Where does Bond go after Craig?

1292293295297298523

Comments

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited May 2023 Posts: 23,548
    mtm wrote: »
    Heh! I think C is quite an interesting one to discuss, not least as he’s such a missed opportunity. I saw some folks on Twitter talking about how the role as written doesn’t give enough to Scott to do, which is kind of the opposite of my thoughts about his talents, but it’s interesting how the character fails to fulfil so many people.

    I think the film has a lot going on as it is and C doesn't get his chance to "shine" as a bad guy. He's too little too late. Also, SF brought in Mallory to move MI6 into new management. Now SP brings in C to move British Intelligence into a new era. While Mallory turned out "on the right side", C becomes the obvious villain's stooge. And that's the problem, I think. With Blofeld introduced early on, who cares about his 'surprise' subordinates? I think that's why his character fails to fulfil so many. Wouldn't you agree, @mtm?
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,513
    I think Bond films need to be globetrotting to a degree, perhaps they could use locations per film and stay there a bit longer?

    I think fans and general audiences come to Bond films partly for the exotic locations and the glamour of it. If they didn't go globetrotting, I think they'd have to work harder on the story and having a more engaging plot.

    I think if they went down the Moonraker novel route, they would need the film to have more tension and suspense
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited May 2023 Posts: 1,368
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    I think Bond films need to be globetrotting to a degree, perhaps they could use locations per film and stay there a bit longer?

    I think fans and general audiences come to Bond films partly for the exotic locations and the glamour of it. If they didn't go globetrotting, I think they'd have to work harder on the story and having a more engaging plot.

    I think if they went down the Moonraker novel route, they would need the film to have more tension and suspense

    I couldn't agree more. Globetrotting is among the many Bondian tropes that makes James Bond forever loved and enduring.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,928
    Agreed and also with staying in the locations a bit longer - would've been happy to stay in Jamaica for twice as long in NTTD.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 1,368
    Venutius wrote: »
    Agreed and also with staying in the locations a bit longer - would've been happy to stay in Jamaica for twice as long in NTTD.

    Yeah. Matera too to be honest....for more action.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,958
    I don’t have any massive complaints with how they’ve been tackling the travel: the only thing I would say is that it’s a bit weird to go to Shanghai or Jamaica for example and not really meet any Chinese or Jamaican characters.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,548
    mtm wrote: »
    I don’t have any massive complaints with how they’ve been tackling the travel: the only thing I would say is that it’s a bit weird to go to Shanghai or Jamaica for example and not really meet any Chinese or Jamaican characters.

    How about re-introducing Quarrel? In, of course, a seriously 'updated' version...
  • Posts: 1,215
    I’d love for Bond to visit Japan again and reintroduce Tiger Tanaka.
  • edited May 2023 Posts: 6,677
    I'd love to have Tiger Tanaka back, and a nipponic setting.

    Things I'd like to see back, after rewatching CR this afternoon.

    Persol sunglasses (lots and lots)
    David Arnold (just get the man back already)
    A modern Aston Martin (that ultimate/final edition of the DBS sounds good)
    An up tempo song (give it to Benjamin Clementine)
    Style over substance, and yet, substance over drama
    Exoticism and escapism done without shame (let's go to Japan again, modern Japan is incredible and it can be juxtaposed to the more traditional Japan)
    A womanising Bond with a chivalry touch (no shame in that)
    Better cut suits (let the man breathe, please)
    (Relatively) Affordable Omega(s) - that one goes straight to the watch market
    I'm sure there's a lot more.
    Also, not for this list, but rewatching CR made me feel I really, really miss Judi Dench. Really do.
  • Posts: 693
    And rework this stunt 100x better
    Imagine jumping down to the next pod to rescue someone. that'd be mental
  • Posts: 1,518
    Other than the usual supporting MI6 group and Felix, I prefer not see any characters who are reminders of films past. After all, aren't we moving on? And yes, I know what a reboot is. By all means return to Japan, but not with old characters. If the series is going to revisit old characters, then remake the films. Tiger Tanaka is one of least memorable screen characters IMO. And let's not do a Tiger JR or the third.









  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 1,368
    I also want Military/Naval James Bond back.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 2023 Posts: 14,958
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Other than the usual supporting MI6 group and Felix, I prefer not see any characters who are reminders of films past. After all, aren't we moving on? And yes, I know what a reboot is. By all means return to Japan, but not with old characters. If the series is going to revisit old characters, then remake the films. Tiger Tanaka is one of least memorable screen characters IMO. And let's not do a Tiger JR or the third.

    Funnily enough I think Tiger is one of the few characters who could have his own spin-off (he’s got his own train! Imagine him and Aki doing supercool spy stuff around Tokyo etc.) but I wouldn’t be desperate to see him in a 007 film again, no. Plenty of room for new characters.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,879
    mtm wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Other than the usual supporting MI6 group and Felix, I prefer not see any characters who are reminders of films past. After all, aren't we moving on? And yes, I know what a reboot is. By all means return to Japan, but not with old characters. If the series is going to revisit old characters, then remake the films. Tiger Tanaka is one of least memorable screen characters IMO. And let's not do a Tiger JR or the third.

    Funnily enough I think Tiger is one of the few characters who could have his own spin-off (he’s got his own train! Imagine him and Aki doing supercool spy stuff around Tokyo etc.) but I wouldn’t be desperate to see him in a 007 film again, no. Plenty of room for new characters.

