Should we get a new M / Q / Moneypenny for BOND 26 and beyond ?

1222325272830

Comments

  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited October 2022 Posts: 5,869
    Still think Anya Chalotra (The Witcher) would be a perfect Moneypenny.

    MV5BNjVmZmY4NDEtYWEzMS00OTVmLTk4MjAtMjVmOTI2NmZmMmUwXkEyXkFqcGdeQWxpenpp._V1_.jpg
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 726
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Still think Anya Chalotra (The Witcher) would be a perfect Moneypenny.

    MV5BNjVmZmY4NDEtYWEzMS00OTVmLTk4MjAtMjVmOTI2NmZmMmUwXkEyXkFqcGdeQWxpenpp._V1_.jpg

    I like that suggestion, I think that would work nicely.
  • Posts: 1,571
    I like Ms. Chalotra for a leading part, as well.
  • edited November 2022 Posts: 784
    He might be too similar to Ralph Fiennes and too famous, but Liam Neeson would have made a very very good M.

    M_05947_R.jpg?quality=80
    829c85a2-a77e-420b-be6d-5bb11a6cf5e3.jpeg?width=780&height=520&rect=1560x1040&offset=0x0
    liam-neeson-derry-girls.jpg
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    He would be good.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 13,929
    I could see that. I really want Colin Salmon to play M, as Charles M. (Martin/Michael or similar) Robinson. One can dream.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,512
    QBranch wrote: »
    I could see that. I really want Colin Salmon to play M, as Charles M. (Martin/Michael or similar) Robinson. One can dream.

    Absolutely, he has a wonderful voice and a commanding presence to play M
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,869
    Olivia Colman would be a perfect M in my opinion.

    thefather2-1613594757.jpg
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited November 2022 Posts: 1,430
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Olivia Colman would be a perfect M in my opinion.

    thefather2-1613594757.jpg

    I would be over the moon to have her cast, but at the same time, it might feel too familiar to Dench and I don't think Mallory has been enough of a palette cleanser. But again, I wouldn't be mad....

    I really like the Colin Salmon idea!
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    I'd prefer Colman to be a villain (villainess?). She can do drama, humour and camp all the same. M would be too little, I feel like. And there still haven't been enough female villains.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,928
    I'm still holding out for Fiennes as Sir Miles Messervy. Talk abut doubling down on the 'different timeline' malarkey!
  • edited November 2022 Posts: 2,897
    I can see Bond 26 including and trying to hone the 'past returning' theme from the Craig era, as well as the idea of M being morally ambiguous at times.

    Perhaps we'll see a version of Sir Miles Messervy in the next film, although he won't be the current M but a former one if that makes sense. I dunno, maybe the film begins with a retired Sir Miles being murdered and the current M enlists Bond to investigate. Maybe the plot is in some way tied to something Sir Miles did during his tenure as M and the current M meets with him to try and attain information... can be anything really.

    It's a bit of an off-the-wall idea, but I'd argue it's in-keeping with the sort of thing the current Bond films are trying to explore (I mean, is it anymore weird than Bond and Blofeld knowing each other as children?)

    So you'd have an older, more established British actor to play a traditional Sir Miles M (I dunno, maybe someone like Kenneth Cranham?) alongside a younger actor playing the new M who is distinct from them (maybe someone like Chiewtel Ejiofor?)
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited November 2022 Posts: 5,869
    LucknFate wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Olivia Colman would be a perfect M in my opinion.

    thefather2-1613594757.jpg
    I would be over the moon to have her cast, but at the same time, it might feel too familiar to Dench and I don't think Mallory has been enough of a palette cleanser.!
    I can see that but I feel like all involved, especially Colman, would make sure it didn't feel too similar to what Dench achieved both in Brosnan and Craig's eras.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 1,368
    Maybe it won't be appropriate bringing her from another major Spy franchise, but Rebecca Ferguson could easily be a good M for Bond 7.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited November 2022 Posts: 4,111
    Venutius wrote: »
    I'm still holding out for Fiennes as Sir Miles Messervy. Talk abut doubling down on the 'different timeline' malarkey!

