Where does Bond go after Craig?

16869717374513

Comments

  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    Blofeld certainly was botched, but they could bring SPECTRE back during actor #(00)7's reign, led by Irma Bunt like I've suggested. But if they let it rest for a while I'm fine with that too.
    Eventually they will bring them and even Blofeld back - EON has spent too much time, effort and money to get the rights to just use them just a bit.

    I could see that working. Honestly, I like the idea of reviving SPECTRE as a defeated relic of the Cold War that has risen from the ashes in modern times with a reinvisioned Irma Bundt as it’s head.
  • Posts: 3,333
    I thought that was one of NTTD's weakest elements @mtm. The demise of Brofeld was a throwaway scene that didn't do that much for me. His death, much like his introduction, felt too rushed.
  • MalloryMallory Do mosquitoes have friends?
    edited October 2021 Posts: 2,036
    Where would I like Bond #7 to go...?
    • I’d like the films to become more appealing to a younger audience (by which I mean those my age, and I’m 30, so not too much younger).
    • Have Bond be established as a 00. No need for another “Bond Begins”.
    • In terms of tone, a little more light heared, with a Bond who enjoys being a secret agent, is more quippy and more seductive towards the ladies.
    • Retain a harder edge for the fight scenes and dramatic moments, but not maintain this as their core characterisation.
    • A return to single film narratives and stories
    • A new M, Q and Moneypenny. Just so there’s no doubt this is a completely new timeline and reboot.
    • Retire the Astons for a few films. Give Bond something new to drive.
    • Bring back the James Bond theme fully, and have it as an integral part of the soundtrack.
    • Continue to employ good talent behind the camera, in terms of Directors, DOP’s, scorer etc.
    • Move on from Purvis and Wade and have a “showrunner” type screenwriter who has an eye on the future, even though the films will be by and large standalone. PWB may be able to do this.
    • Have some fun! Like the Cuba sequence in NTTD.
    • Reign the budgets in. Bond doesnt need to be a $300m epic.
    • Continue Bond as a standalone series, dont try and build it out into a wider “universe” with spin offs. Bond’s USP is that it is huge “event” cinema and a spin off universe would dilute that massively. Also, given EON’s current output and level of creative control, I just dont see them being able, or willing, to do it.
  • HildebrandRarityHildebrandRarity Centre international d'assistance aux personnes déplacées, Paris, France
    Posts: 467
    Moriarty is actually introduced in the same short story where he and Holmes are supposed to die. When Conan Doyle resumed Holmes' adventures, Holmes reveals to Watson that Moriarty actually died from the fall. He's then mentioned in the first batch of short stories, as they address his organization being dismantled, then in the final Holmes novel, but he doesn't make any appearance, even in flashbacks.

    That said, he was a huge influence on the whole "man behind the curtain" trope, resulting in Fantômas, Fu-Manchu, Mabuse (the style of the Lang films was a huge influence on Ken Adam), and naturally Blofeld.

    It will be interesting to see how much the next scripts will dip into the idea of some shadowy organization behind most world events. Quantum was basically "I Can't Believe It's Not SPECTRE", then we got the real thing (but it was rushed in and hardly effective). Now, with a noticeable share of Western populations getting into conspiracy theories about some "Deep State", it may be hard to work with such a concept as it can bring bad vibes.
  • Posts: 12,243
    Mallory wrote: »
    Where would I like Bond #7 to go...?
    • I’d like the films to become more appealing to a younger audience (by which I mean those my age, and I’m 30, so not too much younger.
    • Have Bond be established as a 00. No need for another “Bond Begins”.
    • In terms of tone, a little more light heared, with a Bond who enjoys being a secret agent, is more quippy and more seductive towards the ladies.
    • Retain a harder edge for the fight scenes and dramatic moments, but not maintain this as their core characterisation.
    • A return to single film narratives and stories
    • A new M, Q and Moneypenny. Just so there’s no doubt this is a completely new timeline and reboot.
    • Retire the Astons for a few films. Give Bond something new to drive.
    • Bring back the James Bond theme fully, and have it as an integral part of the soundtrack.
    • Continue to employ good talent behind the camera, in terms of Directors, DOP’s, scorer etc.
    • Move on from Purvis and Wade and have a “showrunner” type screenwriter who has an eye on the future, even though the films will be by and large standalone. PWB may be able to do this.
    • Have some fun! Like the Cuba sequence in NTTD.
    • Reign the budgets in. Bond doesnt need to be a $300m epic.

