Where does Bond go after Craig?

1569570572574575584

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 15,548
    peter wrote: »
    Tuxedo wrote: »
    To me the worst villain in the whole franchise was Blofeld in SPECTRE. By far.

    For me Waltz was the biggest disappointment, but not the worst. Thankfully, IMO, this was rectified with a better and more twisted turn in NTTD.

    The worst villains, for me, have to be Gray's Blofeld, Kristatos, Whitaker, Carver (not in concept, but execution (and I love Pryce as an actor)), Renard (if one includes him as co-main villain), and finally, Graves (couldn't stand him from the moment I first saw him in the film; too obvious a performance. I loved Tan-San Moon, and the actor who played him, much more. He was an ill tempered brat/psychopath with daddy issues...))....

    Yeah I think I'd probably go for Whittaker too. The others you mention are certainly weak, but he's the one who kind of feels like he creates the least impact.
    It's funny, TLD is possibly my favourite Bond movie, and yet I think most of the leads could have been better!
  • edited June 16 Posts: 9,819
    I still say base bond 26 on Diamonds are forever and there you go
  • Posts: 2,112
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I still say base bond 26 on Diamonds are forever and there you go

    Austin Bulter as Willard Whyte II confirmed 🤣
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,819
    Mallory wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I still say base bond 26 on Diamonds are forever and there you go

    Austin Bulter as Willard Whyte II confirmed 🤣

    But what modern vehicle will we replace the moon buggy with? ;-)
  • Posts: 1,706
    mtm wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    Tuxedo wrote: »
    To me the worst villain in the whole franchise was Blofeld in SPECTRE. By far.

    For me Waltz was the biggest disappointment, but not the worst. Thankfully, IMO, this was rectified with a better and more twisted turn in NTTD.

    The worst villains, for me, have to be Gray's Blofeld, Kristatos, Whitaker, Carver (not in concept, but execution (and I love Pryce as an actor)), Renard (if one includes him as co-main villain), and finally, Graves (couldn't stand him from the moment I first saw him in the film; too obvious a performance. I loved Tan-San Moon, and the actor who played him, much more. He was an ill tempered brat/psychopath with daddy issues...))....

    Yeah I think I'd probably go for Whittaker too. The others you mention are certainly weak, but he's the one who kind of feels like he creates the least impact.
    It's funny, TLD is possibly my favourite Bond movie, and yet I think most of the leads could have been better!

    The series has had quite a few weak or bad villains, but Gray is the worst offender. If camp was what he and the director were going for, his performance is an insult to camp. Better suited for the 67 version of CR. Even Connery doesn't pull off the Tracy revenge motive in the badly conceived PTS. As has often been said, DAF was the first RM film.



  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,109
    If DAF had had a writer other than Mankiewicz, would the Roger Moore era have looked different?
  • Posts: 978
    CrabKey wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    Tuxedo wrote: »
    To me the worst villain in the whole franchise was Blofeld in SPECTRE. By far.

    For me Waltz was the biggest disappointment, but not the worst. Thankfully, IMO, this was rectified with a better and more twisted turn in NTTD.

    The worst villains, for me, have to be Gray's Blofeld, Kristatos, Whitaker, Carver (not in concept, but execution (and I love Pryce as an actor)), Renard (if one includes him as co-main villain), and finally, Graves (couldn't stand him from the moment I first saw him in the film; too obvious a performance. I loved Tan-San Moon, and the actor who played him, much more. He was an ill tempered brat/psychopath with daddy issues...))....

    Yeah I think I'd probably go for Whittaker too. The others you mention are certainly weak, but he's the one who kind of feels like he creates the least impact.
    It's funny, TLD is possibly my favourite Bond movie, and yet I think most of the leads could have been better!

    The series has had quite a few weak or bad villains, but Gray is the worst offender. If camp was what he and the director were going for, his performance is an insult to camp. Better suited for the 67 version of CR. Even Connery doesn't pull off the Tracy revenge motive in the badly conceived PTS. As has often been said, DAF was the first RM film.



