47 replies to this topic

[Howland]

Just a question, Now that we have a new M and a new Moneypenny, do we know what kind of deals they made and for how many movies they will appear?

 

Somehow I do not see Ralph Fiennes on the long run for this

[Yellow Pinky]

I believe it was in the Hollywood Reporter interview with Mendes where he said that Fiennes and  Harris had each signed a 3 picture deal.  I was doing my best to remain spoiler free at the time and when I read that I instantly thought, "Oh, they must both be playing what will become known cast members then... Gotta' be M and Moneypenny."

 

Remember, Fiennes stayed on for the run of Harry Potter films, so he's got a track record for recurring roles.

[Kincade]

I love both in their roles, particularly Fiennes. I hope they're both around longer than three, especially since Harris is very young looking for her age. 

[Howland]

I believe it was in the Hollywood Reporter interview with Mendes where he said that Fiennes and  Harris had each signed a 3 picture deal.  I was doing my best to remain spoiler free at the time and when I read that I instantly thought, "Oh, they must both be playing what will become known cast members then... Gotta' be M and Moneypenny."

 

Remember, Fiennes stayed on for the run of Harry Potter films, so he's got a track record for recurring roles.

Yes but I believe he played the bad guy in the harry potter films, so besides the kid himself, he had, maybe the first role for an adult. I do not mean to be demeaning, but even though the role of M is very important, he/she appears only for a few minutes him.

 

With the risk of taking the full wrath of the community, isn't this role a little under him?

 

Now that being said, I think he is fantastic for the role

[Secret007]

Let's just play it by ear with Ralph Fiennes as "M" and Naomi Harris as "Miss Moneypenny". I am still in shock that all those rumors turned out to be true and was further in disbelief when I actually saw Ralph Fiennes in the role of "M" and Naomi Harris as "Miss Moneypenny". It just doesn't seem like a James Bond movie anymore.  Nothing is familiar anymore.

  The best thing to come out of SKYFALL is Ben Whishaw as "Q". I hope he stays on for a full life and my own as well.

[Pussfeller]

It's strange how so many fans will say that some character or detail of the films "doesn't feel like Bond", when all they really mean is that they don't like it. It's perfectly fine to like Whishaw's Q and not like Fiennes' M, but this particular combination of preferences cannot possibly be based on adherence to tradition and normalcy. By a traditionalist metric, Fiennes is surely the most classic and retro component of the new faculty. He's practically a pastiche of Bernard Lee. To single out the Messervy clone and say, "What are these crazy films coming to?", while simultaneously praising the millennial code monkey, just seems... odd.

 

As for the discussion of how long Fiennes will stay with the franchise, I doubt if he'll be itching to flee after collecting two or three paychecks. He's supposed to be a genuine lifelong fan of Bond, so it's not simply a paycheck. Harry Potter proved his willingness to play recurring roles in film series. The producers will want to keep him as long as possible, so he'll probably be given a fairly meaty role - at least as prominent as Dench post-TWINE. I would expect him to stick around for the remainder of Craig's era, as well as for the films of Craigh's immediate successor. I wouldn't expect him to span three different Bonds, but you'd have to read his mind to know for sure. Maybe he'll play M until he's eighty, and become indelibly associated with the role. Or maybe he'll leave after two more films, at the same time as Craig.

[thecasinoroyale]

I hope the current Craig cast stick with him through his films, and even dare I say a few more into the future without Craig, as we don't need a brand new set of actors with a new Bond, as we've known about for the last 50 years, so I hope they last a few more films at least.

 

Wonderful characters who have made a good impact with 'Skyfall', ready to continue and develop!

[Bill]

Ralph Fiennes and Naomie Harris both did a great job.

 

I have yet to post my review of Skyfall, but the short version is that I enjoyed it.  Quite a lot. I was against the reboot when it was first announced--before Craig was even cast.  This prevented me from fully appreciating Casino Royale as perhaps the most faithful adaptation of a Fleming Bond novel aside from OHMSS. 