    I agree. But if they do go with recasting, the only two characters that I can think of are Daisy Ridley as Moneypenny and introducing Felicity Jones as May. They aren’t blockbuster names, but they could serve EON’s tendency with not to big names.
  • Posts: 14,824
    Y'know, after all those rumours about Idris Elba being the next Bond (Which it's more than obvious that it's NOT gonna happen) this random thought came to my head:
    ¿What if Morgan Freeman portrayed Q in the next Bond?
    I'd say he's too famous and too old.

    And too American. And too Lucius Fox.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,689
    Fully agreed. And I do like Morgan Freeman. But I think a new timeline for Bond (I would love to have it as a period piece, but I don't expect any of that) should start with a basic layout of the characters as conceived by Fleming. And that means that Q should be about the age of Bond (one being a "Major", the other a "Commander"...not so far apart), as it was actually the case with the Craig era (ok, it only happened in Skyfall). But not another grandfatherly Q, and also no post-retirement M, either. Let's keep this half-way realistic, at least age-wise.
  • edited November 2022 Posts: 2,897
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Fully agreed. And I do like Morgan Freeman. But I think a new timeline for Bond (I would love to have it as a period piece, but I don't expect any of that) should start with a basic layout of the characters as conceived by Fleming. And that means that Q should be about the age of Bond (one being a "Major", the other a "Commander"...not so far apart), as it was actually the case with the Craig era (ok, it only happened in Skyfall). But not another grandfatherly Q, and also no post-retirement M, either. Let's keep this half-way realistic, at least age-wise.

    Well, if we're going from Fleming's basic layout, then 'Q' isn't a character at all but his counterpart would be a rather dry armourer a bit older than Bond, and M is an old man who would be past retirement age in the real world.

    I'm actually all for not having a Q next time round. Wishaw's a hard act to follow, and it'd be a good twist on the formula to introduce Bond's gadgets in a different way. I also kinda like how in the Fleming novels there's this idea of secrecy around Q-Branch, as if it's this unseen department within MI6 that's often referenced and provides Bond with equipment (presumably it's not headed by a single Quartermaster but is instead helmed by a relatively large group of MI6 workers who come up with ways to solve problems agents have in the field/create gadgets mandated by others). So yeah, I don't mind no Q next time. If anything there's more interesting story potential in characters like Tanner, M and possibly a Loelia Ponsonby adaptation.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,111
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    I'm still holding out for Fiennes as Sir Miles Messervy. Talk abut doubling down on the 'different timeline' malarkey!

    I agree. But if they do go with recasting, the only two characters that I can think of are Daisy Ridley as Moneypenny and introducing Felicity Jones as May. They aren’t blockbuster names, but they could serve EON’s tendency with not to big names.
    007HallY wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Fully agreed. And I do like Morgan Freeman. But I think a new timeline for Bond (I would love to have it as a period piece, but I don't expect any of that) should start with a basic layout of the characters as conceived by Fleming. And that means that Q should be about the age of Bond (one being a "Major", the other a "Commander"...not so far apart), as it was actually the case with the Craig era (ok, it only happened in Skyfall). But not another grandfatherly Q, and also no post-retirement M, either. Let's keep this half-way realistic, at least age-wise.

    Well, if we're going from Fleming's basic layout, then 'Q' isn't a character at all but his counterpart would be a rather dry armourer a bit older than Bond, and M is an old man who would be past retirement age in the real world.

    I'm actually all for not having a Q next time round. Wishaw's a hard act to follow, and it'd be a good twist on the formula to introduce Bond's gadgets in a different way. I also kinda like how in the Fleming novels there's this idea of secrecy around Q-Branch, as if it's this unseen department within MI6 that's often referenced and provides Bond with equipment (presumably it's not headed by a single Quartermaster but is instead helmed by a relatively large group of MI6 workers who come up with ways to solve problems agents have in the field/create gadgets mandated by others). So yeah, I don't mind no Q next time. If anything there's more interesting story potential in characters like Tanner, M and possibly a Loelia Ponsonby adaptation.

