Where does Bond go after Craig?

1194195197199200523

Comments

  • I want everything to go horribly wrong for Bond and him say f****. Bleeped out for maximum effect, in the opening sequence.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    I want everything to go horribly wrong for Bond and him say f****. Bleeped out for maximum effect, in the opening sequence.

    Lol I would like this too. I always love in the novels when Fleming tells us Bond let’s out one loud expletive here and there.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,690
    I want everything to go horribly wrong for Bond and him say f****. Bleeped out for maximum effect, in the opening sequence.

    Lol I would like this too. I always love in the novels when Fleming tells us Bond let’s out one loud expletive here and there.

    Dr No even has a 'F---' in it, I think.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    As a side topic, I wonder how people feel about the recent Bond films getting their uncensored F bombs in (in Skyfall and NTTD, anyway).
    Do people care at all?
    Is it interesting it's only ever been M to say it?
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 2022 Posts: 14,951
    Venutius wrote: »
    Agreed, completely. Mendes doesn't actually say that Bond 26 'should' be directed by a woman, just that it would be 'wonderful' if it was. Really, though? Just to tick a box? Just to make a point? What? As DarthDimi said: 'I want the next film to be directed by a competent director, whether male or female' - literally can't say fairer than than.

    Lending a different voice could be beneficial to the end product as Nick says, and also it could be a good idea from a PR point of view. Bond is increasingly viewed as a bit of a personification of the worst aspects of masculinity. I think Craig and NTTD did actually do good work to move that on a bit without betraying the character of Bond, but a female director may well be a good signpost to those who'd written Bond off of the new 007 being a worth a look. Probably not essential, but it could help- and if they're as competent as each other as you say, what's the problem? Eon have only just given up their 'the director has got to be British' rather than the best-person-for-the-job policy, and I didn't see anyone getting particularly upset about that.

    To be honest, I don't really agree with the whole 'it should be the best person for the job no matter their background' thing: if you've made a choice to increase diversity then you've got to stick to it. There's no one single best person for any job anywhere: not even to play 007 himself, as we've seen many times over the years.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,690
    As a side topic, I wonder how people feel about the recent Bond films getting their uncensored F bombs in (in Skyfall and NTTD, anyway).
    Do people care at all?
    Is it interesting it's only ever been M to say it?

    I don't love it. I swear regularly, but it doesn't feel right to me in the Bond movies. Even 'shit' in LALD and LTK feel extremely weird. I wouldn't want full-on nudity either.

    But if it's gonna be done, the F-bomb in NTTD is pretty perfect.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    As a side topic, I wonder how people feel about the recent Bond films getting their uncensored F bombs in (in Skyfall and NTTD, anyway).
    Do people care at all?
    Is it interesting it's only ever been M to say it?

    I don't love it. I swear regularly, but it doesn't feel right to me in the Bond movies. Even 'shit' in LALD and LTK feel extremely weird. I wouldn't want full-on nudity either.

    But if it's gonna be done, the F-bomb in NTTD is pretty perfect.

    I remember watching a Bond fan film on YouTube and they had their Bond sitting next to a woman who was completely naked laying on her front with her butt visible. Not a major thing, but it really drew a stark contrast between the class Bond films strive for, and how quickly it can become trashy.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,951
    Have you ever seen the work of Maurice Binder? :P
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,690
    mtm wrote: »
    Have you ever seen the work of Maurice Binder? :P

    :)) Yeah, and he started well, but in the 1980s, Octopussy in particular was unbelievably trashy, and LTK had the very childish 'oh look the O is an x-ray thing and you can see a nipple!!!!!!!' Oy vey.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited September 2022 Posts: 2,928
    Ah, I actually never twigged that Moneypenny just said that about Q's fear of flying as an excuse! I'll get my coat...
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 2022 Posts: 14,951
    Venutius wrote: »
    Ah, I actually never twigged that Moneypenny just said that about Q's fear of flying as an excuse! I'll get my coat...

    Must admit I never quite got that! But the excuse was just so she could basically keep an eye on Bond, for Mallory presumably.
    She was the best Bond girl in the last few films if you ask me, a shame she didn't really get much to do after SF.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,979
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    Yeah, but after two films in which Bond told other agents to stop touching their ear, he did it himself in SP! They could've at least have made it an in-joke by having him start to do it and then catch himself and stop it, with a look of slight exasperation on his face. ;)

    The Craig era, especially the back half, seems plagued with these in-jokes that work against themselves later on - Q is "afraid of flying" yet has no problem with it in the very next film, or how they're so above the exploding pen from GE yet introduce an exploding watch into the following installment. Plus, the earpiece bits. It's odd.

