Where does Bond go after Craig?

1185186188190191513

Comments

  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,382
    For comparisons sake, Michael Keaton and Robert Pattinson are not the same Batman.

    That should clear up any concerns for continuity
  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    Posts: 648
    CrabKey wrote: »
    This is what happens when you disregard continuity, relate Bond and the major villain, and give in to wishes of an actor who wants his character to be killed off. You end up with a gigantic mess. Unless one accepts that each Bond exists in a separate reality, like Spiderman: No Way Home, you simply cannot make sense of the Bond series. I won't ever be able to watch a new Bond film without thinking 'if this is the same Bond, but at different point in his life, he'll eventually meet Madelaine and get blown up.' So, make it easy. Either start fresh as if those other films did not exist, or go with the idea I hate by making the name James Bond a code name. At least that way all the current cast could remain. Find a relative unknown actor for the new Bond so we don't have ready made expectations for a known actor who'll quickly become petulant and demanding, and cast Idris Elba as a villain.

    Since CraigBond canonically became 007 in 2006, he can't possibly be any of the previous ones. But I agree that what they did during the Craig era was stupid.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,518
    Truly. “Why has he got this weird muscle car if he just had the tumbler? Why is he back? Why is he younger? Why is literally everything different?”
  • edited September 2022 Posts: 2,010
    I think an argument can be made for why the Connery-Brosnan era’s can be one timeline, but no such argument for that exists with Craig.

    Like do people who think that seriously think that a character like Blofeld survived being dropped into a smock stack as a cripple if that was the case, or that he was his brother the entire time, even back in FRWL?
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,518
    Would anyone seriously believe Brosnan was three decades older than Connery, and still a kite surfin’ 00?
  • Posts: 15,785
    I do think of Connery thru Craig as all being the same character, just different interpretations told in different eras.
    However, I feel the Craig era MI6 staff are different characters from their Fleming counterparts.
    Neither Dench nor Fiennes are Fleming's Miles Messervy, and I don't believe Ben is intended to be Major Boothroyd.
  • Junglist_1985Junglist_1985 Los Angeles
    Posts: 1,006
    Even though it is imperfect, I like the idea that every Bond movie before Craig takes place between QOS and SF, before he’s an “old dog”.
  • Would anyone seriously believe Brosnan was three decades older than Connery, and still a kite surfin’ 00?

    I don’t believe that necessarily, but I do buy that Brosnan’s Bond in some way has experienced all the missions of previous films.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,518
    Would anyone seriously believe Brosnan was three decades older than Connery, and still a kite surfin’ 00?

    I don’t believe that necessarily, but I do buy that Brosnan’s Bond in some way has experienced all the missions of previous films.

    In that case, I can believe the same of Craig in Skyfall.
  • edited September 2022 Posts: 2,753
    CrabKey wrote: »
    This is what happens when you disregard continuity, relate Bond and the major villain, and give in to wishes of an actor who wants his character to be killed off. You end up with a gigantic mess. Unless one accepts that each Bond exists in a separate reality, like Spiderman: No Way Home, you simply cannot make sense of the Bond series.

    I know, such a mess - a 60 year old series coming off of one of its most financially/critically successful run of films with the guarantee of many more. That and the fact that they can do whatever they want creatively going forward.

    I do agree though, each Bond actor's tenure, hell even each Bond film arguably, is different and they're probably best viewed as standalone stories (or universes one could say) in a wider series. The end of NTTD only cemented that. Audiences get it and it's nothing new. We already have so many versions of Bond between the continuation novels, graphic novels, films etc. Again, it should be taken as an opportunity to do something different, but it'll require that slate to be wiped relatively clean (ok, things like the Bond theme and gun barrel likely won't be going, but the cast of the Craig era, any of its storylines, heck even those of the 1962-'02 era can go. You now have a chance to set up a new version of this character distinct from anything that came before. Personally, I'm astounded some fans aren't more excited by this possibility).
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 2022 Posts: 14,861
    Would anyone seriously believe Brosnan was three decades older than Connery, and still a kite surfin’ 00?

    I don’t believe that necessarily, but I do buy that Brosnan’s Bond in some way has experienced all the missions of previous films.

    Whereas I'm not sure I even buy that the Bond of AVTAK ever went up in space. I don't feel like those films are connected.

    Which isn't a problem with either, it's just different ways of doing it.