With Skyfall we have those glorious last two minutes--Moneypenny in her little office, with the hatrack, and M in essentlally Bernard Lee and Robert Brown's office.  When I first read Sam Mendes' statement that he wanted to loop with Dr. No, I had tremendous hope.  I am glad that that hope was proven to be true.  It now appears as if CR, QOS and SF are not only reboots, but also prequels.  What I was against was the idea that 40 years of Bond films never occurred.  Now it appears as if that is not the case.  While Ralph Fiennes is technically not MIles Messervy, he is fulfilling the same role.  Moneypenny is Moneypenny.  Period.  We are back in the same office.  I know it does not make sense--how can Bond meet Felix twice for the first time, Felix and Moneypenny changing races, at least two--and with the ongoing discussion in the forums of the Skyfall DB5--possibly three different explanations of the DB5, the shift in geopolitics and technology over 50 years, the inherent anachronism of Judi Dench's M--just to mention a few examples of totally screwed up continuity.  However, it existed in the series before--just look at Bond and Blofeld meeting each other for the first time twice in YOLT and OHMSS--so precedent does exist. 

This works for fans of the reboot, who would simply maintain that Moneypenny and the new M and Q are simply being introduced into continuity from this point on and the events of the first 20 films still did not occur.  For fans like me, I can look at it the opposite way--as it is no coincidence that Bond is in THAT office at the end of the film--followed by the gunbarrel.  People only familiar with Bond from the Craig films, old school fans who have embraced the reboot as the best thing since sliced bread, fans who do not think of the Craig films as Bond at all--can now have their cake and eat it too.  By ending Skyfall the way he did, Sam Mendes has given all of us the opportunity to truly embrace Bond, and for fans like me, the ability to welcome Bond back into our hearts.

 

So, I can look at the Craig films with a different perspective.  Thus, I think that CR is probably slightly better, given the Fleming elements.  However, Skyfall is still a damn good film. 

 

So that brings me back to the original topic of this thread--I hope that Fiennes and Harris, and Whishaw-- last as long or longer in their roles as Bernard Lee, Lois Maxwell and Desmond Llewelyn, providing continuity with Craig and his successors.  It is not a role beneath Fiennes.  I am sure he understands Bond's cultural significance, and appreciates the importance of M.  Eon took full advantage of Judi Dench's talents, and I would like to see the same of Fiennes.

 

Having said that, I hope that next time we have a Bond film structured like the first 20--the gunbarrel (and hopefully the Binder/Kleinman one--and no CGI bullet like in DAD) with the Bond theme at full blast, a pre-title sequence, a traditional Bond song (i.e. Adele NOT Alicia Keyes and Jack White), a briefing from M, flirting with Moneypenny, and this time, gadgets from Q--no need for an invisible car, but something a little more advanced, and then Bond's mission, with the requisite Bond girl.  And scored by David Arnold--and no need to tease the James Bond theme--he can go full out.  Within that structure there is plenty of room for the more serious tone of the last 6 years.  There is no need to lose it--indeed if Sam Mendes returns it would be perfection!

[Stavro]

As many as they can manage. I like both actors and they did a great job in Skyfall. I'm sure they won't have as much of a role in the following films, but I'm sure I'll be happy to see them.

[AMC Hornet]

Instead of trying to shoehorn the Craig Bonds into the continuity as 'prequels' and imagining that they occurred in the late 1950s - with futuristic cell phones, laptops, DBSs with GPS, etc - or that the Connery Bonds with the Soviet Russians, mechanical decoders and Gemini space capsules are yet to occur, how about just accepting that we have a new series of Bond films, with cute little tributes to the old series, and move on from there?

 

Or does that not make any sense?

[MajorB]

 

I believe it was in the Hollywood Reporter interview with Mendes where he said that Fiennes and  Harris had each signed a 3 picture deal.  I was doing my best to remain spoiler free at the time and when I read that I instantly thought, "Oh, they must both be playing what will become known cast members then... Gotta' be M and Moneypenny."

 

Remember, Fiennes stayed on for the run of Harry Potter films, so he's got a track record for recurring roles.

Yes but I believe he played the bad guy in the harry potter films, so besides the kid himself, he had, maybe the first role for an adult. I do not mean to be demeaning, but even though the role of M is very important, he/she appears only for a few minutes him.

 

With the risk of taking the full wrath of the community, isn't this role a little under him?

 

Now that being said, I think he is fantastic for the role

 

You mean the way it was beneath Judi Dench for over 15 years?

 

I'm excited to have these two actors in these roles. They're different and interesting, and I'm looking forward to see how they're used in future Bonds. I hope they stay as long as they like - even beyond the Craig era, if it comes to that.

[Bill]

AMC Hornet:

With all due respect, I think we can have it both ways.  Clearly, Casino Royale was meant to be the beginning of a new series of films.  With Skyfall, that distinction is now not so apparent.

 

Trying to dot every i and cross every t to shoehorn with everything in the rest of the series is impossible.  However, as I stated, continuity glitches existed before 2006's Casino Royale.  
 