    Gray is fine but he is not Blofeld. Give him another name and the villian is OK.


    echo wrote: »
    If DAF had had a writer other than Mankiewicz, would the Roger Moore era have looked different?

    Would they have hired him?
  • SimonSimon Keeping The British End Up...
    Posts: 136
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Mallory wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I still say base bond 26 on Diamonds are forever and there you go

    Austin Bulter as Willard Whyte II confirmed 🤣

    But what modern vehicle will we replace the moon buggy with? ;-)

    mr-bean-funny-car-driving-sofa-mop-qpnlmsssbuvp0avj.gif

  • NoTimeToLiveNoTimeToLive Jamaica
    edited June 16 Posts: 80
    Blofeld should have been the villain of NTTD. That's all.

    Safin looks like a guest in his own movie.

    I like Safin, but Blofeld causing Bond's death would have had a greater impact, IMO.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,819
    Simon wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Mallory wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I still say base bond 26 on Diamonds are forever and there you go

    Austin Bulter as Willard Whyte II confirmed 🤣

    But what modern vehicle will we replace the moon buggy with? ;-)

    mr-bean-funny-car-driving-sofa-mop-qpnlmsssbuvp0avj.gif

    I approve.
  • Posts: 1,766
    Blofeld should have been the villain of NTTD. That's all.

    Safin looks like a guest in his own movie.

    I like Safin, but Blofeld causing Bond's death would have had a greater impact, IMO.

    Without a doubt.
  • Posts: 3,345
    delfloria wrote: »
    Blofeld should have been the villain of NTTD. That's all.

    Safin looks like a guest in his own movie.

    I like Safin, but Blofeld causing Bond's death would have had a greater impact, IMO.

    Without a doubt.

    To be fair I think Safin needed to defeat Blofeld in that movie. I can't imagine a satisfying third act of NTTD where Blofeld kills Satin and takes his place.
  • Posts: 1,706
    The film Blofeld killing Bond would never have worked, even though he's escaped Bond numerous times. Bond killing Blofeld at the end of NTTD would have been consistent with the YOLT novel. A faithful adaptation of YOLT would have been nice, but finishing up the Quantum arc seemed more important.
  • Posts: 3,345
    I love Fleming's YOLT, but it's not the easiest novel to adapt cinematically (or at least 100% faithfully). Much of it is Bond wandering around with Henderson and Tanaka, and even the Dr. Shaterhand revelation is a bit obvious if you stop to think about it (not that Fleming teases it too much, and it works really well). It's about Bond getting over his trauma in a rather mythicised version of Japan.

    It's a great novel (the last interactions with Blofeld and a lot of the ideas in there are fantastic) but I can see why it's a book which has been loosely adapted. Incidentally I think it's better (and more frequently) used as source material for SF rather than NTTD.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,109
    Yes, I think it's kind of impossible to adapt faithfully. A lot of the first half is just Bond and Tiger musing on Japan. They did a good enough job with the Garden of Death, which is also not exactly cinematic in that Bond should be able to sidestep plants easily.

    What they have failed to capture, in both SF and NTTD, is Bond being a broken man and being sent on an impossible assignment to Japan. Without OHMSS preceding it, you lose that whole arc, which is integral to the book.
  • Posts: 1,706
    Which is precisely why I'd like to see YOLT done right, because it is a challenge.
  • meshypushymeshypushy Ireland
    Posts: 120
    CrabKey wrote: »
    The film Blofeld killing Bond would never have worked, even though he's escaped Bond numerous times. Bond killing Blofeld at the end of NTTD would have been consistent with the YOLT novel. A faithful adaptation of YOLT would have been nice, but finishing up the Quantum arc seemed more important.
    Waltz’s Blofeld, in particular, killing Bond would surely have been controversial in ways that the NTTD ending was not. I am not a fan of Waltz’s Blofeld or the NTTD ending but I would take ‘death by rockets’ over Waltz being the end of Craig’s arc. That would have done DC’s tenure a disservice, I feel.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,109
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Which is precisely why I'd like to see YOLT done right, because it is a challenge.

