42 replies to this topic

[IrishCrown]

It's official, in a statement from MGM, they announced that despite the fact they are, of course, pleased with the record opening weekend for their latest James Bond entry Die Another Day, they have already announced preliminary plans for the next Bond, simply known as Bond 21. With Bond 20, an attempt was made to push the series into boundaries and areas not reached since 1979's Moonraker. For the next movie, however, MGM and the current producers have already made the decision to bring the balloon down, to bring James Bond back to earth. The next Bond, currently slated for release in 2004, promises to be a tougher, grittier Bond. A spokesman for MGM also hopes that in the next Bond, that when 007 comes into a fight with 4 big guys in a room, instead of using an Uzi on them, he uses his fists. Ah, the days of old.



What do you think, fellas? Obviously, this hasn't really happened (that I know of, anyway!), but would any of you guys be sad if it did? From hearing what I have from people I know and on the boards here, this almost reminds me of how people were when Moonraker came out. They either loved the new direction Bond went in, or the purists hated the change.

[TGO]

MGM is making the smart decision to not try a bigger bond. They must have realised all you have to do is promote the hell out of a movie.

[zencat]

Bring Bond down to earth. Oh goodie...another LTK. No thanks.

[IrishCrown]

I was hoping for another For Your Eyes Only, actually.

[zencat]

I was hoping for another Moonraker or at least Octopussy. Of course, I remember they said Octopussy would be a "down to earth" Bond like FYEO. I confess, FYEO was a little too down to earth for me, but I though the balance was perfect in Octopussy.

[IrishCrown]

Did you think the balance was just right in Die Another Day? I thought it was, but a lot of people I know had problems with it.

[deth]

yes, I really loved Octopussy! Ahhh...the fists.....

[IrishCrown]

So a combination of the intrigue of From Russia With Love and the spectacle of Goldfinger, and you have the great Bond, correct? The reason I ask, is because that's what I think Octopussy is, intrigue and spectacle.

[Xenobia]

Well Brosnan wanted things grittier which is fine with me too. If we wind up with something that has poignancy of FYEO with the depth of TWINE and DAD, I think we will be just fine.

-- Xenobia

[IrishCrown]

Since I think Bond 21 will be Brosnan's last, it had better be something special, which I happen to believe it will be.

[PaulZ108]

Nice to see they're set for a 2004 release.

I'm really worried about the "more down to earth" thing. The last time that happened we got FYEO. I love FYEO, but it's the least watched film in my collection. There's nothing wrong with wanting to tone down the fantasy elements, but just don't overdo it like in FYEO and LTK.

[IrishCrown]

Going for the more down to earth approach, I just am not sure how much further they can take this without going totally into science fiction territory. We had a death ray in this movie, what's next, a death star? That's no moon...it's a space station. Hopefully, it won't go that far, but maybe they will. Who knows?

It's the future, get used to it.

[zencat]

Originally posted by IrishCrown
Did you think the balance was just right in Die Another Day?  I thought it was, but a lot of people I know had problems with it.

I thought DAD cleaved big, like YOLT and TSWLM, but I like big and it's been sooooooo long since we've had a big Bond that, well, I just loved DAD and I'm just not ready to go small...yet.

[Alexborn007]

I don't know. If they can keep putting out plot lines with big Fantasy Bond movies...maybe I'm not ready for the switch.

But then again, Brosnan has Bond down to a science and I'd love to see him do something really intriguing and tough. I don't think MGM is being totally up front, there's sure to be a lot of action. And, if DAD keeps pulling in the $$$ then there's bound to be revisions when they see this formula works. Remember, if this is Brosnan's TSWLM...Moonraker came afterwards.

[rubixcub]

With Bond 20, an attempt was made to push the series into boundaries and areas not reached since 1979's Moonraker.

That was pretty evident, and I appreciated the change. It was long overdue IMO.

For the next movie, however, MGM and the current producers have already made the decision to bring the balloon down, to bring James Bond back to earth.

Like FYEO to MR. Hopefully it will be a little more like FRWL than FYEO. With the mixed reaction to DAD being too overblown a little restraint might work- just so long as they don't go to the extreme or try to overcompensate for a smaller scale.

The next Bond, currently slated for release in 2004, promises to be a tougher, grittier Bond. A spokesman for MGM also hopes that in the next Bond, that when 007 comes into a fight with 4 big guys in a room, instead of using an Uzi on them, he uses his fists. Ah, the days of old.

Sounds good to me. 2004, huh? I would've figured 2005, but with MGM in need of cash...

I had a theory a while back on Bond 21's release date being the key to knowing how many Brosnan would do. If it was 2005, then he would be getting another 3-year break and might or might not do #22 in 2007. If it was 2004, that meant he was saving his 3-year break for in-between 21 & 22. Of course, there's no way to know for sure. In any case, if Brosnan does retire the role after Bond 21, they may need the extra year to find the next man and keep audiences hungrier for another Bond movie (look what the 6-year wait did for Brosnan).

Dave

[rubixcub]

IrishCrown, where did you see this press release? Can you give us a hyperlink or anything so we can read it? Thanks.

Dave

[jeff319]

Sorry to break it too ya guys, but at the bottom of IrishCrown's post, he writes:

"Obviously, this hasn't really happened (that I know of, anyway!),"

I was fooled for a while too.

[DLibrasnow]

Of course they will be wanting to release a Bond movie in 2007. How could they not, "007 in 2007" With this in mind it makes sense that Bond 21 will be set for a 2004 release date.

[00Kevin]

Originally posted by DLibrasnow
Of course they will be wanting to release a Bond movie in 2007. How could they not, "007 in 2007" With this in mind it makes sense that Bond 21 will be set for a 2004 release date.

I agree, pluss they wanted to make it's brosnan's 7th

with a bond in 2004, 2006, and 2007, it would work well.

[RITZ]

Where does IrishCrown get all this info?

[5 BONDS]

I don't mind fantasy Bond once in a while as long as they don't use ****** cgi that stands out like your ****.

[ShockTroop22]

When are we expecting a press-release, anyways? how early in pre-production was it when Die Another Day was announced? Sorry, just thought i'd ask.

[Tim007]

So there isn't any press release?

[ShockTroop22]

nope

[C. Tounes]

Oh he fooled us ! I'd be very, very happy if this was true though...

[IrishCrown]

Sorry about the confusion, fellas, but I did write near the end that this didn't really happen yet. I wanted to hear what you guys thought about what type of film Bond 21 would be. The reaction I have been getting from people I have been talking to about Die Another Day has been extreme. I wanted some feedback.

[zencat]

Wait, this isn't real? IrishCrown...you're bad.

[IrishCrown]

Oh, now I've done it.....

[YOLT]

21 in 2004 22 in 2006 and a special one, 23 in 2007, Brosnans last. It will be great to have 2 007s in 2007, one is Bond (of course) and the bad guy becomes 007 when Bond fails in a mission, bad 007 kills M, and Bond kills him, just love to see it. 2010 will be the year of Bond 24 and a new Bond, and 2012 Bond 25, 50 years and 25 films.

[Kingdom Come]

Bond 21 - Bond will use fists instead of technology? How boring! How ordinary! How un-original! I don't want the series to go back to FYEO days. Sorry, fans of FYEO!