Where does Bond go after Craig?

18384868889523

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,956
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I wouldn't mind a Bond film that deals with an occurrence during his time on the military (I'd prefer we stick to WWII), and simultaneously cuts back and forth to a "current" ('60s) mission that is related (surviving villain perhaps).

    I think that's a cool idea, but sounds very much like the personal/dramatic side of things which fans seem to keep saying they don't want.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited December 2021 Posts: 7,526
    Eh, personal maybe in the same vein as GoldenEye. No relatives, just figures from the past. Would be a cool idea. Still not sure I'd want a period Bond film.
  • James Bond Beyond? :P Like Batman Beyond, set in the future. There was one great frame in one of the Dynamite comics where everyone was using a cellphone that had the Spectre logo on the back; maybe they could explore the idea where Spectre becomes a multinational, out in the open corporation and Bond has to try and take them down in that new landscape.

    While Bond has always had one foot in the future, an iteration of Bond set definitively in the future of 20-30 years from now (with those ever elusive flying cars and everything) could be an interesting way to shake things up. SPECTRE as a multinational sounds a bit like LexCorp, but I could see it. I like the spookiness of a future where the SPECTRE logo truly is "everywhere" as Mr. White would say—on cellphones, in store windows, in commercials playing on the subway. Even Austin Powers had Dr. Evil's organization branch out into so-called legitimate business schemes while he was in cryo. I'm a little surprised we haven't had the head of a fictional multinational as a Bond villain yet. The closest we've come to that was Elliot Carver, and that was a good 25 years ago.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    There's one little unused nugget in the Thunderball novel, where Spectre is suggested to have an above-board branch, even having M admitting to have done business with them.
  • There's one little unused nugget in the Thunderball novel, where Spectre is suggested to have an above-board branch, even having M admitting to have done business with them.

    I had forgotten this completely but vaguely recall it now. You may have something here after all!
  • BirdlesonBirdleson Moderator
    edited December 2021 Posts: 2,161
    mtm wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I wouldn't mind a Bond film that deals with an occurrence during his time on the military (I'd prefer we stick to WWII), and simultaneously cuts back and forth to a "current" ('60s) mission that is related (surviving villain perhaps).

    I think that's a cool idea, but sounds very much like the personal/dramatic side of things which fans seem to keep saying they don't want.

    Not if they stick to the mission. Maybe a little insight into younger Bond. The connection between the villain and Bond need not be overtly deep and personal. Just one that got away.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    There's one little unused nugget in the Thunderball novel, where Spectre is suggested to have an above-board branch, even having M admitting to have done business with them.

    I had forgotten this completely but vaguely recall it now. You may have something here after all!

    I’m mining it for my own creative project. ;)
  • edited December 2021 Posts: 12,837
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I wouldn't mind a Bond film that deals with an occurrence during his time on the military (I'd prefer we stick to WWII), and simultaneously cuts back and forth to a "current" ('60s) mission that is related (surviving villain perhaps).

    I think it could work in any time period myself, but there was something cool about how WW2 loomed over the novels. All those different backstories for all those different bad guys, and Bond himself, all rooted in the same conflict.

    But yeah, they’re the only ways I can see it working. Either cutting back and forth, or do it as another origin story (maybe the villain gets away, killing a few of Bond’s unit in the process, and he could persuade MI6 to recruit him and send him after him by witholding intel, or something?). I don’t think a whole film focused on the military angle would work. Just wouldn’t feel very Bond.
    James Bond Beyond? :P Like Batman Beyond, set in the future. There was one great frame in one of the Dynamite comics where everyone was using a cellphone that had the Spectre logo on the back; maybe they could explore the idea where Spectre becomes a multinational, out in the open corporation and Bond has to try and take them down in that new landscape.

    While Bond has always had one foot in the future, an iteration of Bond set definitively in the future of 20-30 years from now (with those ever elusive flying cars and everything) could be an interesting way to shake things up. SPECTRE as a multinational sounds a bit like LexCorp, but I could see it. I like the spookiness of a future where the SPECTRE logo truly is "everywhere" as Mr. White would say—on cellphones, in store windows, in commercials playing on the subway. Even Austin Powers had Dr. Evil's organization branch out into so-called legitimate business schemes while he was in cryo. I'm a little surprised we haven't had the head of a fictional multinational as a Bond villain yet. The closest we've come to that was Elliot Carver, and that was a good 25 years ago.