    I strongly agree with most of this list - a young actor preferably to begin that can stick around for a long time too I think would be nice. Only thing I diverge from is I'd love Craig's M, Q, and Moneypenny to all come back, as I like them all a lot in their roles, but would like them to tone down their screentime.
  • Posts: 1,964
    They are gonna reboot the series again. Hopefully when they do they go back to more stand alone movies for the series. I think thats what is needed and whats missed from the Bond franchise. The Craig arc was fun but we need to go back to the traditional stand alone films. Thats what has to happen where Bond goes after Craig.
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 6,665
    What post Fleming book had Bond messing with some f1 team? If I recall, that was a starting point for a bigger plot. With Aston Martin Cognizant firmly in place, product placement, that is, couldn't they do something interesting and different using that narrative? Just a thought.
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    They are gonna reboot the series again. Hopefully when they do they go back to more stand alone movies for the series. I think thats what is needed and whats missed from the Bond franchise. The Craig arc was fun but we need to go back to the traditional stand alone films. Thats what has to happen where Bond goes after Craig.

    Oh, absolutely.

    BTW, loved that idea of Bond starting in the naval service, @bondsum (I think it was your idea), and than being recruited by Miles Messervy for the 00 section, and then jumping straight to a mission. Maybe Sir. Miles goes to fetch him because he's the best player in the service, and they have to play a game at Le Cercle (just don't make it a big plot point in order to not brush against CR), or maybe he's an automotive enthusiast and that could connect to the narrative I proposed above. Something like that, who knows? Just throwing small stones at a pond, waiting for the waves.
  • MalloryMallory Do mosquitoes have friends?
    Posts: 2,036
    @FoxRox I like the MI6 regulars a lot as well, although I do take issue with the way M has been portrayed in both SP and NTTD. But I think from a marketing perspective it, and probably for general audiences too, a clean slate with them will work best.
  • Posts: 3,333
    No, I don't agree with repeating the same mistake again and again with actors reprising their roles from a different era or timeline. Bond 26 needs to be its own thing without any of Craig's baggage. Sure, you can have the same characters but by having a select few of the actors returning, it will only muddle the franchise further. My biggest gripe with CR at the time was Dudi Dench reprising her role as M. There's no real need for this. If they can find a new actor to play Bond, then they can find new actors to fill the shoes of Moneypenny, Q and M.
  • HildebrandRarityHildebrandRarity Centre international d'assistance aux personnes déplacées, Paris, France
    Posts: 467
    @Mallory I agree about the clean slate. I think that some of the features from the Craig years will permeate in the new incarnations of the characters (Moneypenny having some field agent experience, Q being more a hacker than an engineer, etc.), but it would be weird to have the same actors playing the old parts while some characters who died in this continuity get reintroduced.
  • Posts: 6,665
    Gary Oldman as M, btw. How cool would that be?

    gary-oldman-1.jpg
  • HildebrandRarityHildebrandRarity Centre international d'assistance aux personnes déplacées, Paris, France
    Posts: 467
    And you're posting this without any Smileys?
  • Posts: 7,500
    Univex wrote: »
    Gary Oldman as M, btw. How cool would that be?

    gary-oldman-1.jpg


    Great choice! Could Gemma Arterton be Moneypenny, or would that also mess with the continuity?
  • MalloryMallory Do mosquitoes have friends?
    Posts: 2,036
    @jobo I have always fancied Keeley Hawes as a Miss Moneypenny, but if they are going for a younger set of actors, she may be a little too old now, at 45.
  • Posts: 6,665
    Keeley Hawes would be awesome, but...

    Anything to bring Gemma back :D
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 3,333
    Univex wrote: »
    BTW, loved that idea of Bond starting in the naval service, @bondsum (I think it was your idea), and than being recruited by Miles Messervy for the 00 section, and then jumping straight to a mission. Maybe Sir. Miles goes to fetch him because he's the best player in the service, and they have to play a game at Le Cercle (just don't make it a big plot point in order to not brush against CR), or maybe he's an automotive enthusiast and that could connect to the narrative I proposed above. Something like that, who knows? Just throwing small stones at a pond, waiting for the waves.
    Yes @Univex. That was my first suggestion before going off on a TSWLM novel tangent for something fresh. Another approach would be perhaps introduce Auric Enterprises (or Entreprises Auric A.G.) rather than Goldfinger himself, and we have new adversaries working for Auric A.G. Maybe Goldfinger supplants Blofeld in the new timeline, and we don't get to meet him until three movies later? I must add I like @EinoRistoSiniaho's suggestion of having Irma Bunt head SPECTRE.

    Much like yourself, I'm just throwing small stones at a pond.