    I liked "don't touch your ear" in SF. At least it's a callback to a *recent* film.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited September 2022 Posts: 8,025
    I’m fine with swearing in Bond films, usually by other characters. The only time Bond dropped an F bomb was in the GF novel when he tells Goldfinger to “go **** yourself”, and then this delightful reply by Goldfinger: “Even I can’t do that, Mr Bond.”
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    Posts: 988
    I’m fine with swearing in Bond films, usually by other characters. The only time Bond dropped an F bomb was in the GF novel when he tells Goldfinger to “go **** yourself”, and then this delightful reply by Goldfinger: “Even I can’t do that, Mr Bond.”

    Imagine Q saying:
    "Now pay f***ing attention, OO7"
  • Posts: 2,897
    I’m fine with swearing in Bond films, usually by other characters. The only time Bond dropped an F bomb was in the GF novel when he tells Goldfinger to “go **** yourself”, and then this delightful reply by Goldfinger: “Even I can’t do that, Mr Bond.”

    It makes me chuckle to think that's basically the book's equivalent of the iconic 'you expect me to to talk?' moment in the film.There's also a little moment in the DN novel if I recall correctly when he's going through the obstacle course and says rather loudly to himself "f_ck them all".
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    That exchange in the film is such a perfect substitute for the original.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    "Bond lit his first cigarette of the day - the first Royal Blend he had smoked for five years - and let the smoke come out between his teeth in a luxurious hiss. That was his 'Enemy Appreciation'. Now, who was this enemy?" - My favourite passage from Dr. No.
  • The next Bond should do only 3 films just for the sake of irony:

    1 - Lazenby
    2 - Dalton
    3 - New Guy
    4 - Brosnan
    5 - Craig
    6 - Connery
    7 - Moore
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited September 2022 Posts: 7,526
    Bring an actor in to do a page for page adaption of the Blofeld trilogy, done and done. ;)

    Made me think of a question for the people:

    Do you think we’ll ever get a remake of a Bond film that already exists, or do you think they’d ever re-use a Fleming title?
  • Posts: 12,268
    JamesStock wrote: »
    The next Bond should do only 3 films just for the sake of irony:

    1 - Lazenby
    2 - Dalton
    3 - New Guy
    4 - Brosnan
    5 - Craig
    6 - Connery
    7 - Moore

    It's quite easy to imagine too actually, given how long it takes for them to make them these days plus the rumors they want to pursue an arc of some kind again, making a trilogy format appealing. 8 seems quite out of the question, so that should complete the cycle whenever it comes.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 13,929
    Bring an actor in to do a page for page adaption of the Blofeld trilogy, done and done. ;)

    Made me think of a question for the people:

    Do you think we’ll ever get a remake of a Bond film that already exists, or do you think they’d ever re-use a Fleming title?
    No, and I don't want to see that. Also no previous villains from the films with the exception of Blofeld and Bunt.
  • Agent_Zero_OneAgent_Zero_One Ireland
    edited September 2022 Posts: 554
    Bring an actor in to do a page for page adaption of the Blofeld trilogy, done and done. ;)

    Made me think of a question for the people:

    Do you think we’ll ever get a remake of a Bond film that already exists, or do you think they’d ever re-use a Fleming title?
    Let me introduce you to a film called Never Say Never Again...
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,951
    Bring an actor in to do a page for page adaption of the Blofeld trilogy, done and done. ;)

    Made me think of a question for the people:

    Do you think we’ll ever get a remake of a Bond film that already exists, or do you think they’d ever re-use a Fleming title?

    I think nothing's impossible although I'd be surprised if they do for a while. I guess a few of them have been unofficial remakes of previous ones already (AVTAK/GF etc.)
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,544
    Sam Mendes: the next James Bond film should be directed by a woman

    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/sep/15/sam-mendes-next-james-bond-film-directed-by-woman

    I don't get that. I want the next film to be directed by a capable director, whether male or female. Why does it have to be
    mtm wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    Agreed, completely. Mendes doesn't actually say that Bond 26 'should' be directed by a woman, just that it would be 'wonderful' if it was. Really, though? Just to tick a box? Just to make a point? What? As DarthDimi said: 'I want the next film to be directed by a competent director, whether male or female' - literally can't say fairer than than.