    Yeah it’d be very different, but I do quite like the idea. They’d have more freedom than a historical setting, so even though it’s not set now, they could still easily make it feel timely and relevant. I like the SPECTRE corporate dystopia angle too, that could work. It’s weird really. We’re in the age of the billionaire. The wealth, excess and sci-fi gadgets of the super rich has genuinely gotten to Bond villains levels, and big business types are as common targets in films now as they were in the 80s, but Bond hasn’t gone there for a while. It’s been creepy psychos with remote hidden lairs for a few films now. So, it’d be nice to have a baddy like that again.

    Taking that idea and applying it to a modern setting, maybe a story based on those doomsday climate change bunkers tech billionaires have in New Zealand? Building robot armies, using disciplinary collars to keep the armed guards in line, these are all very Bond villain suggestions that they’ve actually made

    https://amp.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/23/tech-industry-wealth-futurism-transhumanism-singularity

    https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/feb/15/why-silicon-valley-billionaires-are-prepping-for-the-apocalypse-in-new-zealand

    Maybe some cabal of super rich attempts to bring about an apocalyptic event early, to get the upper hand and literally take over what’s left of the world in the aftermath? Although that sounds a bit too similar to Kingsman now that I think about it.

    Or going back to the future setting, if they wanted to go really big and bold with it, a new World War? Or the closest thing possible without a nuclear apocalypse happening. We haven’t seen Bond do any sort of war time espionage before, and doing that in the future could work as well as in World War 2.
  • Posts: 9,770
    We all have ideas for Bond 26 and Bond #7 some of them will be popular some of them will be hated point is the fandom is full of interesting ideas.
  • I’ve said this at least once somewhere on the website I believe, so apologies if I end up repeating myself. I think the best direction for the series going forward post Craig would be to return to the style of Dr. No, FRWL, and TB. Bring that grounded sense of reality with some strong levity and everything will be gold.
  • Posts: 15,818
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I wouldn't mind a Bond film that deals with an occurrence during his time on the military (I'd prefer we stick to WWII), and simultaneously cuts back and forth to a "current" ('60s) mission that is related (surviving villain perhaps).

    I'd love that! Actually, TBH, setting it during WWII would be the MAIN reason I'd be interested in seeing a young Bond Navy era story.
  • StarkStark France
    Posts: 177
    IMO Cinematic Bond needs to stay "5 minutes in the future".

    Elba and Cavill as Bond wouldn't be the worst things, no, but I'm surprised many fans don't care enough to want a better actor in the main role.

    It's like all people want is a new Bond poster, not a new Bond film.

    Why does everyone thinks Cavill is not a good actor ? Because he never had an Oscar role ? He has a real screen presence and plays well.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,956
    There's one little unused nugget in the Thunderball novel, where Spectre is suggested to have an above-board branch, even having M admitting to have done business with them.

    I like that, yeah.
    Birdleson wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I wouldn't mind a Bond film that deals with an occurrence during his time on the military (I'd prefer we stick to WWII), and simultaneously cuts back and forth to a "current" ('60s) mission that is related (surviving villain perhaps).

    I think that's a cool idea, but sounds very much like the personal/dramatic side of things which fans seem to keep saying they don't want.

    Not if they stick to the mission. Maybe a little insight into younger Bond. The connection between the villain and Bond need not be overtly deep and personal. Just one that got away.

    It's kind of hard to see how that couldn't be personal, though. Or if it isn't, what the point of doing it would be. Bond just being mildly frustrated he failed to catch the baddie the first time would seem a bit underwhelming.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    Stark wrote: »
    IMO Cinematic Bond needs to stay "5 minutes in the future".

    Elba and Cavill as Bond wouldn't be the worst things, no, but I'm surprised many fans don't care enough to want a better actor in the main role.

    It's like all people want is a new Bond poster, not a new Bond film.

    Why does everyone thinks Cavill is not a good actor ? Because he never had an Oscar role ? He has a real screen presence and plays well.

    He's wooden. An Oscar doesn't equate to good acting, or a good anything. I don't think "everyone" thinks Cavill isn't a good actor; I don't think he's a great actor because he isn't engaging. YMMV.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited December 2021 Posts: 5,979
    Stark wrote: »
    IMO Cinematic Bond needs to stay "5 minutes in the future".

    Elba and Cavill as Bond wouldn't be the worst things, no, but I'm surprised many fans don't care enough to want a better actor in the main role.

    It's like all people want is a new Bond poster, not a new Bond film.

