Where does Bond go after Craig?

1122123125127128523

Comments

  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    edited March 2022 Posts: 650
    I don't care if Bond goes light or dark. I like OHMSS and LTK just as much as I like YOLT and TMWTGG. I just don't want any more soap opera dramatics, questioning Bond's relevancy, or psychobabble about his psyche.
  • BirdlesonBirdleson Moderator
    Posts: 2,161
    slide_99 wrote: »
    I don't care if Bond goes light or dark. I like OHMSS and LTK just as much as I like YOLT and TMWTGG. I just don't want any more soap opera dramatics, questioning Bond's relevancy, or psychobabble about his psyche.

    Yes.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,942
    Birdleson wrote: »
    slide_99 wrote: »
    I don't care if Bond goes light or dark. I like OHMSS and LTK just as much as I like YOLT and TMWTGG. I just don't want any more soap opera dramatics, questioning Bond's relevancy, or psychobabble about his psyche.

    Yes.

    There are actors who can do both; his time has past , but Hugh Jackman could have been incredible Bond, He has the charm of Moore and can be as blunt and brutal as Craig. I want an actor cut from this mold who will give the franchise the flexibility to explore a range of tones.

  • Posts: 1,550
    talos7 wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    slide_99 wrote: »
    I don't care if Bond goes light or dark. I like OHMSS and LTK just as much as I like YOLT and TMWTGG. I just don't want any more soap opera dramatics, questioning Bond's relevancy, or psychobabble about his psyche.

    Yes.

    There are actors who can do both; his time has past , but Hugh Jackman could have been incredible Bond, He has the charm of Moore and can be as blunt and brutal as Craig. I want an actor cut from this mold who will give the franchise the flexibility to explore a range of tones.

    Elba. Idris Elba.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,942
    Since62 wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    slide_99 wrote: »
    I don't care if Bond goes light or dark. I like OHMSS and LTK just as much as I like YOLT and TMWTGG. I just don't want any more soap opera dramatics, questioning Bond's relevancy, or psychobabble about his psyche.

    Yes.

    There are actors who can do both; his time has past , but Hugh Jackman could have been incredible Bond, He has the charm of Moore and can be as blunt and brutal as Craig. I want an actor cut from this mold who will give the franchise the flexibility to explore a range of tones.

    Elba. Idris Elba.

    Uh, no. . .
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,917
    slide_99 wrote: »
    I don't care if Bond goes light or dark. I like OHMSS and LTK just as much as I like YOLT and TMWTGG. I just don't want any more soap opera dramatics, questioning Bond's relevancy, or psychobabble about his psyche.

    I don't think I really recall any psychobabble from the Craig films, there's probably less than you get in the Fleming books, with all of that accidie stuff and contemplation of killing etc.
  • Posts: 1,550
    He doesn't just play at being cool...

    Idris Elba hops into a brand-new, immensely powerful super-coupe and obliterates a speed record set when George V was still king and Charles Lindbergh had just landed in Paris.

    If it seems silly, it's because this was not in any way a fair fight. Look, Idris Elba is a certified badass, but the 626-hp Bentley Continental GT Speed he was driving benefits from 88 years of automotive evolution that Sir Malcolm Campbell absolutely didn't have at his disposal back in 1927. That's a sizable advantage in favor of the British star.

    Stick with us here, though, because there's a very cool parallel to all of this, and it's something that even Bentley didn't think to highlight.

    See, if you read Bentley's press release, it lays out the bare facts: The undeniably attractive Elba, star of Luther and The Wire, sought to break the "Flying Mile" record, a top speed run that takes place on a seven-mile stretch of smooth, firm beach on the shores of Carmathen Bay, Wales, known as Pendine Sands. The defending champion of the Flying Mile was Sir Malcolm Campbell, whose two-way average of 174.8 mph has gone unchallenged since 1927.

    Elba in the GT Speed obliterated that, blasting through the one-mile stretch at a maximum velocity of 180.361 mph. But why did it take 88 years for Sir Malcolm's record to fall? For that, we need to dig into the history of Pendine Sands.

    In the early 1900s, when the pioneers of motor racing first sought glory in the form of maximum velocity, standard roads and race tracks soon became inadequate. As daring record-breakers pushed 150 mph, they needed a venue that offered enough space on either side of the measured mile to safely run at top speeds. The seven-mile stretch of Pendine Sands fit the bill perfectly.

