4014 replies to this topic

[DaveBond21]

I think the issue is that the producers have an idea for 2 movies, maybe rounding off the Blofeld story.

 

I can imagine the scenario is that Christoph Waltz has in principle agreed to both, and now they need to convince Daniel to do 2 more, completing the arc that he started in SPECTRE. Or do they go with a new guy?

 

I wonder if they would recast Blofeld if they recast 007?

[TheREAL008]

As much as I like Waltz in the role I doubt he'd stay on if Daniel walks.

[byline]

Craig on bored

 

Freudian slip?

[sharpshooter]

I think the issue is that the producers have an idea for 2 movies, maybe rounding off the Blofeld story.
 
I can imagine the scenario is that Christoph Waltz has in principle agreed to both, and now they need to convince Daniel to do 2 more, completing the arc that he started in SPECTRE. Or do they go with a new guy?
 
I wonder if they would recast Blofeld if they recast 007?

They may have to wrap the arc up in one film if they want Craig to return at all.

[Surrie]

 

I think the issue is that the producers have an idea for 2 movies, maybe rounding off the Blofeld story.
 
I can imagine the scenario is that Christoph Waltz has in principle agreed to both, and now they need to convince Daniel to do 2 more, completing the arc that he started in SPECTRE. Or do they go with a new guy?
 
I wonder if they would recast Blofeld if they recast 007?

They may have to wrap the arc up in one film if they want Craig to return at all.

 

 

If that's the case then we'd NEED script writers who are on point, and can create a story for a 2.5 hour film that doesn't fall flat in parts. 

[Odd Jobbies]

 

Craig on bored

 

Freudian slip?

 

Indeed!  Good catch

[Gay Bond]

I'm looking at DR NO as I write this I'm thinking in 2016 there is CLEARLY no one quite like Sean.

Certainly not from the bankable names I've seen, no. If only the studios would take a chance on an unknown.

[Surrie]

I agree, an unknown would be best. Mainly because I won't have any preconceptions of them already... I find it harder to see the likes of Hiddleston in the role when I have already watched him in other projects.

[hoagy]

Seriously ?  Connery was an "unknown" when cast, but not really.  He'd been in a number of films and played the male lead in them.  Same for Craig.  Moore, Dalton and Brosnan all had higher profiles before taking the role than either Connery or Craig, but, even for them, not as high as from playing Bond.  (Lazenby, of course, was the least known before, and made just one 007 film.)  "Unknown" is a relative term.  In other words, the actors whom fans and magazines have discussed all qualify for varying levels of "unknown", though Hugh Jackman and Idris Elba less so.  Both of them likely are too old for the part at this point.

[Surrie]

"Unknown" is a relative term, you are right. However, when I think of the term this does not include actors who the media are set on establishing as 007 before they were even considered. 

[Guy Haines]

I think the issue is that the producers have an idea for 2 movies, maybe rounding off the Blofeld story.
 
I can imagine the scenario is that Christoph Waltz has in principle agreed to both, and now they need to convince Daniel to do 2 more, completing the arc that he started in SPECTRE. Or do they go with a new guy?
 
I wonder if they would recast Blofeld if they recast 007?

If Daniel Craig returns I can envisage a scenario in which Christoph Waltz reprises his role as Blofeld, and Lea Seydoux returns as Madeleine (I've read a magazine interview in which she says she would like to do more Bond films.) So, the story would continue in Bond 25.

But.... if Craig doesn't return then it wouldn't surprise me if the new man takes on new enemies with nothing to do with SPECTRE, and Madeleine just disappears - another "love 'em and leave 'em" relationship, its ending unexplained, as they were in previous Bond films. Of course, there would be nothing to preclude a return of Blofeld and SPECTRE now that the legal issues which prevented it during the Moore/Dalton/Brosnan years are settled - but I suspect ESB would be played by a different actor.

[Surrie]

 

I think the issue is that the producers have an idea for 2 movies, maybe rounding off the Blofeld story.
 
I can imagine the scenario is that Christoph Waltz has in principle agreed to both, and now they need to convince Daniel to do 2 more, completing the arc that he started in SPECTRE. Or do they go with a new guy?
 
I wonder if they would recast Blofeld if they recast 007?

If Daniel Craig returns I can envisage a scenario in which Christoph Waltz reprises his role as Blofeld, and Lea Seydoux returns as Madeleine (I've read a magazine interview in which she says she would like to do more Bond films.) So, the story would continue in Bond 25.

