Where does Bond go after Craig?

1245246248250251513

Comments

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,449
    I don't mind having Blofeld back, to be honest. But... it cannot be anything close to the Waltz version.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,518
    I want Spectre and Blofeld back sooner rather than later. They’re Bond mainstays as far as I’m concerned.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,449
    I want Spectre and Blofeld back sooner rather than later. They’re Bond mainstays as far as I’m concerned.

    Agreed. I'd rather like them from a more impersonal angle, though. They are a sinister organisation, operating in the deep shadows (I think the meeting in SP set things up bloody well, up to the coockoo thing.) Blofeld has to learn about Bond through failure, not share a past with him. And yes, I want the bald dude. ;-)
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,518
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I want Spectre and Blofeld back sooner rather than later. They’re Bond mainstays as far as I’m concerned.

    Agreed. I'd rather like them from a more impersonal angle, though. They are a sinister organisation, operating in the deep shadows (I think the meeting in SP set things up bloody well, up to the coockoo thing.) Blofeld has to learn about Bond through failure, not share a past with him. And yes, I want the bald dude. ;-)

    Absolutely, absolutely. Has to be done right.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,483
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I want Spectre and Blofeld back sooner rather than later. They’re Bond mainstays as far as I’m concerned.

    Agreed. I'd rather like them from a more impersonal angle, though. They are a sinister organisation, operating in the deep shadows (I think the meeting in SP set things up bloody well, up to the coockoo thing.) Blofeld has to learn about Bond through failure, not share a past with him. And yes, I want the bald dude. ;-)

    Couldn't agree more.
    I do hope they leave them alone for a film or two and build up to their reveal in Bond #7's timeline. They need some distance from NTTD after they killed Spectre on screen in my opinion
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 686
    So going forward, do we keep the iconic PPK, or do we pick a more modern equivalent?
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,518
    My vote: keep the PPK.

    Can’t really explain why; I love the DB5 but basically hope to never see it again. The PPK though I want to be constant.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,483
    Yeah keep the PPK, that's Bond's weapon. It felt wrong seeing Bond have a 44 Magnum in LALD
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited March 2023 Posts: 23,449
    My vote: keep the PPK.

    Can’t really explain why; I love the DB5 but basically hope to never see it again. The PPK though I want to be constant.

    I agree. Keep the PPK. Some romantic notions from the past (funny thing to say about a gun) do not have to 'evolve' IMO, even if the world around Bond does. The P99 was OK, but the PPK is as much a part of the "Bond Definition" to me as the tux, awesome cars and Wodka-Martinis.
  • Posts: 1,478
    The problem I have with Blofeld and SPECTRE is the failure of MI6 and Bond to ever get the job done. In NTTD someone else brought both down.

    Even if one accepts that each Bond series exists in a different timeline or universe, the appearance of Blofeld and SPECTRE once again will feel creatively bankrupt. What will Blofeld do this time? Who cares? Bond will foul up his plans yet again. And, as always, ESB will get away. Let's move on from Bond vs. Blofeld.







  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,449
    CrabKey wrote: »
    The problem I have with Blofeld and SPECTRE is the failure of MI6 and Bond to ever get the job done. In NTTD someone else brought both down.

    Even if one accepts that each Bond series exists in a different timeline or universe, the appearance of Blofeld and SPECTRE once again will feel creatively bankrupt. What will Blofeld do this time? Who cares? Bond will foul up his plans yet again. And, as always, ESB will get away. Let's move on from Bond vs. Blofeld.


    I guess that Blofeld and Spectre were defeated by two external forces: Safin, and Kevin "I'm eternally pissed at Ian Fleming" McClory. ;-)

    Seriously, though, I get what you're saying. But I want to give them one more chance. It may be a poor comparison, but part of me thinks Joker. "Another Joker" in 2008? "Another Joker" in 2019? And yet, we continue to be excited about the prospect of seeing yet "another Joker". So maybe Blofeld is not that different to us, Bond fans. I don't know. How they handle the character is the deciding factor, no doubt.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited March 2023 Posts: 4,053
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    The problem I have with Blofeld and SPECTRE is the failure of MI6 and Bond to ever get the job done. In NTTD someone else brought both down.

