The content of all the books are far from perfect but that's not to say they shouldn't be adapted. Just get a screen writer who's worth a damn to adapt it and Bob is your proverbial. With regards to a break, as much as I'd rather have these movies out every year or 2 years, I can understand, particularly in today's climate of movies why maybe a 3 year gap is necessary. Since Craig took over the lead role, the character has regained that special, majestic presense that's been missing for maybe 2 decades. Also, competition from other movies is ridiculously high. You' ve got the superheroes, the rebooting of various characters/franchises...Bond needs to stand out. His presense on cinema screens mustn't be cheapened by seeing him too regularly i.e. every year.
Back in the 60s it was alright because Bond started the blockbuster revolution, plus they had strict source material to work from. Bond's time off is ultimately to recoup the majestic respect he so rightfully deserves.

How would Bond end?
Started by
RedKelly
, Apr 17 2009 01:09 AM
38 replies to this topic
#31
Posted 18 April 2009 - 12:56 PM
#32
Posted 18 April 2009 - 02:06 PM
As long as theres money to make, Bond will always return.
#33
Posted 18 April 2009 - 03:27 PM
The last few days, people here at the CBn forums have been discussing and talking about the end of James Bond. It all started after Michael G. Wilson said that they were taking a break to recharge the batteries. But doesn't that mean the excact opposite of what people are talking about? James Bond will last for at least another 25 years. Why? Because "Bond, James Bond" means money, lots of money.
#34
Posted 18 April 2009 - 03:28 PM
This latest discussion, sure. But I've been talking about whether or not EON should end their franchise with Craig for quite a while now.It all started after Michael G. Wilson said that they were taking a break to recharge the batteries.
#35
Posted 18 April 2009 - 03:49 PM
it's not a question of will it but should it.
I say no. I'm 22 and i'm finnaly getting excited about the bond franchie so no Ilove Casino Royale and Quantum of solace if another year is what it takes to give a film of that caliber fine I'm ok with that.
I say no. I'm 22 and i'm finnaly getting excited about the bond franchie so no Ilove Casino Royale and Quantum of solace if another year is what it takes to give a film of that caliber fine I'm ok with that.
#36
Posted 20 April 2009 - 12:55 PM
I wouldnt like the bond series to end either but if it came to a conclusion
i think they should bring back sean connery as a ageing 007. something along the lines of old snake in mgs4.
i think they should bring back sean connery as a ageing 007. something along the lines of old snake in mgs4.
#37
Posted 20 April 2009 - 01:54 PM
No way. MGS4 was just too painful to accept and too much of a departure from the previous titles in the series. I'm a die hard MGS fan and MGS4 just didn't cut the mustered. Old snake coughing and falling al over the place was bad enough. The last thing I want is my favourite Bond actor, Connery trotting around, getting his
bat by younger whipper-snappers.

#38
Posted 20 April 2009 - 05:25 PM
I'm seeing a lot of "Bond will never end", "Bond last's forever", "Money = Movies", but I'm not seeing a whole lot of thoughts about possible storylines to back up these "Bond won't end" arguments.
Let's get some thinking caps on and start throwing ideas about. You never know who's looking.
Let's get some thinking caps on and start throwing ideas about. You never know who's looking.

#39
Posted 21 April 2009 - 01:52 AM
Eon can just do what they've always done: Pay attention to the market; see what's popular and works, take some ideas straight from global headlines, come up with some entertaining action sequences, and throw a well-dressed action hero called "James Bond" in the middle of it (Hell, I'm looking forward to seeing Tyrone R'shaad Williams as Ian Fleming's James Bond 007 in Diamonds are Foreva-eva in 2062.)
If a series can last over 45 years and feature movies as drastically different in tone as Moonraker and Quantum of Solace, or even Die Anotehr Day and From Russia With Love, I'm pretty sure Eon knows how to keep a good thing going.
Also, I hate to say it, but does Ian Fleming even matter at this point? Sure, they went back to his material for the Craig era (mostly cause of the recently acquired CR) and it's always great to tap into the literary pool to get things back on track, but with most of Fleming's ideas thrown out after the first few films, you can bet Eon knows what they're doing and can find away to keep on doing it.
James Bond is a cultural icon. If one film happens to flop, they can just rethink the concept, recast the part, wait a couple of years and try again. It worked for Godzilla, it worked for Star Trek, and it sure as hell works for Bond.
I highly doubt anybody has anything to worry about.
If a series can last over 45 years and feature movies as drastically different in tone as Moonraker and Quantum of Solace, or even Die Anotehr Day and From Russia With Love, I'm pretty sure Eon knows how to keep a good thing going.
Also, I hate to say it, but does Ian Fleming even matter at this point? Sure, they went back to his material for the Craig era (mostly cause of the recently acquired CR) and it's always great to tap into the literary pool to get things back on track, but with most of Fleming's ideas thrown out after the first few films, you can bet Eon knows what they're doing and can find away to keep on doing it.
James Bond is a cultural icon. If one film happens to flop, they can just rethink the concept, recast the part, wait a couple of years and try again. It worked for Godzilla, it worked for Star Trek, and it sure as hell works for Bond.
I highly doubt anybody has anything to worry about.
Edited by Dr.Mirakle32, 21 April 2009 - 01:54 AM.