    PS. I used to see Keeley Hawes as a possible Moneypenny, but now she's too old for that role @Univex and she was also in that Bodyguard caper.
  • Posts: 12,243
    It’s likely a long ways out, but this is one of the most exciting times to be a Bond fan, with countless possibilities on the horizon and speculation able to go anywhere! I’m hopeful the Amazon deal is going to mean more consistent releases again too, but hopefully not at the expense of quality. I’d be down for 1 movie every 3 years. 2 is probably unlikely in most cases, but 4+ starts to feel too long. I’m kind of hoping an unknown gets cast as Bond and shocks the world in a great way.
  • MalloryMallory Do mosquitoes have friends?
    Posts: 2,036
    Forgot to add:
    1. Female main villain.
  • EinoRistoSiniahoEinoRistoSiniaho Oulu, Finland
    edited October 2021 Posts: 73
    Mallory wrote: »
    Forgot to add:
    1. Female main villain.
    Irma Bunt, the head of SPECTRE. A woman in her mid 60's. A former Stasi agent who after the fall of Communism went underground while using her connections and knowledge to smuggle East German WMD's to troublesome spots on the globe. Before 9/11 she formed a private intelligence and military contractor service led with draconian effiency and cruelty.
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    Played by Tilda Swinton :D
  • Posts: 1,314
    The thing I think we will get is a reiteration of the character. Daniels bond is interesting because it’s different to what has gone before. As was everyone else’s.

    You can’t redo Daniels approach and get away with it it would look like a facsimile.

    So hopefully we move from noighties post 9/11 doom and gloom that has overshadowed escapist cinema for 20 years and move on to something based on life enjoyment and entertainment.
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    edited October 2021 Posts: 1,165
    I had a thought last night that rather than committing to another "era" with one actor EON could turn Bond into a more director-driven propety where each film is its own one-off. In some ways that could be the most appropriate response to the continuity driven Craig era. That way you can have your Michael Fassbender film, your Idris Elba film, your Aiden Turner film, and even a (god help me) Jane Bond movie. You could have moody thrillers, over-the-top action movies, period-piece Cold War films, whatever you want and in more frequent intervals as you are no longer wearing down the energy of one actor and one creative team needing to come up with some internal consistency.
  • Posts: 7,500
    Minion wrote: »
    I had a thought last night that rather than committing to another "era" with one actor EON could turn Bond into a more director-driven propety where each film is its own one-off. In some ways that could be the most appropriate response to the continuity driven Craig era. That way you can have your Michael Fassbender film, your Idris Elba film, your Aiden Turner film, and even a (god help me) Jane Bond movie. You could have moody thrillers, over-the-top action movies, period-piece Cold War films, whatever you want and in more frequent intervals as you are no longer wearing down the energy of one actor and one creative team needing to come up with some internal consistency.


    That's my thinking too. The Craig era has had a positive effect in making Bond more appealing to high profile directors and actors. But these high profile directors will want creative freedom. I suppose it's time for EON to give them that, providing it doesn't break with Fleming's creation too much, obviously. Balance is key.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 2021 Posts: 14,861
    bondsum wrote: »
    I thought that was one of NTTD's weakest elements @mtm. The demise of Brofeld was a throwaway scene that didn't do that much for me. His death, much like his introduction, felt too rushed.

    I thought his little trolley took ages to arrive :D
    Minion wrote: »
    Played by Tilda Swinton :D

    Yes, love that.
  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    edited October 2021 Posts: 357
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Sherlock Holmes stories: Yes, Watson's wife died.

    When dies she die?

    According to Baker Street wiki

    "Mary Watson (née Morstan) was the wife of Dr John Watson. She is first introduced in "The Sign of Four" and Watson refers to her in a number of the stories. While she is generally not involved in the main action of most stories, she is a central character in "The Sign of Four."

    She died at an unspecified point between "The Final Problem" and "The Adventure of the Empty House", and her passing is touched on briefly by Sherlock in the latter. Watson's status as a widower occasionally colours his later accounts of his friend's remarkable deeds."
  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    Posts: 357
    bondsum wrote: »
    Minion wrote: »
    Unfortunately, I feel they only had one shot at reintroducing SPECTRE for modern audiences and Mendes/Logan blew it. At this point, better to let it rest.
    The only drawback of jettisoning SPECTRE going forwards is the lack of Big Bad and return of the multiple megalomaniac tropes. Fleming was smart enough to invent an adversary he could reuse instead of relying on new characters, much like Conan Doyle did with Professor Moriarty. Without SPECTRE driving the narrative, we could get another repeat of Dominic Greene, Brad Whitaker, Franz Sanchez or a Gustav Graves. I mean, does the same apply to Felix Leiter, a character that's already been reused but now dead? Do we have Bond existing in a total vacuum without any of his side characters going forwards? I think SPECTRE can be mentioned in a new timeline, but not necessarily shown straight away.