    Even if one accepts that each Bond series exists in a different timeline or universe, the appearance of Blofeld and SPECTRE once again will feel creatively bankrupt. What will Blofeld do this time? Who cares? Bond will foul up his plans yet again. And, as always, ESB will get away. Let's move on from Bond vs. Blofeld.


    I guess that Blofeld and Spectre were defeated by two external forces: Safin, and Kevin "I'm eternally pissed at Ian Fleming" McClory. ;-)

    Seriously, though, I get what you're saying. But I want to give them one more chance. It may be a poor comparison, but part of me thinks Joker. "Another Joker" in 2008? "Another Joker" in 2019? And yet, we continue to be excited about the prospect of seeing yet "another Joker". So maybe Blofeld is not that different to us, Bond fans. I don't know. How they handle the character is the deciding factor, no doubt.

    For the most part, the Joker is done fairly well (Jared Leto and SS’s script were bad for each other). As for Bond vs Blofeld, I feel like any arch villain (James Moriarty, Lex Luthor etc.) there should always have a presence, to keep our hero on their toes. So Blofeld and Spectre should come back, it’s simply how they are portrayed. Christoph Waltz was great casting, let down by bad material. Let’s hope that doesn’t happen next time. If EON wants a villain who has a personal connection for hating Bond, bring back Alec Trevelyan.
  • Posts: 2,753
    I feel Blofeld's impact is diminished somewhat without him being Tracy's murderer, or indeed before that being the sort of 'white whale' for Bond to search for throughout most of OHMSS.

    I suppose the character could be reimagined, but there needs to be that personal element. The two men don't have to be childhood enemies, but their paths need to have crossed with each other and both need that very specific antagonism that puts the character above any other Bond villain. It's why I always say they missed a good opportunity in SP. Essentially Blofeld (or at least SPECTRE) was responsible for Vesper's death, so the film could had ample opportunity to craft a character not dissimilar to dynamic in the novels. Instead they seemed to try and one up the personal element by having Bond and Blofeld know each other as kids, which at best created little drama and fell flat, and at worst annoyed fans.
  • Posts: 1,478
    Given the wacky relationship of Bond and Blofeld in the DC series, let's hope next time around we don't discover Bond and Blofeld are the same person.
  • Posts: 2,753
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Given the wacky relationship of Bond and Blofeld in the DC series, let's hope next time around we don't discover Bond and Blofeld are the same person.

    Directed by M Night Shyamalan.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,861
    slide_99 wrote: »
    Nolan has the right sensitivities for Bond, at least better than Mendes

    I find Nolan doesn't do jokes or any kind of self-mockery and makes incredibly sexless films, and doesn't even really do fun, so for me has the wrong sensibilities for Bond. Mendes was perfect. I would not want a Nolan Bond film.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,969
    mtm wrote: »
    slide_99 wrote: »
    Nolan has the right sensitivities for Bond, at least better than Mendes

    I find Nolan doesn't do jokes or any kind of self-mockery and makes incredibly sexless films, and doesn't even really do fun, so for me has the wrong sensibilities for Bond. Mendes was perfect. I would not want a Nolan Bond film.

    This might be true of his recent work, but the first two DARK KNIGHT films had plenty of humorous "fun" moments. Also, he has a deep passion for Bond, TSWLM is one of his favourite films in the series, I feel like he would show the franchise the proper reverance it deserves and not nolanify every aspect.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,255
    mtm wrote: »
    slide_99 wrote: »
    Nolan has the right sensitivities for Bond, at least better than Mendes

    I find Nolan doesn't do jokes or any kind of self-mockery and makes incredibly sexless films, and doesn't even really do fun, so for me has the wrong sensibilities for Bond. Mendes was perfect. I would not want a Nolan Bond film.

    💯 %… Nolan is a wet napkin.

    His films have become beautifully shots bore-fests with incredible talent whispering for three hours. There’s no care-free zest to anything he’s done. It’s all ultra-serious, which, as @mtm said above, lack in any kind of fun, and god forbid, self deprecation on the part of the filmmaker himself.

