4014 replies to this topic

[S K Y F A L L]

I'd hate to see new Bond's around for just two films, I mean why not just have them do one film and move on?

Make every film a new Bond actor, then every film will just be an introduction to the new Bond. 

Who needs continuity that s***s for franchises that know what they are doing.

 

F*** wish we got that 5th PB film, oh wait he was to old and his voice is gone so f*** it.

007, more like 004 if your lucky.

 

Albert R Broccoli and Harry Saltzman were probably hitting the bong to much in the 60's to realize people would be sick of Connery after two films.

And Moore, what were they thinking 7 films? Holy s***, what drugs were they doing in the 70's and 80's to let that one get by?

How is the franchise even around anymore?

[SecretAgentFan]

Drugs are very bad.

[S K Y F A L L]

Ask your Doctor, ask your dad.

[Odd Jobbies]

Definitely no more Bond Begins origin stories 'til at least Bond 9.

 

Whomever they cast, young or old there will need to be iconic moments that allow the actor to own the role and for Eon to say, here you go, this is now Bond, please forget the predecessors.

 

Having an early 30s Bond doesn't mean the whole origin thing over again. I'm sure Eon would prefer a younger Bond; cheaper, probably more open to a multi-fim contract and a longer tenure before having to do this over again (assuming gets the ok from critics and audience).

 

Problem is that an older, more established actor (but not a 'superstar') is a surer bet.

[S K Y F A L L]

Seriously though as a fan growing up with the Brosnan era I think it would be nice to see Craig make it to five films and conclude his tenure. 

[Surrie]

Seriously though as a fan growing up with the Brosnan era I think it would be nice to see Craig make it to five films and conclude his tenure. 

 

Couldn't agree more. 

[SecretAgentFan]

But at this point I really don´t see what Craig could bring to the role which he did not do already.  

 

Which also plays right into the kind of movie that the fifth one would be.

 

Craig has injected a little bit more lightness into some scenes of SPECTRE - but the main thread again is serious, troubled, dark, personal.  What else can he bring to the table?

 

I believe every actor gets as many films as he can carry.  I don´t think another Brosnan Bond would have given us something we had not seen from him.  Nor another Dalton entry.  Lazenby, well not even him since his acting ability was limited and his performance constructed in the editing room.   

 

Which leaves Connery and Moore - both having longer tenures than the others at a different time of the franchise when the films were not constructed to be serious and dark but light and fun.  And regardless of what one thinks about DAF, Connery actually managed to give his portrayal of Bond another element there.  Yet, one could argue that even YOLT was one too many for him.  Sir Roger could go from light to more serious in his fifth film and at least visibly had fun in his sixth film.  And his age in AVTAK was again a new element for him to play off on - like Connery did in NSNA.  But more from them?  No, that wouldn´t have worked.

 

I believe the series needs a new actor bringing a fresh start.

[plankattack]

But at this point I really don´t see what Craig could bring to the role which he did not do already.  

 

Which also plays right into the kind of movie that the fifth one would be.

 

Craig has injected a little bit more lightness into some scenes of SPECTRE - but the main thread again is serious, troubled, dark, personal.  What else can he bring to the table?

 

I believe every actor gets as many films as he can carry.  I don´t think another Brosnan Bond would have given us something we had not seen from him.  Nor another Dalton entry.  Lazenby, well not even him since his acting ability was limited and his performance constructed in the editing room.   

 

Which leaves Connery and Moore - both having longer tenures than the others at a different time of the franchise when the films were not constructed to be serious and dark but light and fun.  And regardless of what one thinks about DAF, Connery actually managed to give his portrayal of Bond another element there.  Yet, one could argue that even YOLT was one too many for him.  Sir Roger could go from light to more serious in his fifth film and at least visibly had fun in his sixth film.  And his age in AVTAK was again a new element for him to play off on - like Connery did in NSNA.  But more from them?  No, that wouldn´t have worked.

 

I believe the series needs a new actor bringing a fresh start.

 

I agree that DC has done all he can do with the role, unless one takes the DAF route and constructs a film that, with the perspective of time, is tonally so different from the ones that preceded it.

 

But it's interesting, in both this and  the MGM-3/4 years thread, there is a large slice of the fanbase that want the films to return to the one-off self contained style that is the series pre-2006. With that thought, does the series need a fresh start?

 

No opinion of my own - I've enjoyed DC's run and would happily watch him in one more, but if he's done, he's done, get someone else in. But I do think that this then would be the moment for EON to check back in with its relationship with its lead character. The DC era has attempted (with some but not complete success) to present the character as a plot point in himself, rather than something to hang a film around. If DC returned, the next film would very much be the latter, but if it's to be a new actor, what is the direction - one-offs, arcs, what have you? 