    Why does everyone thinks Cavill is not a good actor ? Because he never had an Oscar role ? He has a real screen presence and plays well.

    Because Cavill is horrible. At acting. No, really. He is.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited December 2021 Posts: 2,928
    I’ve been thinking about the military service angle somebody suggested. Bond in the Royal Marines or whatever. And I do like the idea. I was never really keen on the idea of a Bond origin story, because I think one of the strengths of the character is how he emerged fully formed. But I have always wondered about his time serving...Maybe you could start it with him in the Marines, but then have him recruited by MI6 a third or so onto the film, maybe just as a temporary asset for some plot related reason. End it with M asking if he’s ever considered a career change, fast forward to him as 007 next time round?
    Apparently, SBS operatives work with British secret services on 'deniable black ops' - if they went for a combined origin/mission story, there must be a lot of potential in there for how Bond moved from special forces to MI6. Might be a bit too close to CraigBond's background, though, so they might want to go a different route this time.
    https://www.eliteukforces.info/rumours/the-increment.php
  • edited December 2021 Posts: 2,065
    Cavil isn’t Brando levels, but everyone making him out to be one of the worst screen presences is being a bit melodramatic. Clearly the man isn’t as “talentless” as some make him out to be. Let’s not be too harsh and give credit where it’s due.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    Has anyone said he has the worst screen presence, or that he’s talentless?

    For myself I can say I’ve only said he was wooden.
  • Has anyone said he has the worst screen presence, or that he’s talentless?

    For myself I can say I’ve only said he was wooden.

    It’s not directed towards you, just towards the criticisms that I’ve seen from people on the Internet about Cavil’s acting abilities. I understand some people not liking him, but I can’t bring myself to agree with the criticisms of his acting. He’s put in good performances in the work I’ve seen him in, so this split opinion about his range of abilities just don’t hold much merit in my eyes.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    Has anyone said he has the worst screen presence, or that he’s talentless?

    For myself I can say I’ve only said he was wooden.

    It’s not directed towards you, just towards the criticisms that I’ve seen from people on the Internet about Cavil’s acting abilities. I understand some people not liking him, but I can’t bring myself to agree with the criticisms of his acting. He’s put in good performances in the work I’ve seen him in, so this split opinion about his range of abilities just don’t hold much merit in my eyes.

    I suppose I can meet you halfway and say that he's serviced the character's he's played adequately.

    And in fairness, my pick Luke Evans hasn't been in too terribly much, and so hasn't had much of the chance to really stretch his acting muscles either.

    I think part of why I go after Cavill is because he seems so ahead in the race of public opinion for "Next Bond", that if they end up going with him I'll be very disappointed because it seems so safe.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,112
    Well, Zack Snyder isn’t the greatest with actors. If they’re looking at Cavill just by Superman, that’s not fair. That being said, EON can be more creative with its casting.
  • edited December 2021 Posts: 2,065
    Has anyone said he has the worst screen presence, or that he’s talentless?

    For myself I can say I’ve only said he was wooden.

    It’s not directed towards you, just towards the criticisms that I’ve seen from people on the Internet about Cavil’s acting abilities. I understand some people not liking him, but I can’t bring myself to agree with the criticisms of his acting. He’s put in good performances in the work I’ve seen him in, so this split opinion about his range of abilities just don’t hold much merit in my eyes.

    I suppose I can meet you halfway and say that he's serviced the character's he's played adequately.

    And in fairness, my pick Luke Evans hasn't been in too terribly much, and so hasn't had much of the chance to really stretch his acting muscles either.

    I think part of why I go after Cavill is because he seems so ahead in the race of public opinion for "Next Bond", that if they end up going with him I'll be very disappointed because it seems so safe.

    Fair enough, I get sick of hearing the likes of Cavil and Elba mentioned constantly, alongside Hardy, Hiddleston, etc... They’re too big names, and I say this as someone who likes those actors.

    I don’t have a choice honestly, I just put my faith in EON, that way I can’t be disappointed or upset if it’s not someone who I want in the role, and although Craig has been the only Bond that’s been cast in the role during my lifetime (born in 97), I’m just naturally trusting of EON since they’ve done this for decades now.
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Well, Zack Snyder isn’t the greatest with actors. If they’re looking at Cavill just by Superman, that’s not fair. That being said, EON can be more creative with its casting.