    He certainly has never written a great female role and his action is clunky… Just, no….

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited March 2023 Posts: 7,969
    You know an English director with plenty of "care-free zest"?



    Edgar Wright B-)
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,255
    I agree @Mendes4Lyfe … and he’s actually a director that I thought of while writing that, BUT, there’s something still too infantile about his work— for me.

    I think the next director should have that zest and fun that Wright always brings to his films, but balanced with a mature and strong and textured way of telling visual tales.

    For as much as I like Wright’s films (and I genuinely do), I scratch the surface and there’s not a lot underneath.

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited March 2023 Posts: 14,861
    mtm wrote: »
    slide_99 wrote: »
    Nolan has the right sensitivities for Bond, at least better than Mendes

    I find Nolan doesn't do jokes or any kind of self-mockery and makes incredibly sexless films, and doesn't even really do fun, so for me has the wrong sensibilities for Bond. Mendes was perfect. I would not want a Nolan Bond film.

    This might be true of his recent work, but the first two DARK KNIGHT films had plenty of humorous "fun" moments. Also, he has a deep passion for Bond, TSWLM is one of his favourite films in the series, I feel like he would show the franchise the proper reverance it deserves and not nolanify every aspect.

    I didn't find them much fun, but obviously everyone sees things differently so that's fair enough. And the lack of sexiness or indulgence or punch-the-air moments just makes me think he'd be a bad fit. Plus Tenet was the closest thing to a Bond he's done and I thought it was really quite boring.
    He's good at tense seriousness, but everyone has been saying how they've had enough of that with the Craig films.

    In some ways I think his films are characterised by a sort of stripped-back lack-of-style style, if you know what I mean. He's not about grand production design but modernist starkness; another thing I wouldn't really want with Bond.
    peter wrote: »
    For as much as I like Wright’s films (and I genuinely do), I scratch the surface and there’s not a lot underneath.

    Yes I want to enjoy Wright's stuff more than I do. I like the way he does things but they never quite gel into being great movies for me.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,969
    peter wrote: »
    I agree @Mendes4Lyfe … and he’s actually a director that I thought of while writing that, BUT, there’s something still too infantile about his work— for me.

    I think the next director should have that zest and fun that Wright always brings to his films, but balanced with a mature and strong and textured way of telling visual tales.

    For as much as I like Wright’s films (and I genuinely do), I scratch the surface and there’s not a lot underneath.

    What I love about him is not just the tone and the kinetic nature of his directing, but his style is so unmistakably british. A Edgar Wright Bond film would feel so homegrown and authentic IMO.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited March 2023 Posts: 1,420
    peter wrote: »
    I agree @Mendes4Lyfe … and he’s actually a director that I thought of while writing that, BUT, there’s something still too infantile about his work— for me.

    I think the next director should have that zest and fun that Wright always brings to his films, but balanced with a mature and strong and textured way of telling visual tales.

    For as much as I like Wright’s films (and I genuinely do), I scratch the surface and there’s not a lot underneath.

    What I love about him is not just the tone and the kinetic nature of his directing, but his style is so unmistakably british. A Edgar Wright Bond film would feel so homegrown and authentic IMO.

    I was impressed with his Ant-Man ideas before he got canned. Really played with and developed the dynamics of that character's abilities for action. Hope he has something up his sleeve for Bond, and would love to see it.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited March 2023 Posts: 7,969
    hard to believe its already been 18 months since Bond 25 released. If this were the old days we'd be gearing up for the next film coming out at the end of the year. :-<
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,255
    And it’s been five and a half years since Justice League was released, @Mendes4Lyfe … and they just got around to canning Cavill as Supes and developing new ideas for both BM and SM (and others). And the last Superman film was when? Ten years ago (and fans have really wanted more standalone films for this character!!!!)…

    It has been three and a half years since The Rise of the Skywalker— and at one time they kept promising more episodes to follow new characters that would branch out from this last film (but keep hiring and firing writers and directors and we are no where close to a new film….).

    It took fifteen years to bring an 80 year old Indy Jones back on screen for his latest adventure.

