It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ 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
As @Sammm04 said, Eon's main challenges will be continually adapting Bond to the current time, creating stories and characters which reflect those in the real world. Whenever they hit a crossroad and are in doubt, they'll go back to Fleming. And if all else fails- reboot, which won't be for a few more decades I imagine. Another challenge will be making good casting decisions, casting the right actors/actresses for their respective roles. You could have a top notch script, but if the actors don't fit their character, it will affect the overall outcome of the film. I have faith in Eon to do what feels right.
I can see Barbara staying where she is for some time yet, but I guess when MGW calls it a day, his son David will take over his duties.
Mendes, and perhaps Campbell could come back. Oh, and Spielberg is still patiently waiting for the call. ;)
Agree on both Mendes and Campbell but Spielberg? 30 years ago, most definitely but now? Not a million years would I want him anywhere near Bond.
Regarding the competition, Bourne is practically half-dead; the last Mission Impossible film was a fluke; and what is U.N.C.L.E.? i've never heard of it here in the Far East.
Yes, I'm of the same opinion that 4 per actor may be the new norm. Especially if they continue with 3 year gaps. Risking the wrath of the Craig-ites, he did look considerably older in SF and I expect him to look older still in B24. He may or may not do a fifth, but if we assume that will hit in 17/18 it'll surely be his last. His rough, slightly haggard look is part of his charm but it is unfortunately not an ingredient for longevity. Revamping the franchise every 10-15 is not an awful predicament though. I just hope we have no Lazenby or Dalton style hiccups (regards tenure obviously!)
Any Bond fan who questions the longevity of our favorite spy is an undercover Spectre agent.
Cubby gave a two word response when asked how long Bond will last: "Until doomsday."
Simply put...Bond films are forever. Guaranteed. It is the BaronSamedi of movie history: the series that cannot die.
I envy the Bond fan of the next century who will watching Bond #76 and counting.
"Q, have I ever let you down?"
Yes, I'm sure he'll do both, I'm just a pessimist regards Hollywood and contracts, and would certainly not take it for granted. I don't think it will revert to foppery. I think the next noticeable shift in tone will be when the next actor signs. Even then I expect it to remain relatively gadget and gag free. I think there's scope to make 24 evocative of the of the grand scale adventures of old, without it becoming a pastiche. It's all about story for me. Nail the story and I think the audience will come along for the ride. It's not like the Cubby and Harry era, where you could get away with a series of impressive set-peices linked by a questionable plot. I'm expecting something fresh for 24, with no bloody nods or homages.
I just think that attention spans are short these days and a new actor will be required at fairly short intervals.
Lets hope Bond never get's saddled with a young sidekick like poor old Indy and John Mclane.
That's it. But PC pressure in casting decisions (a minority non-white, or not British actor as Bond as examples) does give me cause for concern. I'm not a total Fleming purist in terms of say Bond being a smoker, although I don't mind either way if the character does or doesn't, but his ethnicity and cultural background must remain inviolable.
Bond is INVINCIBLE !!!!
This is pretty much how I feel about it. If the suits ever take over, casting for Bond is likely to descend into a series of gimmicks: Black Bond, Female Bond, Gay Bond, Pakistani Bond, Mexican Bond, Elvis-Impersonator Bond, and on and on. It would ultimately alienate the fan base and bring about the end of the ongoing franchise.
After that, however, I would expect James Bond to experience a lengthy hiatus and then become kind of like Sherlock Holmes, with new adaptations coming out sporadically, usually as period pieces.
Twenty-something Bond, newly minted Double-O, trying to find love in an angsty dangerous world of espionage....
But I'm sure they've thought of all of this and have a good plan in the works.
That's a quite excellent post you've made there. Some really valid points. Well done.
Everything is done with an eye towards marketing, and not towards the wishes of their long time audience. It's sad but true, there's not enough of us to make the films more than moderately financially viable at best. I think it's safe to say that the "Bourne experiment" hasn't been valid since QOS as SF is anything but Bourne but rather classic Bond, and I wouldn't worry about that any longer as a factor, but they are always doing marketing research and are looking at what the general movie going public wants as far as where they take the character. Another sad fact- when a certain minority becomes a majority, that's when the series will really get into trouble and when Bond is no longer white nor British, I am done and I hope I never live to see it :(
yes this is possible. bond will simply adapt to the market trends, and the classic feel will vanish eventually. even SF borrowed some from Dark Knight (e.g., bardem captivating like joker and psychological themes) I won't be surprised to see a super soldier Bond like Riddick.
my conclusion: Bond will stay forever, but he will be like a chameleon. As long as bond remains white-British, solitary, flirtatious and brutal, I can tolerate that.
SF borrowed from Fleming for the psychological themes, thank god.
Indeed, the trick is to keep the series respectful of its tradition without turning Bond into an outdated relic, like a drunken playboy who fell off a time machine.
It's essential for James Bond to move forward into the 21st Century, rather than perpetually try to rehash the mid-1960s or late 1970s. Excessively rigid adherence to "Classic Bond" could prove just as deadly as corporate demographics-chasing.
It's a difficult balance, but I think that Cubby's heirs have done an admirable job so far.