Taking the time and effort to ensure that everything fits is not something I expect to see in Bond 24 and beyond.  What I would like to see is a straightforward Bond adventure.  There need not be any mention of characters and situations from the first 40 years--although I would not mind seeing Felix back--and Jeffrey Wright in the role.  I would just like them to continue with M, Moneypenny, Q and Tanner as we had known them in the past, and it looks like that is what we will be seeing.  Keeping the sets as they were at the end of Skyfall will certainly solidify that.

You may want to jetison the first 20 films for the new series.  That is a perfectly valid viewpoint.  I am glad that I have the option not to. 

[AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän]

I have a gut feeling that Fiennes and Whishaw will remain on their roles longer than Harris and the next Bond will have his own Moneypenny.

[S K Y F A L L]

I imagine Harris 36 (Moneypenny), Kinnear 34 (Tanner) and Wright 47 (Felix) will remain in the roles at least until Craig's last film. 

 

Fiennes 49 (M) and Whishaw 32 (Q) I hope stay in the role for 15-20 years or more. 

[Nick Bone]

Hopefully as long as its possible. They both did a great job. In Fiennes we have an M with strong personality and background. He has that charisma, he fills his office easily.

 

And bring Felix (Wright) back. I hope they all (Harris, Fiennes, Whishaw and Wright) remain in their roles after Craig.

[AMC Hornet]

AMC Hornet:

With all due respect, I think we can have it both ways.  Clearly, Casino Royale was meant to be the beginning of a new series of films.  With Skyfall, that distinction is now not so apparent.

 

Trying to dot every i and cross every t to shoehorn with everything in the rest of the series is impossible.  However, as I stated, continuity glitches existed before 2006's Casino Royale.  
 

Taking the time and effort to ensure that everything fits is not something I expect to see in Bond 24 and beyond.  What I would like to see is a straightforward Bond adventure.  There need not be any mention of characters and situations from the first 40 years--although I would not mind seeing Felix back--and Jeffrey Wright in the role.  I would just like them to continue with M, Moneypenny, Q and Tanner as we had known them in the past, and it looks like that is what we will be seeing.  Keeping the sets as they were at the end of Skyfall will certainly solidify that.

You may want to jetison the first 20 films for the new series.  That is a perfectly valid viewpoint.  I am glad that I have the option not to. 

I never said I wanted to jettison the first 20 films, I just meant to say that I for one am not going to hurt my head trying to make one consecutive series out of two.

 

If I were that obsessive (and I am obsessive), I'd be trying to figure out how Bruce Wayne's parents could be murdered twice by different assailants, how the Joker survived that fall to return younger (or does The Dark Knight come first, and Jack Napier became the Joker twice?). etc etc.

 

As for Skyfall. I am happy to see the 007 section operating out of the familiar old Univex offices again. I really missed that set over the last 25 years (think of that - half the series' lifetime, if not for half the films). A 'new' Moneypenny is fine, and I too hope for a more straightforward mission next time - more an episode in the adventures of 007 than yet another story about one man finding his calling and becoming an icon.

 

Of course we can have it both ways, and my way is to condider CR to be the second reboot - there's no way in my mind that Dalton and Brosnan are supposed to be the same man as Connery/Lazenby/Moore.

 

But that's a debate already raging in another thread...

[Bill]

Excellent points, AMC Hornet.

 

What distinguishes Bond from, say, Batman, and I think you will agree, is that the Dark Knight operates in a universe from the first issue of Worlds Finest on which is inherently science fiction.  Thus, there is no need to distinguish between the Tim Burton/Joel Schumaker and the Christopher Nolan Batman films. The source material is, was and hopefully ever shall be the comics.  

You will agree, I think, that Bond does not enjoy such a luxury.  The total number of Bond stories--even taking into account the number of adventures created by Fleming, Amis, Pearson, Wood, Gardner, Benson, Higson, Faulks (ugh!), Deaver, Weinberg and upcoming Boyd, as well as the comics--Daily Express, Eclipse, Dark Horse, along with the DC, Marvel and Topps adaptations, along with 23 official, two unofficial and one TV version goes nowhere near in beating the thousands of Batman stories.  There is no need to even begin to reconcile the live action Batman films from 1989 to 1997 with the Nolan Bat films.  

 

The number of Bond adventures is far more finite.  The Bond films, with two exceptions, have been made by one production company,  Continuity is thus extremely important.  However, I fully agree in that I have no desire to hurt my head in making one series out of two,  I just like to think that we can do so, given Skyfall's ending, as long as we do not give it too much thought!