    007HallY wrote: »
    I do agree though, each Bond actor's tenure, hell even each Bond film arguably, is different and they're probably best viewed as standalone stories (or universes one could say) in a wider series. The end of NTTD only cemented that. Audiences get it and it's nothing new. We already have so many versions of Bond between the continuation novels, graphic novels, films etc. Again, it should be taken as an opportunity to do something different, but it'll require that slate to be wiped relatively clean (ok, things like the Bond theme and gun barrel likely won't be going, but the cast of the Craig era, any of its storylines, heck even those of the 1962-'02 era can go. You now have a chance to set up a new version of this character distinct from anything that came before. Personally, I'm astounded some fans aren't more excited by this possibility).

    Yes, and I think it really is time to wipe the slate clean now without the nostalgia we've seen in the Craig films with the DB5 and M's office and all that- that feels played out now. As you say, keep the Bond theme and the gunbarrel but I would say that should be it. Everything else new, no looking back.
  • edited September 2022 Posts: 2,753
    mtm wrote: »
    Would anyone seriously believe Brosnan was three decades older than Connery, and still a kite surfin’ 00?

    I don’t believe that necessarily, but I do buy that Brosnan’s Bond in some way has experienced all the missions of previous films.

    Whereas I'm not sure I even buy that the Bond of AVTAK ever went up in space. I don't feel like those films are connected.

    Which isn't a problem with either, it's just different ways of doing it.

    007HallY wrote: »
    I do agree though, each Bond actor's tenure, hell even each Bond film arguably, is different and they're probably best viewed as standalone stories (or universes one could say) in a wider series. The end of NTTD only cemented that. Audiences get it and it's nothing new. We already have so many versions of Bond between the continuation novels, graphic novels, films etc. Again, it should be taken as an opportunity to do something different, but it'll require that slate to be wiped relatively clean (ok, things like the Bond theme and gun barrel likely won't be going, but the cast of the Craig era, any of its storylines, heck even those of the 1962-'02 era can go. You now have a chance to set up a new version of this character distinct from anything that came before. Personally, I'm astounded some fans aren't more excited by this possibility).

    Yes, and I think it really is time to wipe the slate clean now without the nostalgia we've seen in the Craig films with the DB5 and M's office and all that- that feels played out now. As you say, keep the Bond theme and the gunbarrel but I would say that should be it. Everything else new, no looking back.

    Yes, I'd like to see a slightly different office, as well as a different approach to things, even if broad elements of the Bond stories are there in the next one (Bond girls, allies, the theme, gun barrel, villains etc. which is why I say the slate should be wiped 'relatively' clean). It's why I've said in the past I'd prefer if we went without a Q in the next one and found some other way of introducing Bond's gadgets and cars (if any) in the typical 'Q briefing/Chekov's gun' set up. They could perhaps consider an alternative to Moneypenny with Loleila Ponsonby or something too and give the relationship between the future Bond/M (or even Tanner) a fresh dynamic. And yes, no visual and nostalgic call backs. There's no need for a DB5 or a lair that looks like the one from DN.

    Regardless though, I think an important job for the producers and writers in the early stages is coming up with how this future Bond will differ from Craig's, and indeed other iterations of the character. I say this because I think they have a good grasp on what traits Bond should have that is applicable to each version. Most of these are subtle, and this isn't even accounting for an actor's individual take on the role which might have an impact on the script. I mean, if Craig's Bond was a man who often went against the orders of MI6 to complete his missions, will the next Bond be more of a 'blunt instrument' and is there potential for some interesting story ideas in that? What would a younger version of this character bring to the table? Is there anything that's there in other media iterations of the character (the novels mainly) which haven't been explored in the cinematic versions? Once they've locked those big ideas then they can start coming up with what this new Bond universe and story will look like, and indeed find a new actor.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,861
    Yeah I think the folks who talk about The Batman being the way it will go are perhaps right: in that The Batman isn't really all that huge a departure in terms of tone from the Nolan films. Lots of people around the world have grown to adulthood knowing Craig as Bond, so it's what they know and what they like; so I think it's possible that the next Bond won't be massively different in terms of tone from the Craig films. The details and dressings can change, and indeed Bond will be a slightly different character to the Craig version I'm sure just because it's a new actor if nothing else, but the more realistic and drama-led style I can see staying.
  • Posts: 4,599
    I was thinking, after the huge success of Top Gun 2 - is it time to go for a more care free, flag waving, fun , roller coaster ride ? My gut tells me people want high quality escapism right now.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 2022 Posts: 14,861
    If they can do it to that quality I'd be up for it.
    And to be fair, a lot of TGM is about interpersonal drama between the characters, and it's that which makes the ending more exciting and tense.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,567
    I can see a new story 'arc' happening, although not one that takes 007 from newbie to retirement/death.
    However, this time they will plot it out carefully before they start.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,861
    NicNac wrote: »
    However, this time they will plot it out carefully before they start.