    I still think May should be introduced as a recurring character. If EON INSISTS that Bond be personal, let’s start at his normal home life away from the office.
  • Posts: 2,897
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    I'm still holding out for Fiennes as Sir Miles Messervy. Talk abut doubling down on the 'different timeline' malarkey!

    I agree. But if they do go with recasting, the only two characters that I can think of are Daisy Ridley as Moneypenny and introducing Felicity Jones as May. They aren’t blockbuster names, but they could serve EON’s tendency with not to big names.
    007HallY wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Fully agreed. And I do like Morgan Freeman. But I think a new timeline for Bond (I would love to have it as a period piece, but I don't expect any of that) should start with a basic layout of the characters as conceived by Fleming. And that means that Q should be about the age of Bond (one being a "Major", the other a "Commander"...not so far apart), as it was actually the case with the Craig era (ok, it only happened in Skyfall). But not another grandfatherly Q, and also no post-retirement M, either. Let's keep this half-way realistic, at least age-wise.

    Well, if we're going from Fleming's basic layout, then 'Q' isn't a character at all but his counterpart would be a rather dry armourer a bit older than Bond, and M is an old man who would be past retirement age in the real world.

    I'm actually all for not having a Q next time round. Wishaw's a hard act to follow, and it'd be a good twist on the formula to introduce Bond's gadgets in a different way. I also kinda like how in the Fleming novels there's this idea of secrecy around Q-Branch, as if it's this unseen department within MI6 that's often referenced and provides Bond with equipment (presumably it's not headed by a single Quartermaster but is instead helmed by a relatively large group of MI6 workers who come up with ways to solve problems agents have in the field/create gadgets mandated by others). So yeah, I don't mind no Q next time. If anything there's more interesting story potential in characters like Tanner, M and possibly a Loelia Ponsonby adaptation.

    I still think May should be introduced as a recurring character. If EON INSISTS that Bond be personal, let’s start at his normal home life away from the office.

    The problem with May is twofold I think. Firstly she doesn't really serve much of a story function, unless it's specifically written in... wasn't there a Gardner novel where she was kidnapped? Anyway, short of something like that, which sounds awful, she wouldn't have much impact on the plot, so is the sort of character ripe for being cut either during the writing stage or in the editing room. Secondly, it's unlikely that Bond would have a housekeeper in this day and age.

    On the other hand, including May might work. They could always adapt it so that she's Bond's landlord or something, much like Sherlock did with Mrs. Hudson. She could serve the story in a more indirect way too. Maybe she could say something to Bond that indirectly leads/inspires him to investigate something, or perhaps has a conversation with him that conveys something about Bond to the audience.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,111
    007HallY wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    I'm still holding out for Fiennes as Sir Miles Messervy. Talk abut doubling down on the 'different timeline' malarkey!

    I agree. But if they do go with recasting, the only two characters that I can think of are Daisy Ridley as Moneypenny and introducing Felicity Jones as May. They aren’t blockbuster names, but they could serve EON’s tendency with not to big names.
    007HallY wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Fully agreed. And I do like Morgan Freeman. But I think a new timeline for Bond (I would love to have it as a period piece, but I don't expect any of that) should start with a basic layout of the characters as conceived by Fleming. And that means that Q should be about the age of Bond (one being a "Major", the other a "Commander"...not so far apart), as it was actually the case with the Craig era (ok, it only happened in Skyfall). But not another grandfatherly Q, and also no post-retirement M, either. Let's keep this half-way realistic, at least age-wise.

    Well, if we're going from Fleming's basic layout, then 'Q' isn't a character at all but his counterpart would be a rather dry armourer a bit older than Bond, and M is an old man who would be past retirement age in the real world.

    I'm actually all for not having a Q next time round. Wishaw's a hard act to follow, and it'd be a good twist on the formula to introduce Bond's gadgets in a different way. I also kinda like how in the Fleming novels there's this idea of secrecy around Q-Branch, as if it's this unseen department within MI6 that's often referenced and provides Bond with equipment (presumably it's not headed by a single Quartermaster but is instead helmed by a relatively large group of MI6 workers who come up with ways to solve problems agents have in the field/create gadgets mandated by others). So yeah, I don't mind no Q next time. If anything there's more interesting story potential in characters like Tanner, M and possibly a Loelia Ponsonby adaptation.