But.... if Craig doesn't return then it wouldn't surprise me if the new man takes on new enemies with nothing to do with SPECTRE, and Madeleine just disappears - another "love 'em and leave 'em" relationship, its ending unexplained, as they were in previous Bond films. Of course, there would be nothing to preclude a return of Blofeld and SPECTRE now that the legal issues which prevented it during the Moore/Dalton/Brosnan years are settled - but I suspect ESB would be played by a different actor.

 

 

As Craig's era has been different to the many before him, in respect of story arc's vs. stand alone missions, I would like to see him return and finish the SPECTRE, Waltz, Seydoux fiction. In my opinion, it would be a damn shame if it ended now. 

[Dustin]

The question would be, could they pick up that story (after a fashion) without Craig? Previously the powers that be did their best to establish that a new actor was the same character played by a different face, still the same member of the same Secret Service family. Could another actor take this over? And further, what would be the natural conclusion to the story? If we forget for a moment about what by now seems almost inevitable, Madeleine killed, Blofeld responsible, Bond taking revenge?

Somehow I can't help it, I feel the most fitting end to this story arc, if we want to call it so, would be a scene set '35 years later' where an old Bond visits an even older Blofeld in a care retirement home. The two would talk a little, then Blofeld would boast how he arranged for his spouse Irma Bunt to kill Bond's wife and how he expected Bond to kill him now. To which Bond would reply that his wife died of cancer over twenty years ago and that he had no intention of harming his own brother, especially not since he's been seriously mentally disturbed since his teens. The events of SPECTRE would turn out as a fantasy - but not of Bond's, Blofeld's. And Bond, James Bond, aged 81, would rise from his seat, touch Blofeld's shoulder and just say 'See you next week, Peter' and close the door behind himself.

[Surrie]

That is an interesting concept. But, I'm sure we would never see Eon employ such a direction for 007!! 

 

Without Craig I feel it would be almost pointless to attempt continuing the story in SPECTRE for Bond 25. If he doesn't return then, we'll best just leaving it as Craig driving off into the sunset. Bring BOND 7 in and give him stand alone missions to work with. 

[Dustin]

No, nothing like this would come from Eon. It wouldn't sit well with the general audience and some fans would scream murder. Might be an interesting little teleplay in 30 years or so, just for Waltz and Craig, provided they could get them and not use the name Bond, 007 and all the other lore of the trade. But even then it's much too specific to be of interest for a general audience. Things like the brother symmetry Bond/Blofeld and Ian/Peter would only be spotted by some fans. And the whole scale of the tragedy would only occur to audiences who have seen SPECTRE, it's much too far out there.

Though it would certainly have made a nice kick in the head as an Easter egg after the end titles...

However, I certainly agree that a new actor as 007 would best be introduced to a new story, ideally one that offers potential for the future.

[Pushkin]

'See you next week, Peter' and close the door behind himself.

 

I feel like I am probably asking the obvious but.... what is the "Peter" reference?

[Guy Haines]

I think the issue is that the producers have an idea for 2 movies, maybe rounding off the Blofeld story.
 
I can imagine the scenario is that Christoph Waltz has in principle agreed to both, and now they need to convince Daniel to do 2 more, completing the arc that he started in SPECTRE. Or do they go with a new guy?
 
I wonder if they would recast Blofeld if they recast 007?

If Daniel Craig returns I can envisage a scenario in which Christoph Waltz reprises his role as Blofeld, and Lea Seydoux returns as Madeleine (I've read a magazine interview in which she says she would like to do more Bond films.) So, the story would continue in Bond 25.
But.... if Craig doesn't return then it wouldn't surprise me if the new man takes on new enemies with nothing to do with SPECTRE, and Madeleine just disappears - another "love 'em and leave 'em" relationship, its ending unexplained, as they were in previous Bond films. Of course, there would be nothing to preclude a return of Blofeld and SPECTRE now that the legal issues which prevented it during the Moore/Dalton/Brosnan years are settled - but I suspect ESB would be played by a different actor.

 
As Craig's era has been different to the many before him, in respect of story arc's vs. stand alone missions, I would like to see him return and finish the SPECTRE, Waltz, Seydoux fiction. In my opinion, it would be a damn shame if it ended now.

I happen to agree. I'd like the rumoured two picture deal involving Waltz and Craig to happen. But will it? Who knows? I can't help thinking the story arc will end either now if Craig does leave after four films, or at whatever future film he goes. And the story arc hasn't really been about Bond-v-SPECTRE so much as Bond becoming Bond.

[S K Y F A L L]

Craig wont do two more films, he is kinda well a baby.

Christ he should have just slit his rists like he said then we know he is not returning.

 

Craig will do one more film or be yesterdays news. 

