Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
The incredible potential of Artificial Intelligence Bond films. Video samples.
bondywondy
Uk
Can the admin please allow me to post this topic as it's a serious suggestion.
The potential of a James Bond film with an AI former James Bond actor is incredible. I believe it may be a better option than finding a new actor for Bond 26 or maybe used to make a spin off Bond film in the near future.
Here are two samples I made to show the potential of AI James Bond. They're not made with the latest groundbreaking Google Veo 3 software which incorporates perfect voice and video together, however, these clips show how advanced AI has become in 2025.
Both videos upscale to high definition 1440p resolution.
I chose this image as the reference. Roger Moore looking cool from Live And Let Die.
AI video 1 using that image as reference. I added a retro filter to make it look closer to the 1970s grain film stock:
Video 2
That was done with software less powerful than Veo 3 but you can see how impressive it looks. Roger Moore looks real.
In video 2 the AI software creates a new background. Notice how smooth the invented background is in video 2. The camera pans around Moore and you see the car behind him. That's all predictive algorithmic code based on a photo.
Imagine a full length feature film with a former Bond actor with a perfect replication of his mannerisms, voice (or a similar voice) in full 4K AI realism. I did the clips with a few lines of text. Imagine the potential if you had Veo 4 or Veo 5 and six months of work to create every scene, edit it.
This may be the future of the James Bond franchise post 2035 when it's in the public domain.
Would fans want to see a former actor, one deceased, back to AI life? Well, that's a personal opinion. Some fans may not want it to happen, that's perfectly understandable, but some fans may be excited by the possibility. Hopefully those two video clips show the potential. AI video rendering is not some passing gimmick. It's groundbreaking technology hence why SAG-AFTRA (actors) union and WGA (writers) union went on strike in 2023. They don't want AI to take away their jobs. The power of AI will change cinema and tv production regardless of what the unions want. Fans should accept AI may be the future for the franchise. Maybe not this decade but in the 2030s.
The potential of a James Bond film with an AI former James Bond actor is incredible. I believe it may be a better option than finding a new actor for Bond 26 or maybe used to make a spin off Bond film in the near future.
Here are two samples I made to show the potential of AI James Bond. They're not made with the latest groundbreaking Google Veo 3 software which incorporates perfect voice and video together, however, these clips show how advanced AI has become in 2025.
Both videos upscale to high definition 1440p resolution.
I chose this image as the reference. Roger Moore looking cool from Live And Let Die.
AI video 1 using that image as reference. I added a retro filter to make it look closer to the 1970s grain film stock:
Video 2
That was done with software less powerful than Veo 3 but you can see how impressive it looks. Roger Moore looks real.
In video 2 the AI software creates a new background. Notice how smooth the invented background is in video 2. The camera pans around Moore and you see the car behind him. That's all predictive algorithmic code based on a photo.
Imagine a full length feature film with a former Bond actor with a perfect replication of his mannerisms, voice (or a similar voice) in full 4K AI realism. I did the clips with a few lines of text. Imagine the potential if you had Veo 4 or Veo 5 and six months of work to create every scene, edit it.
This may be the future of the James Bond franchise post 2035 when it's in the public domain.
Would fans want to see a former actor, one deceased, back to AI life? Well, that's a personal opinion. Some fans may not want it to happen, that's perfectly understandable, but some fans may be excited by the possibility. Hopefully those two video clips show the potential. AI video rendering is not some passing gimmick. It's groundbreaking technology hence why SAG-AFTRA (actors) union and WGA (writers) union went on strike in 2023. They don't want AI to take away their jobs. The power of AI will change cinema and tv production regardless of what the unions want. Fans should accept AI may be the future for the franchise. Maybe not this decade but in the 2030s.
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
No, but thank you for the suggestion.
I'm only going to post this once as the admin thought I was mentioning it too much in the other thread. 😉
It may not matter what you think or want. The technology is here and we'll have to deal with it. If Amazon can make an AI Bond film at a fraction of the cost of a real life Bond films... that's quite an incentive. Amazon could potentially save 80 percent or more of its production budget if they fully embrace future AI video technology. The cost is a huge factor when making films.
If you look at what happened with compact discs. Gone. Vast majority of the world stream music or download music. Internet changed how we listen to music.