    Disagree on Snyder. Thought he was great with directing his stars, just his vision of the DC Universe isn’t one that gels with what should be done for a cinematic universe, and I say that as someone who loves his DCEU films.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,956
    Venutius wrote: »
    I’ve been thinking about the military service angle somebody suggested. Bond in the Royal Marines or whatever. And I do like the idea. I was never really keen on the idea of a Bond origin story, because I think one of the strengths of the character is how he emerged fully formed. But I have always wondered about his time serving...Maybe you could start it with him in the Marines, but then have him recruited by MI6 a third or so onto the film, maybe just as a temporary asset for some plot related reason. End it with M asking if he’s ever considered a career change, fast forward to him as 007 next time round?
    Apparently, SBS operatives work with British secret services on 'deniable black ops' - if they went for a combined origin/mission story, there must be a lot of potential in there for how Bond moved from special forces to MI6. Might be a bit too close to CraigBond's background, though, so they might want to go a different route this time.
    https://www.eliteukforces.info/rumours/the-increment.php

    The biography of Craig’s Bomd had him working at Defence Intelligence, which is sort of the military’s version of the secret service, so could be a good mid-point.
  • edited December 2021 Posts: 3,279
    I've said it before and I'll say it again. Bond 26 needs a new approach, but by going back to the novels, and the theme is gangsters. Gangsters, gangsters!

    Intro to the new Bond is from TSWLM, rescuing Viv Michel from 2 gangsters in a motel, who are connected to the Spangled Mob. Back in London, Bond then gets introduced to a high ranking political figure who is corrupt, and associated with the gang via a game of cards at Blades by M, who suspects he is cheating (MR).

    Bond then gets sent on an undercover mission as Mark Hazard to infiltrate their gang, with Pistols S (or someone similar) being their deadly hitman (DAF/TMWTGG). Loads of stuff can then be used from these books, including whorehouse intros, mud spa deaths, horse racing, Brooklyn stomping (DAF and TMWTGG), and the staged railway train finale, which appears in both books coincidentally.

    If Babs wants to tick boxes and keep things right on PC correct, turn Kidd and Wint into 2 female lesbian killers. That's 2 boxes ticked right there (strong women, and lesbians). Make one of them black, and it's a third box ticked (now more resembling Bambi and Thumper).

    Keep it tough, violent, edgy, hardcore. No more family angst crap or retcon garbage. Just Fleming and gangsters! This way they've used up all the best unused Fleming remaining scenes in one go, and given a different direction too for the next actor.

    EON, you are welcome. Job done!
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    I am quite okay with a military beginning for the next Bond. Just make it a great script.

    Also, I want Maggie Q in a Bond movie, in any capacity. But I was thinking of as an ally.
  • Posts: 207

    Great read and I agree that those are good ideas for B26.
  • Posts: 3,279
    Zarozzor wrote: »

    Great read and I agree that those are good ideas for B26.

    Thanks. This would be my dream Bond film, and harkens back to the tougher, violent Bond films like LTK and CR.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    I think the way you thread the various Fleming pieces together works well and I especially like the idea of female versions of Wint and Kidd being the henchwomen for a future film. I don't know how far EON would go in making them a specifically butch lesbian couple, but there is a lot of meat on that bone and I think a good screenwriter could create a very memorable duo out of that idea.

    I am wondering about the gangster aspect.
    On the one hand, after a shadowy, almost state-like cabal of basically terrorists (SPECTRE/Quantum) and guys who are mainly out for personal revenge (Silva and Safin) they could return to a slightly more pedestrian (if that's the right word) villain who just really wants money and power. I am not against that.
    But on the other hand, I don't really know what organized crime looks like nowadays and how do we get Bond involved.
    What I mean by that is that I basically think of the Spangled Mob from the 50s or something out of the Godfather, when I hear the word "gangster". That doesn't really exist anymore, does it? So what's in that place and does that still work similar enough that you could just take the Spangled Mob and easily transfer it? I just don't know.
    Plus, the part about involving MI6/Bond. What's the rationale for that in DAF? I can't recall at the moment. If it's something about colonies, or UK foreign dividends, that wouldn't really work anymore would it? I like the idea of a politician being involved or something like that, but again, why MI6 and not 5 or the police?
    Those aren't hard things to overcome, but just transposing the Spangled Mob from 1956 might not be enough.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited December 2021 Posts: 2,928
    If it's overseas, it'd be MI6 and if MI6 use SBS operatives for 'secret military assistance to foreign powers, the clandestine insertion and extraction of intelligence agents and covert reconnaissance/intelligence gathering', there must be scope for a military Bond to get involved via the SBS and go on from there.
Sign In or Register to comment.