    The last Pirates film was six years ago (again, they keep talking about another film that’s never materialized).

    The Bourne films came out in ‘02, ‘04 and then ‘07 and ‘12 and then ‘16….

    The Mission: Impossible films were released: ‘96, ‘00, ‘06, ‘11, ‘15, ‘18, ‘23/‘24… (they were able to do back to backs (with exceptional stress and challenges and that’s why back to back films are so rare (it takes a colossal effort to make it succeed and that’s why most franchises don’t attempt it— too many things could go wrong)).

    John Wick 2014, ‘17, 19, ‘23.


    About the only franchise that can pump out a film every two years is F&F— but that’s because they’re mainly created through no story and CGI wizardry.

    My point is Mendes: most of the above films come out, generally, with longer and longer gaps. Their budgets increase and with that, more stakes, more prep, more time to give the creatives breathing space.

    And most of them don’t have the budgets of Bond (the larger the budgets, the more work to be done).

    Franchise/tent-pole films are huge undertakings nowadays, on a scale that Cubby and Saltzman could only imagine. Pumping out a film every two years nowadays and you can watch the quality of films stoop to new levels of low and also, as other series are making note of : audience fatigue (this is a very real phenomenon).

    Be patient. Enjoy the other films in the EoN catalogue.
    There is a process, and it’s going to take time.
    And if there was never another Bond film again, be thankful that you have 25 films (!) to watch over and over.
    Or, one day your dream may come true and Amazon swallows Bond and produce a facsimile of what came before…


  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,861
    Excellent post.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,969
    In the first 15 years of the franchise (1962 - 1977) we got 10 films. In the last 15 years of the franchise (2008 - 2023) we got 4 films. That's not even 50% of the output over the same span of time. I understand the films taking longer because they're much bigger productions, but it seems like after each new film gets released they take at least a year off before they even think about picking up the phone and hiring writers to start penning the next one. Think about it, if they had been quick out the blocks on Bond 25 it's highly probable they could have finished and released the film in 2019, before the pandemic shut them down for 2 years and cost them millions in advertising and shelving a finished product. Then, if they had been quick to get to work the script for Bond 26, they could gotten the film shot and completed in time for the sixtieth anniversary in late 2022. Then, if they had been quick again, they would have around 5 months to at least have a first draft or an outline prepared for Bond 27, so that, at minimum if their IS a strike looming in a month's time, they would have something to go on and start making preparations. They can't write, but if they know which locations to look for they can at least scout and brainstorm things on their own. So really a lot of the lost time has nothing to do with mammoth productions taking longer, it has to do with EON not being prepared and not being willing to make things happen, always waiting as long as possible to start the process and then panicking midway through production when things aren't going well. We all saw the Sony leaks, we know how SP was a salvage job, how they were flying by the seat of their pants and the people at Sony were frantically trying to work out why their wasn't a more climatic finale than bond firing his ppk at a helicopter. It reminds me of when your at school and you have a assignment except you don't start it until the day before it's due, so you just start typing anything to get some words down on paper. You know what your writing isn't very good, you know you can do better, but the sheer constraints of time mean that you can't question what your writing, you just have to go with it. That's basically the pattern has been in since Skyfall. Taking way to long to get going, not being prepared thinking things will just fall into place, and then having to pull a salvage jobbie when things start going ***s up, and just making the best of a bad situation. Not to say that this is an EON exclusive problem, theres many instances in hollywood these days of compromised productions, or things falling apart before they even get off the ground (see star wars). But its certainly very frustrating to see a company that used to be at the top of its game, spitting out gold every few years and not letting anything slow them down or kill their momentum suddenly slow to a perpetual crawl. And when a new film is released, it's always a salvage Job where just just had to make things work at a pinch. And who knows how long the next film could take now? If the strikes go ahead, as it seems likely they will, that could completely wipe out the rest of 2023, and then they probably take a year or so to cast bond, a year on the script a year on production and 3 - 6 months on post production until release date (that's if nothing else goes wrong in the meantime). I kinda hope there IS some internal shakeup happening, as if the current regime maintains itself we could only see 3 - 4 bond films over the next 2 decades. How is a franchise supposed to maintain its popularity and prescience in the public conscience, as well as win over a whole new generation who have never even heard of Bond, if they can't even manage 3 films per decade? In many ways I was one of the lucky ones, growing up in the 90's/early 00's we had the bond movie marathons on ITV in the UK every Sunday evening, that's how I fell in love with Rogers bond and the gadgets and the hidden lairs and big fight scene extravaganzas and all those aspects that appeal to the imagination of a young boy. But the same young kid today doesn't watch ITV on a sunday, he is on his phone or on his computer watching minecraft youtubers or fornite twitch streamers. How is bond supposed to stay relevant, and not just become a franchise for the 40 plus crowd, which seems to be the case based on the last entries. I can only see the franchise slowly going to pasture if things continue the way they are, we need some fresh blood from somewhere, because it's only when the franchise is running strong that there is overall enthusiasm and engagement that creates new fans. Think what you want about about Bond 25, but it wasn't a film to create new fans, it might be the ending you wanted and hit the all the right notes if you've been a fan of the Craig films from the beginning, but it didn't ignite a new passion for the franchise like, say TSWLM or Goldeneye, or even Casino Royale did. Poignant for the older crowd, but not hopeful for younger fans who Want something to get excited about EON needs to wake up and find some energy and inspiration or I can quickly see the day coming where james bond will not return...
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,255
    We got four films in thirteen years (since there’s no incumbent Bond at the moment I’m not counting the last two years), because there was MGM’s financial woes (again), and a worldwide pandemic that shut down everything for three years— and we are still recovering.