Bluray players are being discontinued because people prefer streaming films rather than watching physical media. Bluray will be a niche product come 2030.
And now we have AI with the means to recreate our world with stunning realism. It's crazy, but it's happened so the film industry may or will have to accept this new technology rather than resist it. And that means an AI James Bond film is not some geeky internet fan's fantasy... it's a real possibility for Bond 27 or 28. If AI technology improves at the current rate AI feature films will be possible within five or so years, perhaps. That's Bond 27 time period.
But video for a full-lengh official film ? No way.
Oh, I'll deal with it alright: by never ever giving a cent to anything made using it. Total creative bankrupcy, and the videos you made are prime examples of that. Your examples of other developments are true but their relevancy is weak, as how we consume media (and that has changed) doesn't change the fact that the media itself is still made by people using skills and craft. AI being a "matter of time" is no excuse.
So again: no, but thank you for the suggestion.
AI doesn't do that. It just gives the photo a cartoonish look and make the subject's texture and color very off-putting.
It will do it.
Oh, you mean AI works in photo editing?
I mean that whatever you feel it cannot do at the moment, it will be able to do in the relatively near future. For photos, videos, text, whatever. And yes, I can see it being used to create Bond films if desired and legally viable. But frankly, to focus such a discussion specifically on Bond films seems silly because when it happens, for better or worse, it'll probably happen all over the place, not just for Bond. And in such a radically different situation, in such a radically different world, why give a damn about Bond of all things?
That'll be the impact on films, but we aren't getting AI characters in Bond movies, that's complete hysteria.
Ok. I see what you mean. Phew! But I'm really not a fan of AI, to be honest.
I think what's going to happen in the future is that everybody at home is going to create their own stories. AI can already provide text, images, video and audio, so all the building blocks are there. Years ago, radio was what everyone listened to, television was what everyone watched. To a large extent, that's been, as they say, democratized: anyone can have a podcast or a YouTube channel; the tools are there and will continue to improve. The same is going to happen with movies—all movies, not just Bond. By then, whatever commercial entertainment forms there are will be vastly different to provide that which we cannot get by ourselves at home. New artforms will emerge and others will become less popular.
In the meantime though, as you say, AI is going to be used in more marginal ways, but I'm sure it'll become more and more prominent in commercial filmmaking until it becomes something everyone can use. And of course it'll have an effect on all aspects of life. It's going to be another industrial revolution. Maybe the end result will be better, maybe it won't, but the transition is probably going to suck. Hopefully something has been learned since the last time this kind of major change happened.
Sean Connery returns as James Bond.
https://m.youtube.com/shorts/RcIWkSvWc9c
This was the image reference I used:
The clip was not generated by the current state of the art Veo 3 app. I used a less powerful version but you can see the extraordinary potential of AI.
That's because it isn't art. Art has to be made by a human.
Honey Ryder as a photo:
Honey Ryder made AI real using that photo:
https://m.youtube.com/shorts/wM64Vpp5COo
The prompt was: woman touches her hair. It's a perfect render. She looks real. I upscaled the video to HD to get maximum realism effect.
When the AI gets it right it's accurately recreating people. That's what's so extraordinary about this technology. It's managed to capture the essence of what it means to be human. The mannerisms, the myriad of expressions. And now Veo 3 has captured vocal performance. Perfect vocal recreation.
We may not need a new Bond actor in five years or so. That's what's so crazy. In theory if the AI can recreate real life to, let's say, 99 percent accuracy you don't need a new James Bond actor. If the relatives/ the estate of Sean Connery, Roger Moore granted permission Amazon could make a Bond spin off film starring Sean Connery or Roger Moore. Maybe a Lazenby,Dalton, Brosnan, Craig one too. Back in their prime set in whatever time period is most appropriate.
I know some Bond fans may think "its disrespectful or weird to think Sean Connery/ Roger Moore should come back to AI life"... but you could look at it from another perspective: if done faithfully the film would honour their memory. If the AI actor were 99% accurate then it's faithful. It's Sean Connery's essence recreated. It's his face, his mannerisms, his voice, his screen presence. Would that be exploitative? No. If permission were granted then no exploitation.