    Sir Malcolm was the first to set a flying mile record at Pendine Sands, with a 1924 run that set the bar at 146.16 mph. The record didn't stand long: Sir Malcolm and Welshman J.G. Parry-Thomas each held the top speed two more times between 1924 and 1927. Sir Malcolm set a new record in February 1927 with a speed of 174.22 mph; The next month, Parry-Thomas suffered a fatal crash at Pendine Sands when his car went out of control at an estimated 170 mph. He was the first of many drivers to die while pursuing a speed record.

    After Parry-Thomas's death, and another unsuccessful challenge in 1927 by Giulio Foresti (who miraculously walked away after his car rolled at an estimated 150 mph), land speed record seekers sought out other venues. Eventually, drivers gravitated to the wide open expanses of Daytona Beach and the Bonneville Salt Flats, though Sir Malcolm set a 246.09 mph record in Verneuk Pan, South Africa in 1931 that stood for more than a year. Pendine Sands was taken over by Britain's Ministry of Defense in WWII, with public vehicle use on the beach banned until 2010.

    So while the land speed record rose higher and higher, topping out with Andy Green's ThrustSSC run of 760.343 mph in 1997, the record at Pendine Sands remained a remarkable but no longer world-beating 174.8 mph.

    Yes, it's entirely safe to assume that Bentley and Elba sought out a record they knew the Continental GT Speed could break. By a quirk of history, Pendine Sands provided just such a record—with the added benefit of being in Great Britain. British car, British star, British sands; it's almost enough to make you hum "God Save the Queen."

    Here's where history left a nice little bit of coincidence, though: The car that Sir Malcolm Campbell used to set that long-standing 1927 record was the Napier-Campbell Blue Bird, a gargantuan open-cockpit streamliner that was the second in a long succession of speedsters named Blue Bird. The Napier aspect of the name came from the Blue Bird's engine, a 12-cylinder aircraft motor that was once the most powerful engine in the world. The Napier's cylinders are arranged in three banks of four cylinders set apart at 60 degree angles—in other words, a W-12.

    Idris Elba's Bentley is also powered by a W-12, albeit one with a different cylinder arrangement (two 15-degree V-6 engines sharing a crankshaft with a 72-degree spread between them). Which means that, when Elba put the hammer down, he deposed a W-12 with another W-12.

    Just a nice little bit of history repeating itself.
  • Posts: 1,703
    echo wrote: »
    Did people complain when they rebooted the character last time? No. I don't recall reading, "But what about Goldfinger? What about Tracy? Did none of that happen? Waa!" Zzz...

    Actually, there have been critics of the reboot. Why did they need to reboot? I know that they wanted to jump on the Batman Begins reboot wagon. But all they needed was another OHMSS/FYEO/TLD course correction.

    I agreed with this at the time, because I assumed the reboot would just create a new floating timeline, so it seemed pointless to me. But instead they used it to set up a complete story with a beginning middle and end. That made it worth it for me. I still agree they didn’t need to do it, but I’m glad they did, even though the arc wasn’t always handled brilliantly.

    "Wasn't handled brilliantly" is putting it mildly.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 395
    Moore to Dalton switch would be good. Old to younger without past baggage.
  • Posts: 1,550
    delfloria wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Did people complain when they rebooted the character last time? No. I don't recall reading, "But what about Goldfinger? What about Tracy? Did none of that happen? Waa!" Zzz...

    Actually, there have been critics of the reboot. Why did they need to reboot? I know that they wanted to jump on the Batman Begins reboot wagon. But all they needed was another OHMSS/FYEO/TLD course correction.

    I agreed with this at the time, because I assumed the reboot would just create a new floating timeline, so it seemed pointless to me. But instead they used it to set up a complete story with a beginning middle and end. That made it worth it for me. I still agree they didn’t need to do it, but I’m glad they did, even though the arc wasn’t always handled brilliantly.

    "Wasn't handled brilliantly" is putting it mildly.

