It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Whatever the capacity of his role I'm most certainly intrigued.
There is a possibility (as a Brit) that he could be tied to Ilsa's past. That would be interesting given that she's been a mysterious character (neither good nor bad) so far in the prior film.
Cavill playing a Bond type spy in a Mission Impossible film! Bonkers, man! 8-} If he can't play Bond I guess this is the next best thing. I can't imagine he'll play a villain but you never know, I suppose.
Which is interesting, considering Cruise was originally going to play that role before Cavill stepped in.
He did a good job too....
And let's hear the next actor say things that Dalton used to come out with. I want him to be a massive fan of the novels. I want him to be the driving force in forcing the producers to go back to the books - just like Dalton did.
I've never once heard Craig speak of the novels fondly like Dalton did. He's obviously read them, but I don't get the sense he is really trying to interpret the character Fleming wrote. He is a very good actor, and brilliant at conveying hidden depth emotions. But I feel his performance is driven purely by the script he's given, and not by the Fleming source material.
If its a classically trained actor, then no doubt he would go back to the novels, because most thespians who take the craft seriously try to understand the root of a character, and this usually means going back to the source, wherever it may be.
If they go down the route of something silly like Idris Elba, or another actor who is a popular choice, but not necessarily classically trained, then I doubt it. We'll just get another generic action hero who dresses in nice suits and likes bedding women.
Just with Sp they left that path and gave us the more traditional Bond, due to request of many, I believe
So, I wouldn't get my hopes up to see 100% Fleming with the next era or the installment even. Because we know they'll be replicating the thing that left impact on the audience and stick to pop culture. Sure, they'll mention some of the principals and outlines that formed the character from the source material and all, but that's as far as they'll go. The general audience only knows that Bond is a Super-Spy, so EON will keep going down that road. It's only us, the fans, who truly care about Fleming. The general audience doesn't.
Craig indeed did, and he did a very good job with it.
The best Bond actors can blend Fleming's intent with a more flippant & casual Bond that has become known and loved by many. They tried that in SP, but it didn't work (at least imho). Most of that was due to the appalling script, but I believe a lot of that was on account of Craig, who doesn't appear to do so well with that kind of thing. I just watched MR last night and was impressed with how Moore switched subtly from a moore (pun intended) serious Bond in TSWLM to the one he played in that film. He would switch back to even more serious in the next outing, all the while maintaining the character at its core. It's not as easy as it looked.
Barbara has often quoted this, yet none of this is evident in the films she has worked on, other than CR.
QoS, SF and SP dig up mild (in the extreme) references and character names from the novels, and then turn them into something they imagine Fleming would write - often with disastrous results - and far worse than anything that originated with what Fleming wrote. Which makes me wonder what they are afraid of in resurrecting any of the untapped material.
If the material was good enough for Cubby, it should be good enough for his daughter too. And we all know (those who are familiar with the novels) that the material is good enough - far stronger than what P&W have conjured up anyway!
EON have done a good job of trying to stay true to a fantasy character that was written when the world was a very different place.
Given Bond has been played by six actors, we have also had the privilege of different actor interpretations of the character along with progression due to time. It's truly been a fascinating ride, but ultimately they should tailor the script and the character to the actor in order to make it seem authentic. Work within the actor's limitation and we will have a decent enough film.
That doesn't mean it will impress everyone though, and I'm sure many will be up in arms that it's not true to something they envisaged in the books. Nevertheless, I believe that's the way they must go.
But if the actor's limitations are like another Brosnan or Moore, and we go down the generic DAD action fest route again, this doesn't guarantee we will get another decent Bond flick.
Let's hope they pick a strong enough actor who loves the novels enough to force the producers into going back down that route.
At the end of the day, DAD was a fiasco for reasons other than Brosnan. Craig on the other hand contributed to SP being a rather unenjoyable film for me.
Moore was a far more versatile actor than he is generally given credit for and he proved it with seven tonally different entries.
Yes, in one takes it to extremes, we could indeed get something outrageous, but I believe there are enough decent actors out there for that not to be an inevitability.
Some don't like that (and I'm not so sure if I was keen on it either), but it's to be commended because there is a sincerity in his films.
The box office suffered though.
I don't agree with this. In TLD maybe (as this was written for Moore).
But Dalton in LTK is the exact carbon copy of Fleming from the books. Lazenby in OHMSS wasn't far off either, be he was lucky in that the script pretty much followed the novel, so he had no choice but to play the Fleming character. Being physically fit but slightly wooden probably helped convey that to screen too actually.
I think Dalton and LTK were ahead of the time. Back then audiences still expected cheesy Bond, with lots of humour and gadgets. Nowadays people want darker, tougher heroes. Craig's films are testimony to that, and they've all performed well at the BO.
And in Craig's films we are not that far away from the Fleming world, and the gritty, bloody, violent Dalton Bond of LTK. It will only take subtle changes in bringing Craig's Bond into the Fleming world. The tone is pretty much already there.
Having the story based on some Fleming material would be a good start.
Craig's have all performed well, and his films are not that far off Fleming Bond.
Craig does, as long as he sticks to what he's good at and plays within his safe zone, which is within a more grounded & serious universe which is actually closer to the character & tone of the novels.
If they want to inject larger than life fantasy with Craig as Bond, they have to do it with the supporting characters. They successfully achieved this with SF, which is the only Craig entry to really lift the box office numbers in terms of number of theatre goers Stateside. CR, QoS & SP were all relatively static.
Dr. Shatterhand and his Garden of Death, Bond trapped and sat above an erupting tiny volcano chair before escaping and flying off in the sky on a helium balloon.
A brainwashed Bond trying to kill M.
Bond going undercover as Mark Hazard to kill the deadliest hitman on earth, only to find himself on an open steam train, about to be killed as a spectacle for Scaramaga's guests.
Bond being almost kicked to death by a couple of Brooklyn mobsters wearing football boots.
Bond rescuing the heroine who is trapped in a motel by a couple of mobsters who plan to rape her then kill her.
There is much more I can list, but I think you get the point...