[sunset]

Something tells me I am not the only one tired of waiting for more "real" next Bond info.  DC has been great, and IF he returns that would be awesome.  I just binged on Poldark, and I like Turner very much, but I trust EON to make the right choice.  Soon - I hope!

[Dustin]

No opinion of my own - I've enjoyed DC's run and would happily watch him in one more, but if he's done, he's done, get someone else in. But I do think that this then would be the moment for EON to check back in with its relationship with its lead character. The DC era has attempted (with some but not complete success) to present the character as a plot point in himself, rather than something to hang a film around. If DC returned, the next film would very much be the latter, but if it's to be a new actor, what is the direction - one-offs, arcs, what have you?

It's hard to imagine now a Bond film with Craig that is 'just' a simple adventure. After SKYFALL it would have been possible to play that card; the 'issues' were resolved and Bond was in his rightful place. But since the entire run has been wrapped into a parcel and designated "The Oh-Oh Seven Against Thebes Cycle" it's pointless to hope for a 'regular' self-contained storyline. If they did something along those lines - doubtful but not impossible - Craig's tenure would look rather strange. And whoever takes over will have an even worse task ahead of him.

[S K Y F A L L]

Well it's not entirely just up to Craig to bring something new to his Bond, there are the producers and writers whom have to do the same thing. Just because there is doubt Craig could not bring something new does not mean he wont, and I'd give him and the crew the benefit of the doubt. I don't understand why a 5th Craig film couldn't have a little more fun and be anything they want it to be.

 

There are strange prerequisites that seem to come with the films for some reason, it seems that if there was a 5th Brosnan film it would be just like DAD however I don't understand that logic. I'd say do something like FYEO like they did after MR but that clearly was not the case. As pointed out above if Craig returned for a 5th film and it did not feature Blofeld it might seem a little strange but would EON go down this root if they didn't have a plan in place or was there plan all along to only do 4 Craig films?

 

Less films in a actors tenure means more introduction films and who needs those? I don't want to see 'a fresh start' every three films. It is a little much don't you think? They only re-introduced M, Q, and Moneypenny and I'd hate to watch all these characters be introduced again when they haven't even done 3 films. If it was up to me I'd keep M and Q around for Bond 7. 

 

Having more introduction films and new faces does not exactly mean they'll be bringing new things to the franchise. And after so many introduction films what is going to be left to re-introduce? There are so many times you can make something new before it becomes something different altogether. 

[Tiin007]

Well it's not entirely just up to Craig to bring something new to his Bond, there are the producers and writers whom have to do the same thing. Just because there is doubt Craig could not bring something new does not mean he wont, and I'd give him and the crew the benefit of the doubt. I don't understand why a 5th Craig film couldn't have a little more fun and be anything they want it to be.

 

There are strange prerequisites that seem to come with the films for some reason, it seems that if there was a 5th Brosnan film it would be just like DAD however I don't understand that logic. I'd say do something like FYEO like they did after MR but that clearly was not the case. As pointed out above if Craig returned for a 5th film and it did not feature Blofeld it might seem a little strange but would EON go down this root if they didn't have a plan in place or was there plan all along to only do 4 Craig films?

 

Less films in a actors tenure means more introduction films and who needs those? I don't want to see 'a fresh start' every three films. It is a little much don't you think? They only re-introduced M, Q, and Moneypenny and I'd hate to watch all these characters be introduced again when they haven't even done 3 films. If it was up to me I'd keep M and Q around for Bond 7. 

 

Having more introduction films and new faces does not exactly mean they'll be bringing new things to the franchise. And after so many introduction films what is going to be left to re-introduce? There are so many times you can make something new before it becomes something different altogether. 

 

I agree 100%, SKYFALL. One of the defining characteristics of the Connery-Lazenby-Moore era was the consistency of actors back at MI6. I'd keep up that tradition. Fiennes, Whishaw, and Harris are all great, and I'd be thrilled to have them all around for decades. 