    It's not unlike CR '06. YOLT would require a lot of added plot/action in its first half (which, to be fair, is what YOLT the film did).
  • Posts: 3,345
    echo wrote: »
    Yes, I think it's kind of impossible to adapt faithfully. A lot of the first half is just Bond and Tiger musing on Japan. They did a good enough job with the Garden of Death, which is also not exactly cinematic in that Bond should be able to sidestep plants easily.

    What they have failed to capture, in both SF and NTTD, is Bond being a broken man and being sent on an impossible assignment to Japan. Without OHMSS preceding it, you lose that whole arc, which is integral to the book.

    I agree about OHMSS. YOLT doesn't work without it.

    That said (and this may well be because I haven't read the book in a while) I think an important part of the book is that it isn't necessarily an 'impossible' assignment. Actually it's a rather cut and dry diplomatic assignment in many ways, not routine necessarily, but not as challenging as some of Bond's previous missions. The point is that M is essentially lying to Bond about this and his 'promotion' in order to snap him out of his depression. In that sense I think they adapted that broad idea well in SF with M lying to Bond about his evaluation results.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,091
    007HallY wrote: »
    I love Fleming's YOLT, but it's not the easiest novel to adapt cinematically (or at least 100% faithfully). Much of it is Bond wandering around with Henderson and Tanaka, and even the Dr. Shaterhand revelation is a bit obvious if you stop to think about it (not that Fleming teases it too much, and it works really well). It's about Bond getting over his trauma in a rather mythicised version of Japan.

    It's a great novel (the last interactions with Blofeld and a lot of the ideas in there are fantastic) but I can see why it's a book which has been loosely adapted. Incidentally I think it's better (and more frequently) used as source material for SF rather than NTTD.

    Right. Until Bond infiltrates the castle, there’s little to no thrills going on, which is esoteric for a spy thriller. That’s fine, it’s what makes the book unique and I like that it’s mostly Bond soaking in Japanese culture as his way of grieving. But for a faithful film adaptation they would have definitely needed to add a lot more to it to meet audience expectations of what a Bond film is. I think some of the set pieces in the YOLT we got could have been integrated in some capacity. Maybe a lot of the film could have worked as an adaptation, only with the added thread of Bond being a widower and the confrontation with Blofeld having a lot more bite to it.
  • Posts: 1,706
    I don't disagree about plumping up the plot a bit. The leap from suicide garden to stealing space capsules in space that was too much of a stretch.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited June 17 Posts: 6,109
    I wouldn't mind them taking a run at the unadapted aspects of YOLT, but that would mean we'd need to get an OHMSS-like film first.

    Personally, I'd like a break from the romance-heaviness of the Craig era. At least for one film. Give me MR. Then we can maybe have OHMSS/YOLT/TMWTGG again.

    The Bond/Vesper story was so successful and pervasive that I do think they will return to a romance angle before long. We won't see the casual likes of the Moore era again.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,819
    echo wrote: »
    I wouldn't mind them taking a run at the unadapted aspects of YOLT, but that would mean we'd need to get an OHMSS-like film first.

    Personally, I'd like a break from the romance-heaviness of the Craig era. At least for one film. Give me MR. Then we can maybe have OHMSS/YOLT/TMWTGG again.

    The Bond/Vesper story was so successful and pervasive that I do think they will return to a romance angle before long. We won't see the casual likes of the Moore era again.

    I'd find it awkward if they did a MR type of fantasy first, only to proceed to more drama and seriousness with an adaptation of OHMSS - YOLT - TMWTGG. That 'MR' really can't be too 'MR' for that to work.

    That said, I'm all for a more "let's go nuts" vibe in the next Bond, but they'd have to work hard to make it good. We've seen a few rather adventurous spy/action films in recent times, and few of them found an audience. It could be an interesting challenge, of course: a Bond film that puts the 'fun' back in the spy genre (other than M:I).

    I'd love a return to Derek Flink and Matt Helm... but only within a Derek Flint / Matt Helm series. Bond is another kind of juice IMO, with more spice and less sugar.
  • Posts: 1,706
    @echo - We won't see the casual likes of the Moore era again.

    One can hope.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,288
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @echo - We won't see the casual likes of the Moore era again.