    They might have some ideas of a general direction, but in a way I'd be surprised if they plot it out fully. If you do that then you're constraining your directors of films down the line you haven't even hired yet.
  • I do often wonder if there is any ground left untapped with James Bond. The only answer I can think of is to go 'younger.' When speaking to a friend about NTTD and explaining the basic plot, her response was "Isn't Bond always forced to come out of retirement?". Despite knowing better, I do understand her point.

    Here are my criteria for the reboot:
    • Bond needs to be young (ideally an actor in his 20's);
    • Bond needs to be in the Navy and get selected by MI6 for a mission;
    • Explore his vulnerability as a young man becoming a spy;
    • Bond becomes 007 in the final scene; and
    • Introduce Charmain Bond and make her a new regular.

    Also, the reliable DeuxMoi has posted that work has begun on Bond 26 and that Denis Villeneuve is the director they are after. Deuxmoi usually posts accurate stories months before they are announced. I could count numerous examples - the most prominent being Barry Keoghan's true role in The Batman. There have been a ton of others. Most recently the cast of the film version of Wicked and the Hunger Games prequel.

    dctf7nL.png
  • Posts: 4,599
    I think there is room for a "boyish charm" version of Bond. it would be a nice contrast to the "all played out" Bond and it would fit in with an overall lighter, more optimistic theme/tone.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 686
    The Batman is a different franchise to Bond, in that it has a strong rogue's gallery of mainly larger-than-life iconic villains that the current director is making as realistic and as credible as possible. The same goes with the basic staples of the Batman comic like the bat costume and Batmobile. Something that was overtly fantasy is being converted to a real-world setting to make the iconic aspects seem fresh and new.

    Bond isn't quite like that. In fact in many ways the Bond franchise made a name for itself by going the other way, turning Bond's car, which IIRC in the books simply had a concealed place for his gun (was this taken from Chandler's Marlowe?), into something more outlandish. I think Goldfinger really pushed the franchise that little bit further into fantasy, and though the franchise flirts with going back down to earth, it's never been able to stay away from those things that stick in the public's consciousness as Bondian: the scarred villain, the outlandish villain's lair, the gadget-laden car, the indestructible henchman. It even jettisoned the PPK for the more modern P99, then went back to the more iconic pistol. Bond can't ditch too many of its recognisable elements before it becomes just another spy/action franchise, it needs visually identifiable elements like the PPK and the DB5 because Bond lacks a strong visual identifier like Batman's costume. You're not going to mistake Batman for anyone else, but Bond? He's just a guy that sometimes wears a tux. If they'd kept the facial scar that would have helped, but they didn't.

    Some people here are talking about getting rid of things like the DB5. Well, I think if they do get a person of colour to play Bond, they will probably compensate for such a strong visual shift by making sure visually iconic elements are in play front and centre. The DB5 and PPK may not be from the books, but they are linked so strongly to the Bond franchise that they act as a security blanket to change - Pierce looked so much like everybody's idea of Bond that the producers felt confident switching to the P99 after his debut, but with the slightly off-model Craig the franchise went the other direction, and we got the PPK and DB5 back.

    No matter what direction the makers go in for the first film, they will attempt to balance the various aspects of Bond as they move along, swinging between gritty realism and fantasy, serious drama and humour, struggling to find that impossible film that everybody seems to like. They're going to be all over the place, as usual.

    I do think that one thing that Bond will share with the recent The Batman is that they will have a top-notch cinematographer. The Batman looked absolutely gorgeous, and since Skyfall the Bond franchise has prided itself on looking quality.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,891
    In tone , I hope it’s nothing like “The Batman “; I know that I’m in the minority but I strongly disliked the film and found it a soul sucking experience.
  • Posts: 4,599
    “The Greater Good”
    On his first mission, Bond’s life is saved by a senior agent, Blackwood, who then goes on to retire.