[hoagy]

Regardless of whether Craig appears for the next one, Is it true that in the next film they will start dropping hints that M and Moneypenny are an item ?  and if Craig won't come back, how about his brother as an agent ?  His brother is the next most capable guy in the world, after all, and now has that manly scar......yeah....I'm just throwing wrenches.  One of the nice aspects about the series in earlier days was the fact that fans could only wait for the next one and see it upon release.  Now, people write about how the producers "must do" something or other, and that a decision "must" be made, and the fans are "owed" something.  All that is quite ridiculous.  It's fun to come up with interesting plots, casting and so on, but it's EON's property to manage.  A reasonable reconsideration, a deep breath, relax and enjoy spinning plotlines and possibilities, but it's someone else's property.  Oh, and also, those vehicles escaping from Blofeld's desert crater lair (upper left of the screen during and after the explosion), sure, one had Blofeld, but another has the Queen's corgis, with laser beams stuck to their heads.

[sharpshooter]

Let's see if Craig drops any hints on October 7. As a fan who grew up with Brosnan, I'd like to see Craig break the four film barrier. And I don't necessarily think he needs to bring anything else to the table to justify a return. He's widely known as James Bond, and loved for it. And that's enough for me.

[SecretAgentFan]

"Beyond Bond" makes me curious, too - but as already stated it´s highly unlikely that it will offer new insights instead of the usual "nothing´s decided right now"-statements.

 

What I meant with Craig having done all he can is this: every actor has a specific acting range.  I believe Craig has tested out everything he can and wants to do with Bond.  I think he already said that in an interview for SPECTRE.

 

What would be left?  More camp like Connery embraced in DAF? 

 

I can´t imagine that would be what Craig would like, especially not for a last outing.

 

And another "this time it´s personal"-arc would bore me completely.

 

At first, when I heard that the last line of SPECTRE was supposed to be "We have all the time in the world" I was very disappointed that that line was cut.

 

But now I think it was a merciful decision.  Even if Craig re-introduced Bond to a new generation and was essential for rebooting the character and the ensemble, it does not mean he should re-do the whole history of the franchise.

 

That´s why I now believe that it would be a mistake to give him the "Garden of Death"-scenario.  That one was earned by the whole built-up with Bond going against Blofeld for many years, culminating in Blofeld killing Tracy and Bond drowning in a sea of self-doubt and self-hate.  Even if SPECTRE wanted us to believe that CraigBond was fighting Blofeld from the beginning it would feel just as constructed to have him kill Blofeld in the next film.  The same applies to Madeleine.  She is not Tracy, and Bond´s feelings for her are not even close either.  

 

No, I don´t want CraigBond to redo Bond film history at all.  It would be undeserved and unnecessary.

 

If Craig returns then in a stand-alone adventure that should lose the personal trappings and focus on him being a true undoubted professional.

[Odd Jobbies]

Bond producer Callum McDougall on BBC Radio 4s today program, this morning said they want Craig back if he'll do it - he's Barbara's number 1 choice....

[plankattack]

 

 

That´s why I now believe that it would be a mistake to give him the "Garden of Death"-scenario.  That one was earned by the whole built-up with Bond going against Blofeld for many years, culminating in Blofeld killing Tracy and Bond drowning in a sea of self-doubt and self-hate.  Even if SPECTRE wanted us to believe that CraigBond was fighting Blofeld from the beginning it would feel just as constructed to have him kill Blofeld in the next film.  The same applies to Madeleine.  She is not Tracy, and Bond´s feelings for her are not even close either.  

 

 

I had this very thought the other day (just finished re-reading YOLT...). As much as I like the idea of the Garden of Death as a setting/set-piece, it's earned by everything that's gone before, an almost psychedelic end to a trilogy that's really put the hero through the ringer. But unless DC was to go about 8 films, I'd hate to see the series waste arguably what's best of what's left to be adapted, by rushing into it.

 

Not that DC's tenure is not worthy of it - I think as an actor he could sell Bond at this point in his life better than any of the other guys (no disrespect to them); it's just that YOLT works so well because of the books before.

 

SAF a disturbing thought - perhaps we are long-lost brothers ourselves......

[Toxteth_OGrady]

Bit more on today's story...

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk...t-arts-37517067

[SecretAgentFan]

Bit more on today's story...

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk...t-arts-37517067

 

Now, that is finally one reliable statement.

 

Although it still does not clear anything up.  Sure, they want him back.  But will he be back?

 

 

 

That´s why I now believe that it would be a mistake to give him the "Garden of Death"-scenario.  That one was earned by the whole built-up with Bond going against Blofeld for many years, culminating in Blofeld killing Tracy and Bond drowning in a sea of self-doubt and self-hate.  Even if SPECTRE wanted us to believe that CraigBond was fighting Blofeld from the beginning it would feel just as constructed to have him kill Blofeld in the next film.  The same applies to Madeleine.  She is not Tracy, and Bond´s feelings for her are not even close either.  