    I find it interesting how much vitriol is expressed over how the story arc was handled during Craig's tenure. Does no one recall how sloppy the series was in some of the years before ? How cheap effects and dumb moments negatively affected some of the films ? I think the films have been put together MUCH better recently. And this comment comes from someone - um, yes, me - who sees the effects of the writer's strike on QOS and who has detailed the parts of SP which could have been greatly improved with a few strokes of the pen - well, keyboard, right ? - in the script before filming, among a few things.
  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Not a red herring
    Posts: 559
    Since62 wrote: »
    delfloria wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Did people complain when they rebooted the character last time? No. I don't recall reading, "But what about Goldfinger? What about Tracy? Did none of that happen? Waa!" Zzz...

    Actually, there have been critics of the reboot. Why did they need to reboot? I know that they wanted to jump on the Batman Begins reboot wagon. But all they needed was another OHMSS/FYEO/TLD course correction.

    I agreed with this at the time, because I assumed the reboot would just create a new floating timeline, so it seemed pointless to me. But instead they used it to set up a complete story with a beginning middle and end. That made it worth it for me. I still agree they didn’t need to do it, but I’m glad they did, even though the arc wasn’t always handled brilliantly.

    "Wasn't handled brilliantly" is putting it mildly.

    I find it interesting how much vitriol is expressed over how the story arc was handled during Craig's tenure. Does no one recall how sloppy the series was in some of the years before ? How cheap effects and dumb moments negatively affected some of the films ? I think the films have been put together MUCH better recently. And this comment comes from someone - um, yes, me - who sees the effects of the writer's strike on QOS and who has detailed the parts of SP which could have been greatly improved with a few strokes of the pen - well, keyboard, right ? - in the script before filming, among a few things.

    It's easier to forgive some of that stuff in the past when the series wasn't taking itself as seriously. When you set yourself grand ambitions like creating an interconnected story across multiple films, it automatically raises the audience's expectations and if you fail to deliver, it's a lot more disappointing than some sped up film or a silly sound effect over an amazing stunt.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,505
    MSL49 wrote: »
    Moore to Dalton switch would be good. Old to younger without past baggage.

    That's what I'd hope for. Just pick up with the new fella no explanations necessary. This guy is the new Bond off we go
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,942
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    MSL49 wrote: »
    Moore to Dalton switch would be good. Old to younger without past baggage.

    That's what I'd hope for. Just pick up with the new fella no explanations necessary. This guy is the new Bond off we go

    I actually have always seen the transition from Moore to Dalton as the first reboot. Two factors guide how I see this, one being the ages of the actors, and the other being that the Bond Films always take place in the present day. Having Bond suddenly become 15 years younger within the same timeline makes no sense.

    Yes the timelines and continuity of the films have been a bit dodgy and are convoluted, but I see Connery, Lazenby and Moore as the same Bond; the James Bond seen in Dr. No is the same as we saw at the end of his career in "A View to a Kill"

    The next incarnation of Bond featured Dalton and Brosnan as 007. The Bond we see in "Living Daylights" is the same as we see in "Die Another Day". Yes several of the same actors are carried over, but as with Judi Dench's "M", they are not the same versions that they portrayed in the Connery, Lazenby, Moore era.

    Then there is the Craig era.

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited March 2022 Posts: 14,917
    Yep i agree, I see it as three ages to Bond too.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,026
    I've always thought the same way too. It makes the most sense to me.

    Now we're on to age four.
  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Not a red herring
    edited March 2022 Posts: 559
    I've always seen each Bond as existing in their own world, but having all been on the same adventures and experienced the same things (with the exception of Craig obviously). Actually the reboot happened at just the right time for this to work because Brosnan is the last Bond old enough to have operated during the Cold War, so he could've experienced his own versions of FRWL and YOLT, albeit in the 80s rather than the 60s.
  • ThunderballThunderball playing Chemin de Fer in a casino, downing Vespers
    Posts: 776
    Welp. Good news for some, I suppose. Me, I despise Amazon and its founder so I'll stick with the blu rays. I'm a big fan of physical media anyway. Not just for Bond but for a lot of other things.
  • Posts: 12,248
    Welp. Good news for some, I suppose. Me, I despise Amazon and its founder so I'll stick with the blu rays. I'm a big fan of physical media anyway. Not just for Bond but for a lot of other things.

