30 replies to this topic

[JSDude1]

Instead of a plain reboot, yet set in present day as CR was in 2006, EON would set the movie in the 1940's (during Bond's WWII service) or in the 1950s!?

 

I think it could work at some point

 

It has been rumored that at one time they were considering this with Casino Royale with Pierce Brosnan as James Bond.

 

What are your thoughts??

 

I say YES, they should go for it, just not in the immediate future with the next could of JB movies.

[plankattack]

It has been rumored that at one time they were considering this with Casino Royale with Pierce Brosnan as James Bond.

"They" was Quentin Tarentino espousing what he would do if he'd had the chance.

I would love, like so many of us I suspect, to see a true-to-the-source, period, Bond film. I'm not convinced that the series as it exists could pull of such a transition. Remembering how upsetting CR was to some (fans) - and I know that amongst there is still a percentage who don't feel the most recent films are Bond films are all - I suspect that for most film-goers it would be a one and done curiosity before there was a demand for the "Bond we all know and love etc etc"

[kaiserthegreat]

Someone should "Star Trek: Phase II" the idea.  

[Walecs]

I'd like to see a TV series set in the 50s, which followed the plot of each Fleming novel closely (including short stories, like bonus episodes, and The Spy Who Loved Me), in the correct order, with just one actor playing as Bond.

Edited by Walecs, 17 January 2014 - 06:50 PM.

[tdalton]

I'd like for EON to do a period-piece Bond, but not as a film, but rather as a series on a premium cable channel such as HBO or Showtime. 

[S K Y F A L L]

Agreed.

[elizabeth]

I feel like the old me would have, but I think the new me wants EON to continue what they're doing; Bond as the years pass.

[Double Naught spy]

I'd be a very happy Double Naught if they ever did a faithful TV series on the Fleming novels. 

 

Imagine seeing these on the big (or small) screen:   the hunk of the Dover cliffs coming down atop 007 and Gala

                                                                                   Mr. Big being devoured by the sharks

                                                                                   the ongoing banter that goes on while eating/drinking with Felix

                                                                                   the hidden "rose bush" lair & motorcycle confrontation

                                                                                   Felix's Studillac

                                                                                   Shatterhand's castle of death

                                                                                   the fish stuffed into Hildebrand's mouth

                                                                                   the Moonraker rocket

                                                                                   Goldfinger giving his cat to Oddjob for dinner

                                                                                   the squid battle

                                                                                   the tense cat-and-mouse ending to TSWLM b/w 007 and the gangsters

                                                                                   Bond's confrontation with M & M's plexi-glass shield

                                                                                   Red Grant's War & Peace gun

                                                                                   the irascible May questioning the TV "salesman"

                                                                                   the train scenes in DAF, GF, and TMWTGG

                                                                                   Bond coming to the rescue via the ship's porthole in DAF 

Edited by Double Naught spy, 18 January 2014 - 02:20 AM.

[Odd Jobbies]

A one-off period piece released after Craig quits and before the next Bond is cast.

 

Directed by Tarantino with his choice of cast and final edit.

 

Doing it between 'canon movies' is an opportunity to let a filmmaking genius, and fanboy, show us his interpretation.

 

Perhaps something along the lines of Solo, with Clive Owen, Fassbinder as a Bond approaching middle age, or whomever he saw fit.

 

I imagine his latest muse, the immensely talented Christoph Waltz would be his villain.

[AirJordanFan93]

I'd like for EON to do a period-piece Bond, but not as a film, but rather as a series on a premium cable channel such as HBO or Showtime. 

That would be really cool

[Odd Jobbies]

 

I'd like for EON to do a period-piece Bond, but not as a film, but rather as a series on a premium cable channel such as HBO or Showtime. 

That would be really cool

 

It'd certainly be cool, but all things considered i think it would water down the brand. Eon have done a good job of keeping the brand focused, which IMO is what makes the cinematic character so iconic and long lived.

 

Problem with TV is that it seldom compliments the cinema. It's either worse, in which case why do it?  Or it's better - having more time to tell it's stories, if, as in the best tv the stories are continuous across a series, in which case it makes the movies look bad - so, again why would Eon do it?

 

It's most likely a no win situation. I suspect it'd turn out inferior to the movies, since what makes for good tv is character development, exploiting the longer format. But Eon would understandably shy away from this , since much of Bond's appeal is his mystery, with a slight drip-feed of information. Before long the series would have to either say too much, or not enough and it'd start to suck.

 

Then it'd sadly become a 'villain-of-the-week format and they really suck. 

 

The only way i see it working is in a limited run (no 2nd series, 10 eps only), co produced by HBO, who know how to make great tv, drafting in someone with the calibre of Vince Gilligan. But Eon are too hands-on to give HBO or the likes of Gilligan the control they'd need to make it work on tv.

