2006 - 10:03 AM

I would bring back both Major Boothroyd and Moneypenny in future films, but only if they serve a serious purpose. In this techno world there will be gadgets in the films, hopefully the will keep them to a minimum and serious though.
Moneypenny should return to liking Bond. In Moonraker the novel, it states that they like each other and that Moneypenny knows that Bond is attracted to her. She should be used in a serious way - not for comic relief.

Who should play them - well I cannot say really, but no former Bonds, no Michael Caine or any other star. Serious character actors.

#22 Mr.Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

Mr.Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 211 posts
  • Location:Belgium (Gent)

Posted 01 December 2006 - 02:23 PM

Maybe someone like Michael Caine?

Yes, I would like that! :)

#23 00Twelve

00Twelve

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7706 posts
  • Location:Kingsport, TN

Posted 01 December 2006 - 02:34 PM

I'm with Evan. Major Boothroyd should appear perhaps once in a while, not even every film. And I'm certainly fine without a big Q-Branch lab scene.

#24 Zorin Industries

Zorin Industries

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5634 posts

Posted 01 December 2006 - 02:34 PM

Or MONEYPENNY for that matter.

I get the feeling M's male assistant in CASINO ROYALE could be a MONEYPENNY by stealth. Bring it on if so. If the age of a wacky gadget master is behind us, then so are the Angel Delight flirtations of a man and his secretary. BOND and MONEYPENNY is all a bit colonial England now....

#25 Blonde Bond

Blonde Bond

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2006 posts
  • Location:Station T , Finland

Posted 02 December 2006 - 01:23 AM

I wouldn't mind if the guy, who inserted the transmitter in Bond's arm, would be the next Q.

I liked how the scene was handled. Just business, no bull's [censored].
Especially I liked how the only remark directed towards the guy, who's only doing his job, is an ironical "ouch", and then back to the briefing.

Edited by Blonde Bond, 02 December 2006 - 01:23 AM.


#26 tdalton

tdalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 11680 posts

Posted 02 December 2006 - 03:43 AM

I would like to see Q return, although I would want it to be in the more serious tone of the first couple of films rather than the jokey style of the more recent films. If I were casting the role, I'd look at actors like Sam Neill or Jason Isaacs to fill the role instead of looking for comical actors.

#27 Double-Oh-Zero

Double-Oh-Zero

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3167 posts
  • Location:Ottawa, Ontario (via Brantford)

Posted 02 December 2006 - 04:32 AM

I wouldn't mind a tech-guy appearing briefly and taking up three minutes to explain a gadget or suggest a gun.

I wouldn't mind John Cleese reappearing, either.

I would mind if it was done in a daft, self-indugent manner (re: anything after TB).

#28 capungo

capungo

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 357 posts
  • Location:Filet of Soul, NYC

Posted 02 December 2006 - 05:04 AM

Given that I recall hearing either Wilson, Babs, or Craig mention Q and Moneypenny possibly being reintroduced in the next one, I say it's a good chance we'll have it, and I for one would love to see him return, so long as(biggest point) the story requires him. Unlike what some people say, I think humor is a necessary element with q, otherwise all we'd get is a tedious rundown of what his gadgets do. I think the key point is that the humor doesn't come from gadget slapstick and stale one liners. Just imagine how good Craig would be in a sequence like the prototypical Q scene in Goldfinger. Just nail the dynamic of Q not liking how Bond abuses the gadgets real well, and let the personalities play off each other NATURALLY.

Also, I wouldn't mind seeing Q's respect for Bond develop over the next few movies, so we can sort of see that dynamic of the friendship between them a la TWINE. Even though Bond can annoy Q a great deal, I think that that uniqueness of character is quite endearing to Q. Couple that with the fact that Bond is one of the few 00s without a short lifespan, and I'm sure Q is able to appreciate the special man he is.

As for casting, I'd be rather indifferent to John Cleese coming back, but if they were to recast, I've got 2 ideas.
A. First off, after watching some Shaun of the Dead, I think it'd be interesting to see what Bill Nighy would do to the role. Maybe try to have him be a relic of the sorts of English gentlemen we usually see during those MI6 briefings in the Connery days.
B. Hugh Laurie. He may be a bit of an untraditional choice for the role, but I think he could carve out something special with the character. Just imagine in your head how a scene with him as Q would play out. Pretty damned great, no?

Edited by capungo, 02 December 2006 - 05:08 AM.


#29 Blonde Bond

Blonde Bond

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2006 posts
  • Location:Station T , Finland

Posted 02 December 2006 - 07:46 AM

B. Hugh Laurie. He may be a bit of an untraditional choice for the role, but I think he could carve out something special with the character. Just imagine in your head how a scene with him as Q would play out. Pretty damned great, no?


Just equip him with a cane, make him very stuck-up in his manners, and we're set to go !

#30 tdalton

tdalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 11680 posts

Posted 02 December 2006 - 08:50 AM

B. Hugh Laurie. He may be a bit of an untraditional choice for the role, but I think he could carve out something special with the character. Just imagine in your head how a scene with him as Q would play out. Pretty damned great, no?


I think that he would probably be a very good Q as well. He would probably be able to strike a great balance between the seriousness that Q would need within this new reboot as well as be able to mix some humor into the part as well.