    I feel that. I’m hoping this doesn’t hurt the chances of getting a physical set of every film including NTTD or my OCD is going to rage.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited March 2022 Posts: 5,869
    I just want to say I'm getting little bored of the conversation outside of this community. I swear every video or article I read talks about the same things - Henry Cavill, Tom Hardy, Aiden Turner, Idris Elba and Christopher Nolan. I can't tell if its naivety, a lack of creativity or just a blatant attempt to get some content out regarding the future of James Bond out there for the sake of it (maybe even all of the above) because no-one seems to be delving any deeper than same conversation we've had for the past 10 years. Even some of the more hardcore fans seem to be unable to fall into this trap.
  • edited March 2022 Posts: 12,837
    mtm wrote: »
    slide_99 wrote: »
    I don't care if Bond goes light or dark. I like OHMSS and LTK just as much as I like YOLT and TMWTGG. I just don't want any more soap opera dramatics, questioning Bond's relevancy, or psychobabble about his psyche.

    I don't think I really recall any psychobabble from the Craig films, there's probably less than you get in the Fleming books, with all of that accidie stuff and contemplation of killing etc.

    I don’t recall any soap opera stuff either. There was relationship drama, but Fleming was no stranger to that.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    edited March 2022 Posts: 4,247
    I think EON should simply make the next Bond era Military-based with complex plots and more spy work, with plenty of femme fatales with original and colourful villains, all with grounded plots built around it, with thrills and suspense accompanied by sprinkling gadgetry/technology here and there, that doesn't affect the plot. This way, it will standout from Craig's era.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,917
    mtm wrote: »
    slide_99 wrote: »
    I don't care if Bond goes light or dark. I like OHMSS and LTK just as much as I like YOLT and TMWTGG. I just don't want any more soap opera dramatics, questioning Bond's relevancy, or psychobabble about his psyche.

    I don't think I really recall any psychobabble from the Craig films, there's probably less than you get in the Fleming books, with all of that accidie stuff and contemplation of killing etc.

    I don’t recall any soap opera stuff either. There was relationship drama, but Fleming was no stranger to that.

    I agree, but it's often unclear what people mean by 'soap opera', whether it's an ongoing story or just a love drama (again, both things that Fleming didn't exactly steer clear of).
  • Posts: 328
    Since62 wrote: »
    delfloria wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Did people complain when they rebooted the character last time? No. I don't recall reading, "But what about Goldfinger? What about Tracy? Did none of that happen? Waa!" Zzz...

    Actually, there have been critics of the reboot. Why did they need to reboot? I know that they wanted to jump on the Batman Begins reboot wagon. But all they needed was another OHMSS/FYEO/TLD course correction.

    I agreed with this at the time, because I assumed the reboot would just create a new floating timeline, so it seemed pointless to me. But instead they used it to set up a complete story with a beginning middle and end. That made it worth it for me. I still agree they didn’t need to do it, but I’m glad they did, even though the arc wasn’t always handled brilliantly.

    "Wasn't handled brilliantly" is putting it mildly.

    I find it interesting how much vitriol is expressed over how the story arc was handled during Craig's tenure. Does no one recall how sloppy the series was in some of the years before ? How cheap effects and dumb moments negatively affected some of the films ? I think the films have been put together MUCH better recently. And this comment comes from someone - um, yes, me - who sees the effects of the writer's strike on QOS and who has detailed the parts of SP which could have been greatly improved with a few strokes of the pen - well, keyboard, right ? - in the script before filming, among a few things.

    You're right but the real problem lies with the fact that after 6 decades you'd expect EoN to know better and not repeat some of the same mistakes or worse. The talent involved in making these films are a lot more sophisticated compared to years gone by except for the writing it seems. What's really frustrating is that the majority of the current Bond film's sloppiness could easily be avoided in favour of better decisions. At least with the older films I get the impression that Harry and Cubby in many instances just didn't give a crap and with conviction went along with whatever wacky nonsense they gave us.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,944
    MSL49 wrote: »
    Moore to Dalton switch would be good. Old to younger without past baggage.

    That's some soap.
  • Posts: 1,703
    We'll know soon because Amazon will want to move forward with the next Bond to get their moneys worth.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 395
    Cubby knew how to pick proper Bond.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    His daughter as well.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,894
    Oh no. Does this mean they are going to slap their damn logo on the films? Make it tougher for me to forget that Amazon now has a say.
  • Posts: 1,009
    Here we go, lads. With Dan off and Amazon on, we're entering a new era on quite a number of aspects.
Sign In or Register to comment.