    Bond is assigned to shadow an alleged arms dealer. Whilst “on his watch” , the dealer is assassinated and questions are asked by M whether Bond was “trigger happy” ?
    A whole series of unauthorised “hits” then take place across Europe against various targets that were being monitored. M is put on gardening leave as it as it’s possible he has either sanctioned the hits himself personally or has lost control of his department. M asks Bond to investigate and teams up with a female Swedish agent, Astrid, who also needs to clear her name from an unauthorised hit in Malmo.

    As they get closer to the truth, Bond attends Blackwood’s retirement party. Blackwood reveals that he is the leader of the “hit squad”. After a career as an agent, he has given up on the internal politics and sensibilities of government. He sees evil across the land and his team, he claims, “has done more good in a year than MI6 has done in fifty”. He has recruited agents across Europe and asks that Bond joins his team.

    Bond rejects the invitation and realises that he is now a target of Blackwood’s team. He confides in Astride re Blackwood’s role. She reveals she is actually a member of Blackwood’s team and has been shadowing Bond and reporting back. Fight ensures and Bond kills her.

    Bond informs M of his discovery. His reactions are mixed. Staggered that the team has existed on his watch but relieved that he is “in the clear”. He orders Bond to bring Blackwood in.

    Bond tracks him down and a final climactic set piece takes place. This ends with Bond taking the upper hand. Coming to terms with what he has done and his bleak future, the unarmed Blackwood notes that Bond has one bullet left and requests, as a double O agent, he performs his duty. Bond refuses but does hand him his Walter. Blackwood thanks Bond who walks away and we hear a single shot.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,861
    talos7 wrote: »
    In tone , I hope it’s nothing like “The Batman “; I know that I’m in the minority but I strongly disliked the film and found it a soul sucking experience.

    Yes I agree, the only reason I compare the two is because The Batman wasn't much of a departure from the Nolan films, and I think we're likely to see the same rejig but-not-completely in the next Bond. I would expect it to be less of a total core change than the one between DAD and CR, anyway.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited September 2022 Posts: 5,921
    I don't need another "becoming Bond" story. When Spiderman did it again with Andrew Garfield, it was quite boring.

    Bond should just be a newly-minted 00. It can just be stated that he's new (a bit of a wink to the audience).

    A strong younger Bond/older M dynamic has distinct possibilities (especially if they start with a MR or even Colonel Sun-inspired script).

    I think CR will be the template for Bond 26 (how could it not be?), which brings us back to Fleming. The smart money is that Eon will go back and carry on with the pieces of Fleming that are left.

    A more faithful THR, anyone, incorporating Liz Krest and Fidele Barbey? The Seychelles is one of the few destinations that still feels exotic/out of reach. There aren't many...
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,053
    patb wrote: »
    “The Greater Good”
    On his first mission, Bond’s life is saved by a senior agent, Blackwood, who then goes on to retire.

    Bond is assigned to shadow an alleged arms dealer. Whilst “on his watch” , the dealer is assassinated and questions are asked by M whether Bond was “trigger happy” ?
    A whole series of unauthorised “hits” then take place across Europe against various targets that were being monitored. M is put on gardening leave as it as it’s possible he has either sanctioned the hits himself personally or has lost control of his department. M asks Bond to investigate and teams up with a female Swedish agent, Astrid, who also needs to clear her name from an unauthorised hit in Malmo.

    As they get closer to the truth, Bond attends Blackwood’s retirement party. Blackwood reveals that he is the leader of the “hit squad”. After a career as an agent, he has given up on the internal politics and sensibilities of government. He sees evil across the land and his team, he claims, “has done more good in a year than MI6 has done in fifty”. He has recruited agents across Europe and asks that Bond joins his team.

    Bond rejects the invitation and realises that he is now a target of Blackwood’s team. He confides in Astride re Blackwood’s role. She reveals she is actually a member of Blackwood’s team and has been shadowing Bond and reporting back. Fight ensures and Bond kills her.

    Bond informs M of his discovery. His reactions are mixed. Staggered that the team has existed on his watch but relieved that he is “in the clear”. He orders Bond to bring Blackwood in.

    Bond tracks him down and a final climactic set piece takes place. This ends with Bond taking the upper hand. Coming to terms with what he has done and his bleak future, the unarmed Blackwood notes that Bond has one bullet left and requests, as a double O agent, he performs his duty. Bond refuses but does hand him his Walter. Blackwood thanks Bond who walks away and we hear a single shot.