    I still think May should be introduced as a recurring character. If EON INSISTS that Bond be personal, let’s start at his normal home life away from the office.

    The problem with May is twofold I think. Firstly she doesn't really serve much of a story function, unless it's specifically written in... wasn't there a Gardner novel where she was kidnapped? Anyway, short of something like that, which sounds awful, she wouldn't have much impact on the plot, so is the sort of character ripe for being cut either during the writing stage or in the editing room. Secondly, it's unlikely that Bond would have a housekeeper in this day and age.

    On the other hand, including May might work. They could always adapt it so that she's Bond's landlord or something, much like Sherlock did with Mrs. Hudson. She could serve the story in a more indirect way too. Maybe she could say something to Bond that indirectly leads/inspires him to investigate something, or perhaps has a conversation with him that conveys something about Bond to the audience.

    I say at this point, if EON wants to try something different, having May in a film or two probably wouldn’t hurt.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited November 2022 Posts: 1,368
    I think the warmth of Moore's Bond would have worked better with May. Same reason I think a lot of things in NTTD wouldn't have felt out of place with Moore's Bond. I can imagine Moore's Bond openly professing his love for a woman and using the word "Love" multiple times.
  • Posts: 2,897
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    I'm still holding out for Fiennes as Sir Miles Messervy. Talk abut doubling down on the 'different timeline' malarkey!

    I agree. But if they do go with recasting, the only two characters that I can think of are Daisy Ridley as Moneypenny and introducing Felicity Jones as May. They aren’t blockbuster names, but they could serve EON’s tendency with not to big names.
    007HallY wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Fully agreed. And I do like Morgan Freeman. But I think a new timeline for Bond (I would love to have it as a period piece, but I don't expect any of that) should start with a basic layout of the characters as conceived by Fleming. And that means that Q should be about the age of Bond (one being a "Major", the other a "Commander"...not so far apart), as it was actually the case with the Craig era (ok, it only happened in Skyfall). But not another grandfatherly Q, and also no post-retirement M, either. Let's keep this half-way realistic, at least age-wise.

    Well, if we're going from Fleming's basic layout, then 'Q' isn't a character at all but his counterpart would be a rather dry armourer a bit older than Bond, and M is an old man who would be past retirement age in the real world.

    I'm actually all for not having a Q next time round. Wishaw's a hard act to follow, and it'd be a good twist on the formula to introduce Bond's gadgets in a different way. I also kinda like how in the Fleming novels there's this idea of secrecy around Q-Branch, as if it's this unseen department within MI6 that's often referenced and provides Bond with equipment (presumably it's not headed by a single Quartermaster but is instead helmed by a relatively large group of MI6 workers who come up with ways to solve problems agents have in the field/create gadgets mandated by others). So yeah, I don't mind no Q next time. If anything there's more interesting story potential in characters like Tanner, M and possibly a Loelia Ponsonby adaptation.

    I still think May should be introduced as a recurring character. If EON INSISTS that Bond be personal, let’s start at his normal home life away from the office.

    The problem with May is twofold I think. Firstly she doesn't really serve much of a story function, unless it's specifically written in... wasn't there a Gardner novel where she was kidnapped? Anyway, short of something like that, which sounds awful, she wouldn't have much impact on the plot, so is the sort of character ripe for being cut either during the writing stage or in the editing room. Secondly, it's unlikely that Bond would have a housekeeper in this day and age.

    On the other hand, including May might work. They could always adapt it so that she's Bond's landlord or something, much like Sherlock did with Mrs. Hudson. She could serve the story in a more indirect way too. Maybe she could say something to Bond that indirectly leads/inspires him to investigate something, or perhaps has a conversation with him that conveys something about Bond to the audience.

    I say at this point, if EON wants to try something different, having May in a film or two probably wouldn’t hurt.