And I fully embrace what you expressed in your wish for the next film to be an episode in the life of 007 without all the baggage.  Indeed, I yearn for it!

If you ever come to the New York area (or may already be there) please let me know--I would be honored to buy you a drink and discuss all things Bond with you!

Cheers!

[seawolfnyy]

Getting back to the main point of this thread......I think it'll be 3 films for Harris and she'll retire with Craig. I could see Rory Kinnear moving on after Craig's final film as well. I think Whishaw and Fiennes are in it for the long haul.

[Thevan7F]

Just a question, Now that we have a new M and a new Moneypenny, do we know what kind of deals they made and for how many movies they will appear?

 

Somehow I do not see Ralph Fiennes on the long run for this

You forgot Ben Whishaw who revived Q. Haven't you. Ben Whishaw acted with Daniel Craig in couple the movies.

[Howland]

 

 

I believe it was in the Hollywood Reporter interview with Mendes where he said that Fiennes and  Harris had each signed a 3 picture deal.  I was doing my best to remain spoiler free at the time and when I read that I instantly thought, "Oh, they must both be playing what will become known cast members then... Gotta' be M and Moneypenny."

 

Remember, Fiennes stayed on for the run of Harry Potter films, so he's got a track record for recurring roles.

Yes but I believe he played the bad guy in the harry potter films, so besides the kid himself, he had, maybe the first role for an adult. I do not mean to be demeaning, but even though the role of M is very important, he/she appears only for a few minutes him.

 

With the risk of taking the full wrath of the community, isn't this role a little under him?

 

Now that being said, I think he is fantastic for the role

 

You mean the way it was beneath Judi Dench for over 15 years?

 

I'm excited to have these two actors in these roles. They're different and interesting, and I'm looking forward to see how they're used in future Bonds. I hope they stay as long as they like - even beyond the Craig era, if it comes to that.

 

I was sure this reply would come up ;-)

 

I have a lot of respect for Dame Judi Dench and the role of M. I may be wrong, but I don't think she did have the same career than Ralph Fiennes, so no, it was not under her

[graric]

 

 

 

I believe it was in the Hollywood Reporter interview with Mendes where he said that Fiennes and  Harris had each signed a 3 picture deal.  I was doing my best to remain spoiler free at the time and when I read that I instantly thought, "Oh, they must both be playing what will become known cast members then... Gotta' be M and Moneypenny."

 

Remember, Fiennes stayed on for the run of Harry Potter films, so he's got a track record for recurring roles.

Yes but I believe he played the bad guy in the harry potter films, so besides the kid himself, he had, maybe the first role for an adult. I do not mean to be demeaning, but even though the role of M is very important, he/she appears only for a few minutes him.

 

With the risk of taking the full wrath of the community, isn't this role a little under him?

 

Now that being said, I think he is fantastic for the role

 

You mean the way it was beneath Judi Dench for over 15 years?

 

I'm excited to have these two actors in these roles. They're different and interesting, and I'm looking forward to see how they're used in future Bonds. I hope they stay as long as they like - even beyond the Craig era, if it comes to that.

 

I was sure this reply would come up ;-)

 

I have a lot of respect for Dame Judi Dench and the role of M. I may be wrong, but I don't think she did have the same career than Ralph Fiennes, so no, it was not under her

 

 

Dame Judi Dench didn't have the same career the Ralph Fiennes had, before Bond she was renowned as a Shakespearean Actress in the Theater (and had been appointed both an Officer of the British Empire and a Dame Commander), while Ralph Fiennes before Bond has done some admirable acting work (like Schindlers List)  but is generally known as Lord Voldemort from Harry Potter: do you really need to ask who the role would appear to be beneath?

We have an incredibly respected theater actress, who has been awarded the OBE, you find a fair few theater actors still consider acting in films to be inferior and 'beneath them' let alone so commercial a franchise as Bond. 
On the other hand no matter how critically acclaimed an actor Ralph Fiennes it has been clear as far back as 1998, when he appeared in The Avengers remake, that he did not consider acting in Franchises to be beneath him (no matter the quality of the script or character.)

Despite what we fans may think clearly neither actor considers the role beneath them, and the relatively small size of the role means that Fiennes will probably think of this as a small bit of fun to do once every two years between more substantial roles.

[EyesOnly]

Ralph Fiennes was one of the best parts of Skyfall, so I hope he is around long after Craig leaves the role.

[tdalton]

Ralph Fiennes was one of the best parts of Skyfall, so I hope he is around long after Craig leaves the role.