[JSDude1]

A one-off period piece released after Craig quits and before the next Bond is cast.

 

Directed by Tarantino with his choice of cast and final edit.

 

Doing it between 'canon movies' is an opportunity to let a filmmaking genius, and fanboy, show us his interpretation.

 

Perhaps something along the lines of Solo, with Clive Owen, Fassbinder as a Bond approaching middle age, or whomever he saw fit.

 

I imagine his latest muse, the immensely talented Christoph Waltz would be his villain.

 

THIS.

 

I was thinking the same thing a one off with another actor (or perhaps a one off in the middle of Craig's run) as a period piece, giving Craig a chance the "recharge" so that his take doesn't become stale..?

[plankattack]

But do we really think that Tarantino would give us a "period-piece Bond" or would we get a Tarantino Bond that just happened to be set in the period that Fleming wrote it? Do we want a honest adaption of Fleming, or just a film that happens to be set when Fleming intended. Because if it's the former, then what do we need Tarentino for?

I love many of Tarentino's films but each one is identifiable as a Tarentino-film before they're anything else; as a filmmaker that what he does. All of his flicks are his take on a genre, but they are all Tarentino films before they are of that genre. If everyone wants a Tarantino-Bond, that's fine, but I suspect that a Tarentino Bond, regardless of when it's set or what it's "based" on, would have as much in common with Fleming as EON's MR.

[JSDude1]

But do we really think that Tarantino would give us a "period-piece Bond" or would we get a Tarantino Bond that just happened to be set in the period that Fleming wrote it? Do we want a honest adaption of Fleming, or just a film that happens to be set when Fleming intended. Because if it's the former, then what do we need Tarentino for?

I love many of Tarentino's films but each one is identifiable as a Tarentino-film before they're anything else; as a filmmaker that what he does. All of his flicks are his take on a genre, but they are all Tarentino films before they are of that genre. If everyone wants a Tarantino-Bond, that's fine, but I suspect that a Tarentino Bond, regardless of when it's set or what it's "based" on, would have as much in common with Fleming as EON's MR.

You're right I don't really care for Tarantino anyway.

[billy007]

Bond fans who are also Sherlock Holmes fans ask yourselves:

What have i enjoyed more a contemporary Sherlock Holmes  "SHERLOCK"  "ELEMENTARY" or a period piece Robert Downey Jr/Jude Law?

 

The average 007 fan is a movie fan not a literary fan. Can Fleming's work actually translate to a modern screen?

I don't think a period piece matters as long as the character is portrayed accurately.

Wait and see the new Fleming TV movie is he a period piece 007?

[Guy Haines]

I'm not sure about a period piece film, although I notice there's a current trend in movies generally for period pieces which are not that far back in the past - "American Hustle", "Rush", "Argo" and so on. Which made me feel quite nostalgic for my teens!

 

We've already had one change of gear with the Craig re-boot. Another too soon after this might seem confusing. A period TV series about Bond might work though, provided its made clear that the episodes are strict adaptations of the Fleming books, like the BBC Radio 4 adaptations starring Toby Stephens as Bond, rather than remakes of the movies, with their style, translated to the TV screen.

 

I would, however, like to see a future Bond continuation novel done as a fifties/sixties period piece -perhaps covering the period after Thunderball but before OHMSS (And yes, I know The Spy Who Loved Me was set in-between those two, but that novel was hardly a typical Bond adventure, even though it briefly refers to SPECTRE)

 

Or - a collection of Bond short stories, along the lines of For Your Eyes Only, set in the period when Fleming was still around, but each written by a different author.

 

One other thing. Sherlock Holmes has been mentioned above. I heard this morning on Radio 4 that a US court had determined that Sherlock Holmes was no longer subject to copyright. There could be multiplicities of Holmes novels, TV series, films etc. Imagine if a future court ruling applied that to Bond. The mind boggles!

[Walecs]

 like the BBC Radio 4 adaptations starring Toby Stephens as Bond, rather than remakes of the movies, with their style, translated to the TV screen.

 

 

Gustav Graves as James Bond? So weird!

[DaveBond21]

I have really warmed to this idea recently, and feel it would work. Period pieces with the same actor in the role and for it to stick as closely to the source material as possible. It would be interesting to see if they could restrain themselves when it came to adding more action.

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[AMC Hornet]

...and yet, some fanboys would still mentally injure themselves trying to reconcile the period piece with their single chronology, wherein CR, QoS & SF are prequels to Dr. No.

[glidrose]

some fanboys would still mentally injure themselves

Let's see, I could either say...

Surely a redundancy!

...or...

Something many of them have lots of experience at!