    I think she'd be adapted/serve the functions I outlined, but yeah, she could be included.

    After the Craig era I suspect the writers will have a better handle on these sorts of side characters and how to integrate them into the plot.
  • Posts: 14,824
    Off topic, but the current C is an M. And he's a Moore, on top of that.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited November 2022 Posts: 4,111
    I think the warmth of Moore's Bond would have worked better with May. Same reason I think a lot of things in NTTD wouldn't have felt out of place with Moore's Bond. I can imagine Moore's Bond openly professing his love for a woman and using the word "Love" multiple times.

    I think we’ll get a more lighthearted Bond next time. More akin to Brosnan than Moore.
    007HallY wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    I'm still holding out for Fiennes as Sir Miles Messervy. Talk abut doubling down on the 'different timeline' malarkey!

    I agree. But if they do go with recasting, the only two characters that I can think of are Daisy Ridley as Moneypenny and introducing Felicity Jones as May. They aren’t blockbuster names, but they could serve EON’s tendency with not to big names.
    007HallY wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Fully agreed. And I do like Morgan Freeman. But I think a new timeline for Bond (I would love to have it as a period piece, but I don't expect any of that) should start with a basic layout of the characters as conceived by Fleming. And that means that Q should be about the age of Bond (one being a "Major", the other a "Commander"...not so far apart), as it was actually the case with the Craig era (ok, it only happened in Skyfall). But not another grandfatherly Q, and also no post-retirement M, either. Let's keep this half-way realistic, at least age-wise.

    Well, if we're going from Fleming's basic layout, then 'Q' isn't a character at all but his counterpart would be a rather dry armourer a bit older than Bond, and M is an old man who would be past retirement age in the real world.

    I'm actually all for not having a Q next time round. Wishaw's a hard act to follow, and it'd be a good twist on the formula to introduce Bond's gadgets in a different way. I also kinda like how in the Fleming novels there's this idea of secrecy around Q-Branch, as if it's this unseen department within MI6 that's often referenced and provides Bond with equipment (presumably it's not headed by a single Quartermaster but is instead helmed by a relatively large group of MI6 workers who come up with ways to solve problems agents have in the field/create gadgets mandated by others). So yeah, I don't mind no Q next time. If anything there's more interesting story potential in characters like Tanner, M and possibly a Loelia Ponsonby adaptation.

    I still think May should be introduced as a recurring character. If EON INSISTS that Bond be personal, let’s start at his normal home life away from the office.

    The problem with May is twofold I think. Firstly she doesn't really serve much of a story function, unless it's specifically written in... wasn't there a Gardner novel where she was kidnapped? Anyway, short of something like that, which sounds awful, she wouldn't have much impact on the plot, so is the sort of character ripe for being cut either during the writing stage or in the editing room. Secondly, it's unlikely that Bond would have a housekeeper in this day and age.

    On the other hand, including May might work. They could always adapt it so that she's Bond's landlord or something, much like Sherlock did with Mrs. Hudson. She could serve the story in a more indirect way too. Maybe she could say something to Bond that indirectly leads/inspires him to investigate something, or perhaps has a conversation with him that conveys something about Bond to the audience.

    That is one of the few continuation novels that EON should adapt: Nobody Lives Forever (1986). They should do it with a Bond a few movies in, with May and Moneypenny being recurring characters at this point. Honestly, she could have worked in Skyfall, in Kincade’s role.
  • Posts: 2,897
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    I think the warmth of Moore's Bond would have worked better with May. Same reason I think a lot of things in NTTD wouldn't have felt out of place with Moore's Bond. I can imagine Moore's Bond openly professing his love for a woman and using the word "Love" multiple times.

    I think we’ll get a more lighthearted Bond next time. More akin to Brosnan than Moore.
    007HallY wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    I'm still holding out for Fiennes as Sir Miles Messervy. Talk abut doubling down on the 'different timeline' malarkey!