    So take three years of MGM’s issues and three years of Covid, and what’d you get? Over half a decade of pauses inside of 13 years that effectively wiped out any development coming out of EoN HQ!!

    Six years where they couldn’t work. Out of thirteen years.

    Almost 50% of the time you’re complaining about was literally out of their hands. The other years were taken up with development, pre production, filming, post and releases and a 60th anniversary, and now…. Re-introducing the character!!!

    Sorry @Mendes4Lyfe … but you’re conveniently deleting history.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited March 2023 Posts: 8,000
    Yeah Mendes4Lyfe, that entire argument of yours is weak sauce.

    Fact is we’re never gonna get a Bond film every two years ever again, and we should be glad. I want Bond films to be special events, not something churned out by Disney.

    The Sequel Trilogy for example would have greatly benefitted from having three year intervals. But because of Disney’s greed, they were rushed and it showed. I don’t want that to happen to Bond. We saw that with the subpar QOS.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,969
    peter wrote: »
    We got four films in thirteen years (since there’s no incumbent Bond at the moment I’m not counting the last two years), because there was MGM’s financial woes (again), and a worldwide pandemic that shut down everything for three years— and we are still recovering.

    So take three years of MGM’s issues and three years of Covid, and what’d you get? Over half a decade of pauses inside of 13 years that effectively wiped out any development coming out of EoN HQ!!

    Six years where they couldn’t work. Out of thirteen years.

    Almost 50% of the time you’re complaining about was literally out of their hands. The other years were taken up with development, pre production, filming, post and releases and a 60th anniversary, and now…. Re-introducing the character!!!

    Sorry @Mendes4Lyfe … but you’re conveniently deleting history.

    If you read my post above you would see how I explained how those gaps could have been avoided by EON simply getting a move on after release of the previous film, (like they did in the old days) and not waiting 1 or 2 years before starting the process in motion. If directly after the release of SP in late they took 1 - 2 months off and then got to work and began the script writing process, there's no reason they couldn't have finished the movie by late 2019, that's plenty of time even for EON. That way they would avoid the pandemic entirely, infact they could use that time busy on the script of Bond 26 whilst everyone is locked down so that starting in late 2021 when the lockdowns lifted they would have been ready to move ahead with filming. And so on and so forth. These long stretches of dead time are all of EON own making, and could have easily been avoided by just being on the ball. If you plan to saunter around hope things will fit nicely into place, then ofcourse you're going to run into problems.
Sign In or Register to comment.