    Lending a different voice could be beneficial to the end product as Nick says, and also it could be a good idea from a PR point of view. Bond is increasingly viewed as a bit of a personification of the worst aspects of masculinity. I think Craig and NTTD did actually do good work to move that on a bit without betraying the character of Bond, but a female director may well be a good signpost to those who'd written Bond off of the new 007 being a worth a look. Probably not essential, but it could help- and if they're as competent as each other as you say, what's the problem? Eon have only just given up their 'the director has got to be British' rather than the best-person-for-the-job policy, and I didn't see anyone getting particularly upset about that.

    To be honest, I don't really agree with the whole 'it should be the best person for the job no matter their background' thing: if you've made a choice to increase diversity then you've got to stick to it. There's no one single best person for any job anywhere: not even to play 007 himself, as we've seen many times over the years.

    But then we would be pushing a diversirty agenda. I just want a good Bond film. I'd be happy with a combination of both as long as the director is chosen out of artistic rather than political considerations. I can think of several female directors who I'd love for a Bond film, but because I confide in their skills, not because they are women.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 2022 Posts: 14,951
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    But then we would be pushing a diversirty agenda.

    Yep, and there's nothing wrong with that.
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I just want a good Bond film. I'd be happy with a combination of both as long as the director is chosen out of artistic rather than political considerations. I can think of several female directors who I'd love for a Bond film, but because I confide in their skills, not because they are women.

    If the result is a good film there's no problem then. Perhaps some of those directors you mention have their sensibilities informed by their experiences as women in society and wouldn't be the same if they weren't women. It is an artistic medium.
    Did it harm the Bond films that Cubby insisted on only British directors?
  • edited September 2022 Posts: 2,897
    mtm wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    But then we would be pushing a diversirty agenda.

    Yep, and there's nothing wrong with that.
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I just want a good Bond film. I'd be happy with a combination of both as long as the director is chosen out of artistic rather than political considerations. I can think of several female directors who I'd love for a Bond film, but because I confide in their skills, not because they are women.

    If the result is a good film there's no problem then. Perhaps some of those directors you mention have their sensibilities informed by their experiences as women in society and wouldn't be the same if they weren't women. It is an artistic medium.
    Did it harm the Bond films that Cubby insisted on only British directors?

    Was Cubby's instance on this perhaps (I'm only speculating) more an issue of money and convenience rather than necessarily artistic? I know John Landis was connected to LTK at one point, and of course Broccoli also considered American actors like John Gavin, James Brolin etc. for Bond. Seems exactly the sort of thing a producer would do/say to be honest. Insist on a particular demographic for these positions (again, because it works out cheaper or more convenient for them) and then claim it's for the purpose of representation. It happens even today.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 2022 Posts: 14,951
    007HallY wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    But then we would be pushing a diversirty agenda.

    Yep, and there's nothing wrong with that.
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I just want a good Bond film. I'd be happy with a combination of both as long as the director is chosen out of artistic rather than political considerations. I can think of several female directors who I'd love for a Bond film, but because I confide in their skills, not because they are women.

    If the result is a good film there's no problem then. Perhaps some of those directors you mention have their sensibilities informed by their experiences as women in society and wouldn't be the same if they weren't women. It is an artistic medium.
    Did it harm the Bond films that Cubby insisted on only British directors?

    Was Cubby's instance on this perhaps (I'm only speculating) more an issue of money and convenience rather than necessarily artistic?

    Probably (I suspect a tax reason). But that's even worse isn't it? Putting money above the art?

    If he really wanted to make the best films he should have been looking for the best director, no matter which country they were from.
    But nothing is really as simple as that- there are always many angles to play. He'd have been thinking of the money, so he could spend more to put on screen. And also there's an argument that a British voice does give a unique sensibility to what are semi-British films and make them what they are. So there are all sorts of reasons why you would decide to pick someone from this or that background.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,544
    mtm wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    But then we would be pushing a diversirty agenda.

    Yep, and there's nothing wrong with that.

    I only half agree with that statement, @mtm. Bond films, at least to me, are pure entertainment. Oliver Stone pushing an agenda? Sure. But not the Bonds, or at least not in my opinion. Obviously, there is nothing wrong with organically bringing diversity in a Bond, as we have seen in the previous couple of films, all directed by men I might add. All I am saying is that as long as it happens without things being too obviously engineered, I don't care. But if the film is designed to in-your-face promote a diversity project, I am not so cool with that. That is not what this series was made for, or so I think.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,512
    I don't really care who directs Bond 26, provided they get what Bond is.
    Rewatching NTTD, I fear some of the creatives didn't understand the essence of James Bond
Sign In or Register to comment.