    One can hope.

    Moore than one🤓 Richard Maibaum would have liked to work on any of the DC movies. He still probably would have criticized others as well.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,091
    It’s funny how open Maibaum was about not being satisfied with Moore in the part, even sounding jealous at one point over NSNA having Connery, but Cubby kept him employed up to LTK.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,288
    It’s funny how open Maibaum was about not being satisfied with Moore in the part, even sounding jealous at one point over NSNA having Connery, but Cubby kept him employed up to LTK.

    Cubby liked loyalty, and Maibaum showed it, to him at least. The NSNA crew probably didn't want Maibaum around because of his trademark criticizing. He would have been criticized as bad as Purvis and Wade are now, had the internet existed then. Same with Tom Mankiewicz and the other multiple writers. And at least they are more respectful of others. After reading some interviews with him, it's actually getting harder and harder for me to respect him. As with DC, no one person should have the power that those two had. Egos should always be in check.
  • edited June 17 Posts: 3,345
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    It’s funny how open Maibaum was about not being satisfied with Moore in the part, even sounding jealous at one point over NSNA having Connery, but Cubby kept him employed up to LTK.

    Cubby liked loyalty, and Maibaum showed it, to him at least. The NSNA crew probably didn't want Maibaum around because of his trademark criticizing. He would have been criticized as bad as Purvis and Wade are now, had the internet existed then. Same with Tom Mankiewicz and the other multiple writers. And at least they are more respectful of others. After reading some interviews with him, it's actually getting harder and harder for me to respect him. As with DC, no one person should have the power that those two had. Egos should always be in check.

    I do genuinely think if Maibaum was around in 2012 he would have criticised SF for the film abandoning the agent list Maguffin halfway through the film as well as the third act (which I think are needed to make the film work and make it as successful as it was). Probably would have had more to say as well about the Craig and Brosnan era scripts too!

    Not to say he would have been correct about any of this criticisms (if he would have in fact made them, it's obviously impossible to say). Nor that he was always correct about the criticisms he had about other Bond scripts (at least in my opinion). I think he was simply a very good/experienced scriptwriter who'd worked on the same franchise in his time for a long while through great and not so great times, and had very particular ideas about it. And a sharp tongue too clearly!
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,091
    IIRC Mankiewicz was offered NSNA and he turned it down due to his past association with Cubby, even though he hadn’t worked as extensively since TMWTGG.

    I definitely would disagree with Maibaum on SF if expressed that opinion, because the movie clearly isn’t about the agent list. That was just a glorified MacGuffin meant to instigate things that lead up to the real intentions of Silva.

    But he’s also the guy that put a lot of stock on the Solex device, which was an unnecessary component of TMWTGG.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited June 18 Posts: 6,109
    Maibaum was critical of his own films, notably AVTAK.
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    I wouldn't mind them taking a run at the unadapted aspects of YOLT, but that would mean we'd need to get an OHMSS-like film first.

    Personally, I'd like a break from the romance-heaviness of the Craig era. At least for one film. Give me MR. Then we can maybe have OHMSS/YOLT/TMWTGG again.

    The Bond/Vesper story was so successful and pervasive that I do think they will return to a romance angle before long. We won't see the casual likes of the Moore era again.

    I'd find it awkward if they did a MR type of fantasy first, only to proceed to more drama and seriousness with an adaptation of OHMSS - YOLT - TMWTGG. That 'MR' really can't be too 'MR' for that to work.

    That said, I'm all for a more "let's go nuts" vibe in the next Bond, but they'd have to work hard to make it good. We've seen a few rather adventurous spy/action films in recent times, and few of them found an audience. It could be an interesting challenge, of course: a Bond film that puts the 'fun' back in the spy genre (other than M:I).

    I'd love a return to Derek Flink and Matt Helm... but only within a Derek Flint / Matt Helm series. Bond is another kind of juice IMO, with more spice and less sugar.

    I'm thinking more of MR the novel. A low-key, gritty story that doesn't hinge on the love interest. I mean, the ending is interesting but it's a standalone.
Sign In or Register to comment.