 

If he doesn't return at least we can make fun of him, Harrison Ford was like 68 when he did KOTCS and he'll be doing another one.

 

Who would win in a fight Craig or Van Diesel, Diesel because he wouldn't go down in the 4th round, lol. 

[Dustin]

'See you next week, Peter' and close the door behind himself.

I feel like I am probably asking the obvious but.... what is the "Peter" reference?

In his Authorised Biography Pearson mentions Bond's elder brother Henry. I never particularly liked that idea, Bond having a brother - or remnants of a family at all - but if Bond is anything, then he's a fantasy version of Fleming. In this case it would just be fitting for him to have a version of Peter as real elder brother. And since it's fantasy - and quite a bit of meta-fiction indulgence - it would be fitting that here the elder brother takes the exit into a fantasy world. It would even be interesting to leave open how far this went. Did maybe all of Bond's adventures just happen in his brother's fantasy?

[DaveBond21]

 

 

 

I think the issue is that the producers have an idea for 2 movies, maybe rounding off the Blofeld story.
 
I can imagine the scenario is that Christoph Waltz has in principle agreed to both, and now they need to convince Daniel to do 2 more, completing the arc that he started in SPECTRE. Or do they go with a new guy?
 
I wonder if they would recast Blofeld if they recast 007?

If Daniel Craig returns I can envisage a scenario in which Christoph Waltz reprises his role as Blofeld, and Lea Seydoux returns as Madeleine (I've read a magazine interview in which she says she would like to do more Bond films.) So, the story would continue in Bond 25.
But.... if Craig doesn't return then it wouldn't surprise me if the new man takes on new enemies with nothing to do with SPECTRE, and Madeleine just disappears - another "love 'em and leave 'em" relationship, its ending unexplained, as they were in previous Bond films. Of course, there would be nothing to preclude a return of Blofeld and SPECTRE now that the legal issues which prevented it during the Moore/Dalton/Brosnan years are settled - but I suspect ESB would be played by a different actor.

 
As Craig's era has been different to the many before him, in respect of story arc's vs. stand alone missions, I would like to see him return and finish the SPECTRE, Waltz, Seydoux fiction. In my opinion, it would be a damn shame if it ended now.

I happen to agree. I'd like the rumoured two picture deal involving Waltz and Craig to happen. But will it? Who knows? I can't help thinking the story arc will end either now if Craig does leave after four films, or at whatever future film he goes. And the story arc hasn't really been about Bond-v-SPECTRE so much as Bond becoming Bond.

 

 

I believe they decided to start a new story arc once they got the rights to SPECTRE and Blofeld and I think the plan was for at least 3 films. I can't imagine after all that they would go back to standalone adventures.

 

If they do have a 2-movie story mapped out, it would be better to change actor now rather than wait for the final movie of the 3 to move to Hiddleston.

 

I believe this could be the issue they are discussing at present, but I am just guessing based on the 2 movie story.

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[FlemingBond]

this is why i thought it would have been wiser to finish off the Craig era and start off the next actor with SPECTRE. Instead they piggybacked off the previous 3 films and made them SPECTRE related. Still doesn't make sense to me and could backfire now.

[sharpshooter]

I could possibly see Craig doing two more...if they waited another five or so years, which I'm not sure if either party wants to do. I don't think he'd be interested in rapid-fire productions. So at this stage, I'm guessing it's one more from Craig or nothing. 

[SecretAgentFan]

I think Craig has done superb work as Bond.   But really, the next actor to take over should be more enthusiastic about playing Bond.  

 

How I miss the times when Sir Roger had no need for distancing himself from the role by waiting for other films...

[DaveBond21]

I think Craig has done superb work as Bond.   But really, the next actor to take over should be more enthusiastic about playing Bond.  

 

How I miss the times when Sir Roger had no need for distancing himself from the role by waiting for other films...

 

This was always an issue for me, and the reason I always used to say that Craig would only do 3 movies. I was proven wrong in the end.

 

However he never got used to being so famous and so associated with the character.

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[Surrie]

 

 

 

 

I think the issue is that the producers have an idea for 2 movies, maybe rounding off the Blofeld story.
 
I can imagine the scenario is that Christoph Waltz has in principle agreed to both, and now they need to convince Daniel to do 2 more, completing the arc that he started in SPECTRE. Or do they go with a new guy?
 
I wonder if they would recast Blofeld if they recast 007?