 

Agreed.  I'm glad that they've finally gotten Fiennes involved with the Bond franchise.  If they had ever gotten around to doing faithful adaptations of Fleming's novels, especially on a platform like HBO or Showtime, I'd have loved to have seen Fiennes take on the role of Bond himself.  He would have been great at that and I think he'll make a brilliant M.  I think when it's all said and done he'll be the best M of the bunch.

 

I do hope that they minimize Moneypenny's involvement in future films, though.  I think it had more to do with how the character was written than how Harris performed the role, but I found the character to be rather annoying.  

[seawolfnyy]

I sort of agree with that assessment tdalton. I thought many of the scenes between her and Bond somewhat awkward. Especially the one in Macau that did not promise any of what seemed to be in the trailer.

[AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän]

I think saying Ralph Fiennes is generally known only for Lord Voldemort is erroneous - he has been one of the most revered actors for almost 20 years - he did play one of the leads in hugely successful Red Dragon and has played lead parts in numerous critically acclaimed films such as David Cronenbergs Spider. Teens and 20-somethings probably know him as Voldemort but us older fans of quality acting have been fans of him for a long long time. And my hunch is that playing M is much more satisfying to Fiennes than playing Voldemort - I remember him saying that he had to go way over the top with that role and basically played him as a ham. 

[Odd Jobbies]

Quite a few i imagine. I certainly hope that Ralph stays in the role for some time. His father figure could come into it's own when Craig is finally succeeded (though i hope this a few films away yet).

[solace]

Loads hopefully

[EyesOnly]

Ralph Fiennes was one of the best parts of Skyfall, so I hope he is around long after Craig leaves the role.

Agreed. I'm glad that they've finally gotten Fiennes involved with the Bond franchise. If they had ever gotten around to doing faithful adaptations of Fleming's novels, especially on a platform like HBO or Showtime, I'd have loved to have seen Fiennes take on the role of Bond himself. He would have been great at that and I think he'll make a brilliant M. I think when it's all said and done he'll be the best M of the bunch.

I do hope that they minimize Moneypenny's involvement in future films, though. I think it had more to do with how the character was written than how Harris performed the role, but I found the character to be rather annoying.

Completely agree. I wish he would have taken the role after Dalton as I think he could have made an EXCELLENT Bond. He probably would have had better films than Brosnan too. I'm just glad he's part of the franchise now because its better for it. A completely underrated actor.

And I also agree with Agenttinollanollaseitseman. However he did play the voldemort role well.

Edited by EyesOnly, 09 December 2012 - 05:59 AM.

[B5Erik]

Some have asked if this part is beneath Fiennes. 

Were it not for the legacy of Bernard Lee and Judi Dench I'd say yes, but as those two did such a magnificent job in the role (and let's not forget the solid job that Robert Brown did as well) this is actually a pretty nice role for Fiennes.  He gets a nice paycheck for a couple days work.  It's easy to fit in his schedule and he gets to continue a legacy role - one filled previously by some pretty talented people.

 

Fiennes is the perfect guy for the role, and I suspect that he knows it.  Hopefully he continues on longer than the 3 movies in the deal, but if not he will have left his mark on the role.

[Guy Haines]

Some have asked if this part is beneath Fiennes. 

Were it not for the legacy of Bernard Lee and Judi Dench I'd say yes, but as those two did such a magnificent job in the role (and let's not forget the solid job that Robert Brown did as well) this is actually a pretty nice role for Fiennes.  He gets a nice paycheck for a couple days work.  It's easy to fit in his schedule and he gets to continue a legacy role - one filled previously by some pretty talented people.

 

Fiennes is the perfect guy for the role, and I suspect that he knows it.  Hopefully he continues on longer than the 3 movies in the deal, but if not he will have left his mark on the role.

Agreed. As for "is the role beneath him"? - no. He clearly didn't think that involvement with the Harry Potter series was, and he has such a range of other roles that, as with Judi Dench, "M" will be just one major part of many he will have played, albeit an iconic one. Plus, Ralph Fiennes is a self confessed Bond fan - it helps, I imagine if you are involved in a project you rather like. I must admit I doubted at first that he would be in the series for more than one film, because I doubted if Mallory was destined to be "M", but I'm pleased to have been proved wrong.

 

And on the actors "slumming it" point, again - I'd say the massive critical success of SF could mean we'll see more top flight thespians in starring, supporting or even brief cameo roles in future Bond films - Bond films are action adventures with a touch of class.