    I agree. But if they do go with recasting, the only two characters that I can think of are Daisy Ridley as Moneypenny and introducing Felicity Jones as May. They aren’t blockbuster names, but they could serve EON’s tendency with not to big names.
    007HallY wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Fully agreed. And I do like Morgan Freeman. But I think a new timeline for Bond (I would love to have it as a period piece, but I don't expect any of that) should start with a basic layout of the characters as conceived by Fleming. And that means that Q should be about the age of Bond (one being a "Major", the other a "Commander"...not so far apart), as it was actually the case with the Craig era (ok, it only happened in Skyfall). But not another grandfatherly Q, and also no post-retirement M, either. Let's keep this half-way realistic, at least age-wise.

    Well, if we're going from Fleming's basic layout, then 'Q' isn't a character at all but his counterpart would be a rather dry armourer a bit older than Bond, and M is an old man who would be past retirement age in the real world.

    I'm actually all for not having a Q next time round. Wishaw's a hard act to follow, and it'd be a good twist on the formula to introduce Bond's gadgets in a different way. I also kinda like how in the Fleming novels there's this idea of secrecy around Q-Branch, as if it's this unseen department within MI6 that's often referenced and provides Bond with equipment (presumably it's not headed by a single Quartermaster but is instead helmed by a relatively large group of MI6 workers who come up with ways to solve problems agents have in the field/create gadgets mandated by others). So yeah, I don't mind no Q next time. If anything there's more interesting story potential in characters like Tanner, M and possibly a Loelia Ponsonby adaptation.

    I still think May should be introduced as a recurring character. If EON INSISTS that Bond be personal, let’s start at his normal home life away from the office.

    The problem with May is twofold I think. Firstly she doesn't really serve much of a story function, unless it's specifically written in... wasn't there a Gardner novel where she was kidnapped? Anyway, short of something like that, which sounds awful, she wouldn't have much impact on the plot, so is the sort of character ripe for being cut either during the writing stage or in the editing room. Secondly, it's unlikely that Bond would have a housekeeper in this day and age.

    On the other hand, including May might work. They could always adapt it so that she's Bond's landlord or something, much like Sherlock did with Mrs. Hudson. She could serve the story in a more indirect way too. Maybe she could say something to Bond that indirectly leads/inspires him to investigate something, or perhaps has a conversation with him that conveys something about Bond to the audience.

    That is one of the few continuation novels that EON should adapt: Nobody Lives Forever (1986). They should do it with a Bond a few movies in, with May and Moneypenny being recurring characters at this point. Honestly, she could have worked in Skyfall, in Kincade’s role.

    That seems to be the Gardner novel in which May is kidnapped. I hope we don't have anything like that personally, and I'd never want to replace the great Albert Finney in SF, but I'm sold on May in some form for the next film.
  • edited November 2022 Posts: 784
    Coleman would be classy like Dench but a bit more sympathetic I imagine.
    QBranch wrote: »
    I could see that. I really want Colin Salmon to play M, as Charles M. (Martin/Michael or similar) Robinson. One can dream.

    I am very surprised they didn't reuse his character instead of introducing Mallory in Skyfall. He seems like he would be the most similar to Bernard Lee. Def top choice if Bond isn't black, much more office desky than Elba.

    img]165213.jpgmovie-london-has-fallen-charlotte-riley-colin-salmon-wallpaper-preview.jpg
    colin-salmon-1612130267.jpg


  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,875
    I’d be quite happy for Ralph Fiennes to return as M.
    If not, Gary Oldman
    320d45smzzhf.jpeg

    Though a role like M, may be too small a role for him. And one I’ve mentioned before, who I feel would make a perfect M, is Jared Harris
    thyjegkkp0b4.jpeg

    Could easily see him as Sir Miles. Full Naval uniform. Amazing actor.
  • edited November 2022 Posts: 176
    M: Timothy Dalton
    Q: Jimmy Carr
    Moneypenny: Phoebe Waller-Bridge
    Bill Tanner: Kingsley Ben-Adir
    May: Annette Crosbie
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,111
    007HallY wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    I think the warmth of Moore's Bond would have worked better with May. Same reason I think a lot of things in NTTD wouldn't have felt out of place with Moore's Bond. I can imagine Moore's Bond openly professing his love for a woman and using the word "Love" multiple times.