[Guy Haines]

I've just been re-reading the posts on this thread, including my own, which mentions a period piece Bond novel idea, and lo and behold we are only months away from just that with Anthony Horowitz's "Trigger Mortis".

 

I'm still not convinced about a period piece Bond film - unless it was done really accurately but had nods to the classic period of the 1960s. Indeed they could slot this one into that period, and include the Aston Martin DB5 (Why not - it crops up in the Craig movies!)

 

I guess I've bent a bit on my stance in last year's post, but on balance I'm still with the "Bond is a character of the present or five minutes into the future" view. Ian Fleming's Bond, to borrow a line from Mad Men's Don Draper had a "life that only goes in one direction - forwards." The timelines of the Fleming novels may have been a bit elastic, but he didn't suddenly jump from setting one novel in, say, 1959 to the next ten or fifteen years earlier.

 

I'm sure the idea of a period piece is very well intentioned - the wish to know more about the background of the man and maybe the time before Casino Royale in the books - which John Pearson's "biography" of Bond handled very well, imho. - and before Dr. No in the films. I'm not sure though how audiences might react to a Bond movie which was a transparently obvious attempt to re-create, say, the Bond films of the 1960s, right down to being set in that decade. You can still re-create that approach if you wanted to without having to go back in time to do it.

 

Then again, I may be completely wrong.

[HoneyDiamond]

I think a period Bond movie would work wonderfully. 

[tdalton]

I don't see a period piece film working at all.  I think the general public would pretty much roll their eyes at it and turn out in smaller numbers.  

 

If they're going to go the period piece route, TV is the way to go.  A lower bar to clear in order to call it a success plus it could be done concurrently with the film series.

[DaveBond21]

I don't see a period piece film working at all.  I think the general public would pretty much roll their eyes at it and turn out in smaller numbers.  

 

If they're going to go the period piece route, TV is the way to go.  A lower bar to clear in order to call it a success plus it could be done concurrently with the film series.

 

Yes, maybe TV is the way to go.

 

But I honestly think that some kind of period piece is inevitable at some point.

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[JLaidlaw]

Moffat and Gatiss's period set Christmas special of Sherlock could be an interesting experiment at how far an audience accepts a one-off period piece in the middle of a successful run. Unless of course Moffat's playing us for fools and it's not a period piece at all.

 

I agree an idea is best done as a glossy transatlantic co-produced television series. Done as series of three two hour adventures that would mean all the novels get covered in four series (though you'd miss out on the brilliantly adaptable short stories with that format). Ideally, Casino Royale would be the start of the series, but if going for a one off to launch I'd recommend Moonraker. Aside from being one of the better books, it has never been properly adapted and has no character ties to the other novels.

 

The only issue is if the actor playing the television Bond gets a following to the detriment of the film Bond. But strangely I think this could be mitigated by choosing a popular, proven actor who would just miss out on taking on the main role due to not being the right age when the vacancy came up. And if the series begun at the start of a four year turnaround between Craig and his successor, this really shouldn't be a problem.

[Emrayfo]

Period piece, yes. But like Walecs and tdalton have said above, it would have to be for TV but with high production values. If a Madmen vibe were taken, where there is an assiduous fidelity to the times portrayed and to the Fleming novels, it could be truly excellent.

 

Concurrent or contemporaneous incarnations of Sherlock Holmes across TV and film have been mentioned more than once above: Viewers have managed to accommodate these diverse interpretations without being confused or put-off. Some may like them all, some may prefer one over the others; neither sets of ven-diagramed fans have been barriers to success for any of these shows or films.

 

I think a faithful period interpretation of the novels would overall strengthen the character and its fan base. Also, it could be genuinely exciting for fans like us because television provides opportunity for narrative and character development, especially nowadays, that film cannot. And since TV is generally quicker to put together, a show like this could help fill the space between Craig and his successor and also fill some of the likely standard 3+ year gap between films.

 

p.s. NOT Tarantino. I love Tarantino, but not for this.

Edited by Emrayfo, 23 June 2015 - 08:55 AM.

[AMC Hornet]

I'm not sure though how audiences might react to a Bond movie which was a transparently obvious attempt to re-create, say, the Bond films of the 1960s, right down to being set in that decade. You can still re-create that approach if you wanted to without having to go back in time to do it.

 

Octopussy did just that, invoking the flavour of a 60s film, while still being set in the 80s.

 

And I still love it!

 

I don't see any need to re-invent the wheel. We already have six Bond films set in the 60s. I understand what the supporters of this idea are hoping for, but even if a period mini-series were to happen, there's no guarantee that it would be any more faithful to the source material than say, DAF or LALD.