    You think that's a drawback? I'd call that an asset, I've always disliked recurring villains.
    I want the bad guys to be destroyed in whatever movie I watch and see new ones the next time around

    What you say about Moriarty isn't true at all, he was only originally introduced in order provide a character of suitable magnitude to kill Sherlock Holmes off in "the Final Problem"

    Wikipedia says "Despite only twice appearing in Doyle's original stories, later adaptations and pastiches have often given Moriarty greater prominence and treated him as Sherlock Holmes' archenemy."

    To be fair I should add that he is also "mentioned" in 5 other stories, mainly from "The Return of Sherlock Holmes".

    He doesn't appear in any of the 28 stories which make up "The Adventures of" and "The Memoirs of", other than the aforementioned "Final Problem", and by "The Casebook of" Conan-Doyle had clearly become bored with him and he is mentioned only once.

    "Doyle's original motive in creating Moriarty was evidently his intention to kill Holmes off. "The Final Problem" was intended to be exactly what its title says; Doyle sought to sweeten the pill by letting Holmes go in a blaze of glory, having rid the world of a criminal so powerful and dangerous that any further task would be trivial in comparison (as Holmes says in the story itself). Eventually, however, public pressure and financial troubles impelled Doyle to bring Holmes back.",
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,921
    Mallory wrote: »
    Forgot to add:
    1. Female main villain.

    I think that, if Eon stays true to form and lets PW-B write the first draft, this is a strong possibility.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited October 2021 Posts: 12,459
    I did not mean "continue" as in continuity. I mean a few people seem to think there will be no more Bond films, and a few seem to think it means no more James Bond but we get Nomi instead. How anybody could think no more Bond films would be made is beyond me. Of course it will be a reboot; Barbara confirmed that. But to even a casual fan, how do they come up with the series has now ended full stop - OR that Bond will now be Nomi. Those make no sense to me at all.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited October 2021 Posts: 12,459
    /
    Mallory wrote: »
    Where would I like Bond #7 to go...?
    • I’d like the films to become more appealing to a younger audience (by which I mean those my age, and I’m 30, so not too much younger).
    • Have Bond be established as a 00. No need for another “Bond Begins”.
    • In terms of tone, a little more light heared, with a Bond who enjoys being a secret agent, is more quippy and more seductive towards the ladies.
    • Retain a harder edge for the fight scenes and dramatic moments, but not maintain this as their core characterisation.
    • A return to single film narratives and stories
    • A new M, Q and Moneypenny. Just so there’s no doubt this is a completely new timeline and reboot.
    • Retire the Astons for a few films. Give Bond something new to drive.
    • Bring back the James Bond theme fully, and have it as an integral part of the soundtrack.
    • Continue to employ good talent behind the camera, in terms of Directors, DOP’s, scorer etc.
    • Move on from Purvis and Wade and have a “showrunner” type screenwriter who has an eye on the future, even though the films will be by and large standalone. PWB may be able to do this.
    • Have some fun! Like the Cuba sequence in NTTD.
    • Reign the budgets in. Bond doesnt need to be a $300m epic.
    • Continue Bond as a standalone series, dont try and build it out into a wider “universe” with spin offs. Bond’s USP is that it is huge “event” cinema and a spin off universe would dilute that massively. Also, given EON’s current output and level of creative control, I just dont see them being able, or willing, to do it.

    I pretty much agree with your ideas here. I think I would prefer for him to start off as already established as a 00 for a couple of years. Does a "reboot" always/usually mean it must start at the very beginning? I am not well versed in knowing these terms.

    Also, I think realism is still important. But it can be real, physical, and brutal at times (especially in fights, gunplay, hunting/tracking/spying) and still have a lighter tone, smooth feel to the next movie. I do not at all want to go back to old formula Moore films (though I love some of them a lot). I do not want to copy F&F or MI films. I want Bond still unique as Bond, and for me one thing I am grateful to for the Daniel Craig films is that is gave us a realistic, gritty Bond. I need a very good actor in this next film, who has the acting chops to be versatile and a script that can get the balance right.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,921
    I think they should go back to Fleming and allow characters to go in and out of Bond's life and memory (Vesper, Tiffany, Tracy of course--or equivalent characters that fulfill these roles in Bond's life). I'm just tired of Bond being haunted by Vesper in every.damn.film.

    I'm all for a rebooted Mathis or Leiter, just used sparingly and in locations where they make sense.
Sign In or Register to comment.