    I think we’ll get a more lighthearted Bond next time. More akin to Brosnan than Moore.
    007HallY wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    I'm still holding out for Fiennes as Sir Miles Messervy. Talk abut doubling down on the 'different timeline' malarkey!

    I agree. But if they do go with recasting, the only two characters that I can think of are Daisy Ridley as Moneypenny and introducing Felicity Jones as May. They aren’t blockbuster names, but they could serve EON’s tendency with not to big names.
    007HallY wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Fully agreed. And I do like Morgan Freeman. But I think a new timeline for Bond (I would love to have it as a period piece, but I don't expect any of that) should start with a basic layout of the characters as conceived by Fleming. And that means that Q should be about the age of Bond (one being a "Major", the other a "Commander"...not so far apart), as it was actually the case with the Craig era (ok, it only happened in Skyfall). But not another grandfatherly Q, and also no post-retirement M, either. Let's keep this half-way realistic, at least age-wise.

    Well, if we're going from Fleming's basic layout, then 'Q' isn't a character at all but his counterpart would be a rather dry armourer a bit older than Bond, and M is an old man who would be past retirement age in the real world.

    I'm actually all for not having a Q next time round. Wishaw's a hard act to follow, and it'd be a good twist on the formula to introduce Bond's gadgets in a different way. I also kinda like how in the Fleming novels there's this idea of secrecy around Q-Branch, as if it's this unseen department within MI6 that's often referenced and provides Bond with equipment (presumably it's not headed by a single Quartermaster but is instead helmed by a relatively large group of MI6 workers who come up with ways to solve problems agents have in the field/create gadgets mandated by others). So yeah, I don't mind no Q next time. If anything there's more interesting story potential in characters like Tanner, M and possibly a Loelia Ponsonby adaptation.

    I still think May should be introduced as a recurring character. If EON INSISTS that Bond be personal, let’s start at his normal home life away from the office.

    The problem with May is twofold I think. Firstly she doesn't really serve much of a story function, unless it's specifically written in... wasn't there a Gardner novel where she was kidnapped? Anyway, short of something like that, which sounds awful, she wouldn't have much impact on the plot, so is the sort of character ripe for being cut either during the writing stage or in the editing room. Secondly, it's unlikely that Bond would have a housekeeper in this day and age.

    On the other hand, including May might work. They could always adapt it so that she's Bond's landlord or something, much like Sherlock did with Mrs. Hudson. She could serve the story in a more indirect way too. Maybe she could say something to Bond that indirectly leads/inspires him to investigate something, or perhaps has a conversation with him that conveys something about Bond to the audience.

    That is one of the few continuation novels that EON should adapt: Nobody Lives Forever (1986). They should do it with a Bond a few movies in, with May and Moneypenny being recurring characters at this point. Honestly, she could have worked in Skyfall, in Kincade’s role.

    That seems to be the Gardner novel in which May is kidnapped. I hope we don't have anything like that personally, and I'd never want to replace the great Albert Finney in SF, but I'm sold on May in some form for the next film.

    I wouldn’t want to replace Albert Finney in SF either. I’m just saying that the character could have possibly worked in his place. I’d actually like to see Kincade in future Bond origin stories if I’m honest!
    Benny wrote: »
    I’d be quite happy for Ralph Fiennes to return as M.
    If not, Gary Oldman
    320d45smzzhf.jpeg

    Though a role like M, may be too small a role for him. And one I’ve mentioned before, who I feel would make a perfect M, is Jared Harris
    thyjegkkp0b4.jpeg

    Could easily see him as Sir Miles. Full Naval uniform. Amazing actor.

    Great choices for M. Both could also be great villains, particularly Oldman.
    M: Timothy Dalton
    Q: Jimmy Carr
    Moneypenny: Phoebe Waller-Bridge
    Bill Tanner: Kingsley Ben-Adir

    I was also thinking PWB as Moneypenny, or even May. For Tanner, Q or even Leiter, I’d say go for unknown actors.
Sign In or Register to comment.