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
I'm not sure if we will see a return to a more 'traditional' actor in the role however. I fear that since Craig opened the floodgates anything goes from now on, particularly if Babs want to continue on this emotional tangent. One can only hope that things don't get too much further out of hand.
Regarding getting back to a two year schedule, I'm afraid that is unlikely until the current leadership at EON is replaced, either by acquisition of Bond rights or by old age retirement. They seem quite content to spread this out as long as they can, and with their new found interest in side pursuits, I believe the gaps will only get longer. At some point, I believe there will be pressure financially on the MGM side to get these films out sooner, and hopefully that will be the impetus to satisfy our craving for more frequent Bond.
I'd put money on him being the next Bond.
There is always the chance Eon will go with a more traditional Roger Moore/Sean Connery type. Personally, I hope not. I don't really gravitate to the more effete 007s. I like someone a little more alpha in the role.
I don't want the likes of Max Irons or Theo James considered. I'm really not interested in some bland pretty white boy playing the role. You need someone with a bit of edge. Folk like Tom Hiddleston look more at home hanging out with David Cameron and can hardly channel the insouciance of Sean Connery.
I can live with Max Irons. He was impressive in that Christie adaptation. In a few more years and with a bit more experience under his belt, he may be able to take up the mantle.
Theo James I can do without. I recently saw him in some crappy film with Ben Kingsley. He lacks charisma imho.
I don't see the Craig era as a start of a new norm, but more an extended diversion. I also do think that Aidan Turner will fit the role a bit better in a few years, when he isn't so fresh faced. I like the fact that he isn't popping up in everything though, as I think that would probably harm his chances of becoming Bond. The producers like to think that they discovered the actor, and although Aidan is popular in his own country, he's a blank slate on the global stage. I think that is good news, as many iconic roles are going to lesser known actors, like Spider-Man and Han Solo for instance. I think if there is one thing Bond is missing it's a bit of charm, or amiability. There was nothing endearing about Bond in SP in my opinion, and I think the actor is a part of that equation not adding up. It's Craig's downfall, that when the focus is on introspection of the character he is great, but when it is about having fun on a mission and getting into mischieve, he doesn't sell it. So much of Bond was about the unique scrapes he'd himself caught up in. Battling a pair of female fighter in a swimming pool, driving round with a crazy police sheriff riding shotgun, finding an ice skater in your bed etc. This stuff was common for decades, it was just what Bond did. If Bond doesn't do that stuff, what does he do when he isn't navalgazing? I don't think it's a question they have even attempted address. The point is that on the one hand what Bond used to do is now considered too pastiche to be taken seriously, and on the other hand it is also too politically incorrect and out of date. Soon nothing Bond used to get up to will be considered fair play anymore, and all that will remain is endless soul-searching of a character lost in the entropy of the modern paradigm. If we don't want that to happen, we have to start with an actor who can get away with handling the lighter side of things, and being what today would be considered mischevious and disodent. Roger Moore had a way handling incredibly raunchy material, and making it fun for the whole family. That's what they need to tap into again, and less so an actor with a degree from Shakespeare academy.
Having said that, it was never really his game, was it? That's the very reason he was hired. Because Babs felt compelled to take the character in a different direction. The only question now is will she return to the template, or continue with further deviations and introspections. I believe that now that she has gotten a taste for success which she has defined on her own terms with the help of her chosen muse, this is only going to continue. She will want to up the ante.
So much as I may be in agreement with you, I wouldn't be surprised if our kind of Bond is long gone. May he RIP.
I hope I'm wrong however.
Yes, it was never his game, and they made sure to steer clear of all that for most of his run. It was only really with SP, when they tried to dabble for with the old Bond flair (the Lucia sequence comes to mind), that it became evident to me just how ill-fitting that persona was for him. It also irritates me that now everyone thinks that the next guy who takes over should be an actor in the same vein, when that is the opposite of what is needed. I think Aidan Turner is all too happy to make fun of himself, and doesn't take himself too seriously or behave like a sourpuss to the press. I hate to sound like a broken record, but there was no one more self effacing than Roger Moore. It was almost sad at times to see him make fun of his own acting etc. I genuinely don't think he knew how good a performer he was, or what drew people to him, apart from that he was over 6 foot with a solid jawline. I think in order for Bond to move forward, instead of meandering in circles, it has to learn to take itself less serious, and relax. We have said many times how the world that gave birth to Craig's Bond was still stricken by the tragedies of 9/11 and global instability. While that hasn't changed, I think the way we perceive it has. Sadly, it has become everyday to read about new tragedies, and I think people look to media to see that there is still cheerfulness in the world. That's how the franchise Bond does battle with (F&F, MI, Marvel, Kingsman etc.) have thrived as of late, and I'm hopeful that things will be forced back in that direction with a changing of the guard, Babs or no Babs.
With all due respect, Bond is not supposed to be having fun on a mission and getting into mischief. The Moore era is the Moore era and it has been put to bed. Thank God.
Agreed. Moore was Moore and no one did, or will do it, like him again.
I can do without cute winks and bad one liners.
I like the Connery/Craig/Lazenby masculinity. Rugged/roguish charm. Physically capable and looks like he knows how to actually throw a punch. Magnetism (however which way the actor projects it is good enough for me)...
That’s 100% correct. Moore is awesome, but not something to strive for in the modern day
I'd like to see some more time spent in soaking up these locales, too. SP felt like it simply jumped from country to country for the sake of it, though the introduction to Rome was gorgeous. I'm thinking of Bond and Melina enjoying the sights and the culture in FYEO, wouldn't mind seeing something akin to that.
Yes that's been a problem with the last three Bond films. Rapid fire successions of globetrotting but not really soaking up and embracing the culture. And a bit too much of London.
@Peter, I can't comment on the novels as I haven't read many of them. I'm referring to the cinematic portrayal. On repeat viewings of Craig's films there's really not much life in the guy. I don't find him as interesting as I would Sean, Roger and Pierce's Bond. While they all had their share of somber quiet moments, they still had life to them. I'm not seeing enough that in Craig. He just mopes around too much for my tastes. It was a convincing act at first but now it's wearing a little thin.
P
QoS he's quite light except for his 6 Vesper's...
You see brooding; I see deeply conflicted.
In 1979 after MR, Roger Moore comments about the tough schedule and that he is unlikely to return as Bond.
2017 Daniel Craig confirms he is coming back for Bond 25.
1981. Roger Moore returns for Bond 12 aka FYEO.
Moore went on to star in two more Bond films after FYEO, always saying that the latest film would be his last
I can see history repeating itself with Daniel Craig.
He's said it's his last, but who knows. He could go on to make a sixth or seventh film, like Roger Moore did. It's just repeating history as before.
I think more than five is highly unlikely. Regardless of what ones think of Craig ir would speak volumes about what they think of the pool of candidates.
It gets boring after a while. Can't keep up the same act four times in a row.
Precisely.
You've nailed it. The Craig schtick is getting old, and he isn't good when he's not in his comfort zone.
I can see Craig doing a sixth possibly. Never say never.
It's history repeating itself.