[Emrayfo]

 

I'm not sure though how audiences might react to a Bond movie which was a transparently obvious attempt to re-create, say, the Bond films of the 1960s, right down to being set in that decade. You can still re-create that approach if you wanted to without having to go back in time to do it.

 

I don't see any need to re-invent the wheel. We already have six Bond films set in the 60s. I understand what the supporters of this idea are hoping for, but even if a period mini-series were to happen, there's no guarantee that it would be any more faithful to the source material than say, DAF or LALD.

 

^^ These are valid criticisms, but I think slightly miss the point, and the opportunity. Also, we are talking TV, not film. Something with the scope of a Mad Men or Game of Thrones.

 

The idea is not about re-creating the milieu or vibe of the 1960s Bond films. For starters, the first seven (arguably eight) Bond books were set in the 1950s, not the 1960s. The ‘50s is a very different period to the ‘60s with a Europe still reeling from the recent World War. Le Carre’s classic Smiley novels, and The Spy Who Came in From the Cold, are all set in the 1960s and informed by that time, but the beginning of Bond is in a much younger Cold War period and the stories are very definitely imprinted with a strong post-War vibe.

 

This is the period of the Korean War (1950-53), the Hungarian Revolution (1956) and the Suez Crisis (1956-57). The Cold War was very real but not quite yet at the heightened levels we saw in the ’60s.The first sections of the Berlin Wall were not laid until 1961, Bay of Pigs was 1961, as was the advent of what became the Vietnam War, and the Cuban Missile Crisis hit in 1962. And then there are the popular cultural factors.

 

Such an immediate post-War setting of war veterans and European reconstruction brings very different politics, music, culture, fashion, technology, daily headlines and social concerns to those of the Sixties. (See Dennis Potter’s Lipstick on Your Collar, which is set during the Suez Crisis, for a sense of the British establishment at the time). Europe was in ruins and mired in post-War reconstruction efforts, an emerging battle ground for the emerging super powers. The US was just starting to exercise its new global influence while the USSR was scrambling (not all that successfully and somewhat clumsily) to build its own sphere of influence. The UK, while impoverished from the War, was still in possession of an Empire (excluding the former subcontinental posessions). While the British Labour Party had championed decolonisation from 1945, the Conservatives were in power from 1951 and were determined to maintain British global influence, and so were very hawkish over Suez, Malaya etc.

 

I just see so much potential for the original novels to be dramatised in this setting, in their correct order. A sober interpretation, faithful to the books and the time period. Taking Mad Men as an example, we see it is possible to deliver a TV show where the evolving style, technology and cultural norms of each historical year covered in a show can be fastidiously followed as they unfolded and developed in real life. Just as Mad Men showed us with high fidelity how the early 1960s evolve and develop from a staid and conservative hangover of the ‘50s to the Swinging Sixties and then finally transitioning to the early 1970s, so we could see a similar development in Bond and his times.

 

1950s Fleming Novels:

• 1953 Casino Royale
• 1954 Live and Let Die
• 1955 Moonraker
• 1956 Diamonds Are Forever
• 1957 From Russia, with Love
• 1958 Dr. No
• 1959 Goldfinger
• 1960 For Your Eyes Only (short stories)

 

1960s Fleming Novels:

• 1961 Thunderball
• 1962 The Spy Who Loved Me
• 1963 On Her Majesty's Secret Service
• 1964 You Only Live Twice
• 1965 The Man with the Golden Gun
• 1966 Octopussy and The Living Daylights (short stories)

[Pierceuhhh]

It's an atrocious idea. James Bond is a contemporary character. Fleming didn't write books set in the 1910s. He was always fascinated by the now, by the future, by technology. Whenever Fleming stepped "back in time" a little - i.e. using Nazis as villains in MOONRAKER - IMO it felt hackneyed and irrelevant.

Sounds like most people here just want to see the books translated directly to the screen. Why? Just read them again if you want. And frankly, a lot would need to be changed to get Fleming's slapdash plotting to work, which would render the whole exercise pointless anyway. I can't imagine the average viewer being entertained by a faithful 45-minute adaptation of FROM A VIEW TO A KILL ("Bond lies on a tree branch, looks at a rose bush").

It may not sound like it, but I love the books and the movies, and the best way the movies can stay faithful to Fleming is to keep his approach and philosophy and follow Bond through the years - don't dwell in the past, NEVER LOOK BACK!!
 

Period pieces never look 100% convincing anyway.

[AMC Hornet]

 

Such an immediate post-War setting of war veterans and European reconstruction brings very different politics, music, culture, fashion, technology, daily headlines and social concerns to those of the Sixties.

 

Fine, as long as they don't overdo the period vibe by stuffing in barely-relevant cultural references for their own sake, like Sebastian Faulks did.