    I like it.
    I do often wonder if there is any ground left untapped with James Bond. The only answer I can think of is to go 'younger.' When speaking to a friend about NTTD and explaining the basic plot, her response was "Isn't Bond always forced to come out of retirement?". Despite knowing better, I do understand her point.

    Here are my criteria for the reboot:
    • Bond needs to be young (ideally an actor in his 20's);
    • Bond needs to be in the Navy and get selected by MI6 for a mission;
    • Explore his vulnerability as a young man becoming a spy;
    • Bond becomes 007 in the final scene; and
    • Introduce Charmain Bond and make her a new regular.

    Also, the reliable DeuxMoi has posted that work has begun on Bond 26 and that Denis Villeneuve is the director they are after. Deuxmoi usually posts accurate stories months before they are announced. I could count numerous examples - the most prominent being Barry Keoghan's true role in The Batman. There have been a ton of others. Most recently the cast of the film version of Wicked and the Hunger Games prequel.

    dctf7nL.png

    I agree with Charmian Bond becoming a regular. Same with May. They should be given a chance or two for the Cinematic Bond.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 2022 Posts: 14,861
    echo wrote: »

    I think CR will be the template for Bond 26 (how could it not be?)

    I can't see how it could be..? They've only just done it. And it's such a mad story that it would stick out.

  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited September 2022 Posts: 5,921
    I mean a fairly faithful, lean-and-mean Fleming adaptation (MR or TMWTGG, maybe?). Not CR the story.

    I could see them adapting the bulk of TMWTGG but saving that opening (which has little to do with the rest of the story) for Bond 27 or 28. They've got to establish the new Bond first before they brainwash him, unless they want to be accused of ripping off Bourne again.

    And introducing Q and Moneypenny over the course of several films...they got a lot of story mileage out of that delay, last time around.

    I don't see them doing May or Loelia ever, actually. Maybe a Goodnight reboot, though.
  • CharmianBondCharmianBond Pett Bottom, Kent
    Posts: 533
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    I agree with Charmian Bond becoming a regular. Same with May. They should be given a chance or two for the Cinematic Bond.

    Maybe not a regular, although I'd be interested to see how that would work, but I'd still like Charmian to be introduced to the film universe in some way. As I've said, Vicky McClure would be ideal, I'm sure she can do a passable Scottish accent. I'd add Loelia along with May, I think they should at least get some time in the spotlight.
  • I do find the idea of a 20 something Bond early in his career interesting. It’s one of the very few approaches they haven’t done already. But it would take a very talented writer and director to pull it off. I wouldn’t want to see any origin story cliches like we saw in FAAD. But if it was just a case of a fully formed, but younger Bond, in the SBS or whatever (don’t think he’d be in the Navy now, even Fleming’s Bond was just a “chocolate sailor”), then that could be a fresh approach.

    I think they should avoid any ground covered by CR though, so I wouldn’t want it to end with him becoming 007 (that in itself seems like another origins cliche too). I’d end it with him being approached by someone mysterious who’s implied to be a spook. Then fast forward to him already early in his career as 007 in the next film. Don’t think we need to see the two kills again or anything like that.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,861
    I do find the idea of a 20 something Bond early in his career interesting. It’s one of the very few approaches they haven’t done already. But it would take a very talented writer and director to pull it off. I wouldn’t want to see any origin story cliches like we saw in FAAD. But if it was just a case of a fully formed, but younger Bond, in the SBS or whatever (don’t think he’d be in the Navy now, even Fleming’s Bond was just a “chocolate sailor”), then that could be a fresh approach.

    I think they should avoid any ground covered by CR though, so I wouldn’t want it to end with him becoming 007 (that in itself seems like another origins cliche too). I’d end it with him being approached by someone mysterious who’s implied to be a spook. Then fast forward to him already early in his career as 007 in the next film. Don’t think we need to see the two kills again or anything like that.

    Yeah I think there are plenty of ways to do it which wouldn't cover the same ground as CR. I don't dislike the Charmian idea even, I could imagine there being a way of doing that.
    As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I think you could even do a plot where Bond is the very first double-O - have M approach him in the SBS or DI with the idea of setting up the double-O section, needed for a specific mission perhaps.
Sign In or Register to comment.