If Daniel Craig returns I can envisage a scenario in which Christoph Waltz reprises his role as Blofeld, and Lea Seydoux returns as Madeleine (I've read a magazine interview in which she says she would like to do more Bond films.) So, the story would continue in Bond 25.
But.... if Craig doesn't return then it wouldn't surprise me if the new man takes on new enemies with nothing to do with SPECTRE, and Madeleine just disappears - another "love 'em and leave 'em" relationship, its ending unexplained, as they were in previous Bond films. Of course, there would be nothing to preclude a return of Blofeld and SPECTRE now that the legal issues which prevented it during the Moore/Dalton/Brosnan years are settled - but I suspect ESB would be played by a different actor.

 
As Craig's era has been different to the many before him, in respect of story arc's vs. stand alone missions, I would like to see him return and finish the SPECTRE, Waltz, Seydoux fiction. In my opinion, it would be a damn shame if it ended now.

I happen to agree. I'd like the rumoured two picture deal involving Waltz and Craig to happen. But will it? Who knows? I can't help thinking the story arc will end either now if Craig does leave after four films, or at whatever future film he goes. And the story arc hasn't really been about Bond-v-SPECTRE so much as Bond becoming Bond.

 

 

I believe they decided to start a new story arc once they got the rights to SPECTRE and Blofeld and I think the plan was for at least 3 films. I can't imagine after all that they would go back to standalone adventures.

 

If they do have a 2-movie story mapped out, it would be better to change actor now rather than wait for the final movie of the 3 to move to Hiddleston.

 

I believe this could be the issue they are discussing at present, but I am just guessing based on the 2 movie story.

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

Surely if that was the case, then Craig would have been involved in the discussions of a 3 film story-arc. Had he really not wanted to be involved in more Bond films, then would he have done SPECTRE in the first place?? 

[Toxteth_OGrady]

Today's tabloid nonsense:

 

http://www.dailymail...-Craig-007.html

[Surrie]

Today's tabloid nonsense:

 

http://www.dailymail...-Craig-007.html

 

I don't believe a word 'The Sun' or 'Daily Mail' say, but Bell wouldn't actually be a bad choice for Bond... if only he was a little older than 30. If Craig did do 2 more films, then Bell would be more or less the right age.

[sharpshooter]

Today's tabloid nonsense:
 
http://www.dailymail...-Craig-007.html

I don't believe any of this.

[Dustin]

We keep coming up with the term 'story arc' again and again as if there was some kind of bigger plan behind the recent films. I don't think that's the case, as far as I can see this is not how Eon works. 'Having a secret organisation for Bond to battle' or 'Having Blofeld back' - this is what constitutes a story arc in Eon Country. They take this thing one film at a time, they make it up as they go. Even QOS, the only direct sequel, didn't go the full distance in that it reverted Bond's development back to a state before M told him why Vesper had doubled for the opposition in CR. Eon may have pondered a larger picture during CR but ultimately that picture was never actually drawn. Sure, they will have a drawer with some ideas, as probably any creative player in the industry will have. But when the writers sit down for the next one they still start with a white page, not with a map. Logan trying to write two scripts with a connected story was the exception, not the rule.

And I can see why they take this approach. Just suppose SPECTRE had ended with a cliffhanger or in a way that ultimately needs a conclusion. And just suppose it had tanked royally at the box office instead of pulled the second best b.o. of the entire series. The one thing we can be sure of is that they would then drastically change direction, and probably rightfully so. They don't settle to stuff something down the audience's throats that doesn't make the cut. They move on.

[DavidJones]

We keep coming up with the term 'story arc' again and again as if there was some kind of bigger plan behind the recent films. I don't think that's the case, as far as I can see this is not how Eon works. 'Having a secret organisation for Bond to battle' or 'Having Blofeld back' - this is what constitutes a story arc in Eon Country. They take this thing one film at a time, they make it up as they go. Even QOS, the only direct sequel, didn't go the full distance in that it reverted Bond's development back to a state before M told him why Vesper had doubled for the opposition in CR. Eon may have pondered a larger picture during CR but ultimately that picture was never actually drawn. Sure, they will have a drawer with some ideas, as probably any creative player in the industry will have. But when the writers sit down for the next one they still start with a white page, not with a map. Logan trying to write two scripts with a connected story was the exception, not the rule.
And I can see why they take this approach. Just suppose SPECTRE had ended with a cliffhanger or in a way that ultimately needs a conclusion. And just suppose it had tanked royally at the box office instead of pulled the second best b.o. of the entire series. The one thing we can be sure of is that they would then drastically change direction, and probably rightfully so. They don't settle to stuff something down the audience's throats that doesn't make the cut. They move on.

This.

I also sense that people got restless for another actor before SP even came out.