 

 

I had this very thought the other day (just finished re-reading YOLT...). As much as I like the idea of the Garden of Death as a setting/set-piece, it's earned by everything that's gone before, an almost psychedelic end to a trilogy that's really put the hero through the ringer. But unless DC was to go about 8 films, I'd hate to see the series waste arguably what's best of what's left to be adapted, by rushing into it.

 

Not that DC's tenure is not worthy of it - I think as an actor he could sell Bond at this point in his life better than any of the other guys (no disrespect to them); it's just that YOLT works so well because of the books before.

 

SAF a disturbing thought - perhaps we are long-lost brothers ourselves......

 

 

Cuckoo?

[Tiin007]

The news is reassuring in the following sense: it means EON have not yet been informed by Craig that he is definitely hanging up the tux now. 

 

With the dearth of actual news in recent months, I'd assumed it was highly likely that Craig had already left the role, but an official announcement was pending (either due to the distribution deal or the search for a new Bond). 

 

This news tells us that such is not the case.

 

(In fact, I think it's entirely possible that Craig has expressed interest in returning, just that nothing is set in stone.)

 

Regardless, as I've been saying for quite a while now, I'd love for Craig to return. 

[sharpshooter]

As a fan who wants Craig back, this news doesn't really advance the situation either way, but it's reassuring that he's still their number one choice.

[RMc2]

It's a relief to hear Craig hasn't yet confirmed his departure to EON.

 

At least we know where we stand, even if we're no closer to having an answer re: Bond 25...

[Dustin]

Well, strictly speaking it doesn't say anything about whether Craig himself said anything either way, just that they hope to have him back. That could also mean by offering more influence, money or whatever else Craig fancies; perhaps even funding/co-funding a production of Craig's choice. In the end something along those lines might be more interesting for him than mere cash.

[SecretAgentFan]

Craig is just the current and very popular Bond.  Of course, they want him back instead of trying out a new guy who might have to deal with enormous backlash.

 

If the internet had been around in ´67 I´m sure EON would have said: Yes, Sean Connery is still our number one choice and we want him back.

 

My prediction: Craig does not want to go again, he is as fed up with the role as Connery was after YOLT.  And SPECTRE was specifically designed by him as a co-producer to end his tenure.

[SecretAgentFan]

And again... 

 

http://www.vanityfai...TAyMDA1NDk0OAS2

[S K Y F A L L]

 

My prediction: Craig does not want to go again, he is as fed up with the role as Connery was after YOLT.  And SPECTRE was specifically designed by him as a co-producer to end his tenure.

Never looked at it like that before, good catch. 

 

And again... 

 

http://www.vanityfai...TAyMDA1NDk0OAS2

and thanks for posting again...

[SecretAgentFan]

Good article on the whole situation: 

http://www.denofgeek...mes-bond-series

[Agent 76]

Maybe Daniel and Eon have had secret talks, and Craig told them he wouldn't return for another movie. With that, perhaps they agreed that Craig would announce his retirement from 007 duties at this "beyond bond" interview, and then Eon would give a press conference to reveal the plan for the near future.

By the way, did Eon ever gave a press conference announcing the retirement of Piercefrom the role back in 2002/2003 period, or just a press release?

[univex]

A press release, if that - i think.

 

I don´t think the beyond Bond thing is a Bond related event at all. 

 

And I´ve changed my mind after rewatching Skyfall today (what a brilliant, beautifully shot film that was). I really, really want Craig to have his YOLT(novel). Japan, barracudas, garden of death, Tiger Tanaka, amnesia, all of it. Done right. 

 

So, here it is, my vote with a change of heart. One more fore Craig. And I don´t care when.

[Odd Jobbies]

I'd imagine that a conference needs a positive announcement, such as the new Bond. Bad news is best released in the press.

A press release, if that - i think.

 

I don´t think the beyond Bond thing is a Bond related event at all. 

 

And I´ve changed my mind after rewatching Skyfall today (what a brilliant, beautifully shot film that was). I really, really want Craig to have his YOLT(novel). Japan, barracudas, garden of death, Tiger Tanaka, amnesia, all of it. Done right. 

 

So, here it is, my vote with a change of heart. One more fore Craig. And I don´t care when.

They should jump at the chance to do YOLT some justice while they've got an actor who's proven he can do Bond justice.

 

Like i've said, the opening of YOLT's sequel (because that's exactly what it is) is a perfect way to introduce a new actor to the audience - with him having to re-learn his identity over again. That's the softest of reboots - the last thing the franchise needs now is another hard reboot.