I think the Honey Ryder short is a glimpse of what is possible given the future advancement of AI and if people are prepared to spend the time to create AI films. The process will be time consuming because a film needs hundreds of AI rendered scenes edited, a screenplay, a professional sound mix, etc. AI film making will be a creative challenge but it won't cost 200 million dollars. That's the other game changer. Not only is AI a game changer in terms of video and audio creation, the cost of AI is hugely less expensive than the cost of making high budget live action and cgi/cartoon films.
Amazon will save millions if AI is so advanced it looks like a live action film.
You can't stop the AI revolution. Just watch that short of Ursuala Andress. She look real. But she's not. Just computer magic. This is the biggest change in video entertainment since the invention of film. Film is no longer needed. AI is here.
Why are you so obsessed with pushing this AI garbage when people have made it quite clear they aren’t really interested in its offerings? No one wants to see AI replicate Connery, Moore, or whomever else and do it poorly at that. I don’t care how advanced the technology gets - I don’t care how much it make look like Connery - as far as myself and many others are concerned - if it’s AI then we don’t care.
Because he see the future it will bring. As new generations get used to AI it will become more mundane and be accepted as just one more form of entertainment. As I said earlier, there were a LOT of people who said Toy Story CGI animated films would never catch on.
It was a false equivalence before and it remains as such now. CGI actually requires work.
I've never seen a real person's hand randomly disintegrate.
AI is going to destroy a lot of jobs, but that's really its goal. It's making everything cheaper.
But I don't think we'll ever see Connery play Bond again (only in our fantasies). Young audiences don't know who he is.
No it's not, CGI was deemed to cold and autonomous during the release of Toy Story by many critics. Today CGI requires a lot less work now because of AI and it will continue to make inroads into Visual Effects work. Right now rotoscoping is headed for the chopping block and the jobs that go with it. As AI continues to progress and it's ability to analyze artists input it's use will continue to grow. I was recently able to create a proof of concept creature with full animation by simply drawing a black and white sketch to start with. Also a friend recently produced a commercial featuring dolphins and other animals for Google completely using AI and was it was approved.
On the other hand I find the barrage of CGI visual effects already peppered throughout things like the Marvel projects soul crushing. I would not call most of the VFX shots we see in films today art. The supervisors and designers are the artistic guides throughout the process and if AI becomes one more tool to use then the audience and producers will benefit even though some jobs will be lost along the way. We are on the precipice of the same seismic shift we saw during the release of the first Jurassic Park.
Of course, it should never be attempted but inevitably will if it beats employing real people, which it one day might.
They could tinker with the classics. Imagine Le Chiffre interrogating Roger Moore, for example. Sean Connery buying Bibi an ice cream made out of stainless steel (you know he would).
The possibilities are possible.
So what? It's notable that this stuff can be pulled off with such a high degree of authenticity. And it's obvious where the technology is going. Things will continue to be improved upon. One doesn't have to be happy about it, but that's what's happening.
As for artistry, I can imagine a new concept of artistry emerging in the future in which the person's taste and creativity is reflected in what they ask AI to do for them and how they iterate upon it and refine it. Much like a film director's hand being noticeable in their films.
Good point. To us it might feel weird. Young people already born in an AI world will see nothing weird or unpleasant about using it, even with artistic or self-expression purposes. Doubly so as AI continues to improve.
Not for me.
Yes it is, and you've proved it with your elaboration. CGI requires work, regardless of whether it was deemed cold and autonomous by critics. There was still a lot of people working on it regardless of the final result.
You've just sold us here on the fact that AI requires minimal work, if any at all.
It's a losing battle admittedly: it's going to be implemented. I have come to accept it on a certain level. But I don't and will likely never respect it, as it strips authenticity away and reduces human elements and craft. It's a shortcut tool, and I hope audiences reject its use if (as the hypothesis of this thread suggests) it worms its way further into mainstream film-making.
When did the amount of people or time become a criteria for art? I wonder what a lot stunt performers would say about the use of digital doubles being used? VFX could be considered the lazy way of doing stunts and puppeted creatures. BTW you won't have to accept it but two generations from now may very well have a different perspective. Much the same way a lot my generation does not accept video games as entertainment.