    If we have M, then you must be...T!
    ;)
  • mattjoesmattjoes Kicking: Impossible
    Posts: 6,730
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Other than the usual supporting MI6 group and Felix, I prefer not see any characters who are reminders of films past. After all, aren't we moving on? And yes, I know what a reboot is. By all means return to Japan, but not with old characters. If the series is going to revisit old characters, then remake the films. Tiger Tanaka is one of least memorable screen characters IMO. And let's not do a Tiger JR or the third.









    (This space intentionally left blank.)
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,548
    mtm wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Other than the usual supporting MI6 group and Felix, I prefer not see any characters who are reminders of films past. After all, aren't we moving on? And yes, I know what a reboot is. By all means return to Japan, but not with old characters. If the series is going to revisit old characters, then remake the films. Tiger Tanaka is one of least memorable screen characters IMO. And let's not do a Tiger JR or the third.

    Funnily enough I think Tiger is one of the few characters who could have his own spin-off (he’s got his own train! Imagine him and Aki doing supercool spy stuff around Tokyo etc.) but I wouldn’t be desperate to see him in a 007 film again, no. Plenty of room for new characters.

    On the other hand, Tiger back... I would say yes to that. Who would play him today, I wonder?
  • edited May 2023 Posts: 6,677
    Tomohisa Yamashita, for a younger Tiger.
    Or Hideaki Itõ.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited May 2023 Posts: 5,979
    Benny wrote: »
    I can't believe we're still discussing this. :-O

    Going forward, can the Bond films work on a cheaper budget, with less globetrotting?
    A more single location story perhaps. I'm not suggesting this to be the way the series should go, but a possible route. A tighter budget, with a good story would be very different too what we've had before.

    C is a careless, controversial c***. Concluded.

    I don't mind less globetrotting, although someone here once suggested a faithful adaptation of MR with the settings of the movie MR. That's an intriguing notion.

    I also think that since Kissy Suzuki was never introduced by name, she is fair game, and I think there's room for a new Tiger. That being said, I doubt they are going with YOLT the novel anytime soon...
  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Not a red herring
    edited May 2023 Posts: 565
    I think a single film set entirely in the UK would be fine. It's not much different from other breaks with formula we've had. And there are plenty of grand and atmospheric places they could go. It could be the greenest Bond film ever. Or the greyest.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,548
    Univex wrote: »
    Tomohisa Yamashita, for a younger Tiger.
    Or Hideaki Itõ.

    Interesting! I hadn't thought of these names.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    The main thing will be to avoid running into the "Blofeld in SPECTRE" problem. The old characters are loaded up with meaning for us viewers (and if they weren't, there would be no need to re-use them) but necessarily don't really mean a thing to the characters in the film in the case of a reboot. So you get scenes like in SPECTRE were the actor says "The man inside your head is ERNST STAVRO BLOFELD" and the music swells ominously but really Bond's reaction should have been "Who?" or rather "Who cares?". There's a disconnect between what the characters know and connect to and what the audience connect to.

    The way out - if they were to use these characters - is to once again start not caring about continuity. Or rather return to a more floating continuity, in which if called upon by a screenwriter, something like the plot of the first 20 films has roughly happened to this new Bond and he largely knows places, characters and plots that we know. So we don't get a scene in which some Dikko Henderson stand-in says "They call him TIGER!" and everyone is supposed to react to that. Instead, Bond and Tiger just know each other, because we know that they know each other. It doesn't exactly have to have the backstory of YOLT, but it would free the story to go to a new place instead of being stuck between just a re-hash and too much of a divergence.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 2023 Posts: 14,958
    The main thing will be to avoid running into the "Blofeld in SPECTRE" problem. The old characters are loaded up with meaning for us viewers (and if they weren't, there would be no need to re-use them) but necessarily don't really mean a thing to the characters in the film in the case of a reboot. So you get scenes like in SPECTRE were the actor says "The man inside your head is ERNST STAVRO BLOFELD" and the music swells ominously but really Bond's reaction should have been "Who?" or rather "Who cares?". There's a disconnect between what the characters know and connect to and what the audience connect to.

    To be fair, that is how Craig plays it: Bond just says "Catchy name". I'm not really sure the music swells ominously all that much really, either.

    I quite like seeing the characters meet, but it doesn't have to follow for each one. Quarrel (or Jr) could happily turn up with Bond already knowing him, it depends on the situation I guess.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,513
    I also want Military/Naval James Bond back.

    I'd like that to mate. Think it'll ever happen though?
    I think the only reason Craig's Bond was referred to as Commander in NTTD, was because he lost his 00 number and more importantly to give him the authority to demand the missile launch
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,879
    mtm wrote: »
    The main thing will be to avoid running into the "Blofeld in SPECTRE" problem. The old characters are loaded up with meaning for us viewers (and if they weren't, there would be no need to re-use them) but necessarily don't really mean a thing to the characters in the film in the case of a reboot. So you get scenes like in SPECTRE were the actor says "The man inside your head is ERNST STAVRO BLOFELD" and the music swells ominously but really Bond's reaction should have been "Who?" or rather "Who cares?". There's a disconnect between what the characters know and connect to and what the audience connect to.

    To be fair, that is how Craig plays it: Bond just says "Catchy name". I'm not really sure the music swells ominously all that much really, either.

    I quite like seeing the characters meet, but it doesn't have to follow for each one. Quarrel (or Jr) could happily turn up with Bond already knowing him, it depends on the situation I guess.

    I'd be fine with a character like Quarrel, or Tiger Tanaka , Kerim Bey or anyone else for that matter appearing in a future Bond film. But preferably not in a remake.
    We had Quarrel in DN in '62, then Quarrel junior in LALD in '73, eleven years later.
    Are we supposed to see this character as the offspring of DN Quarrel? Is Bond a codename? Or can we just suspend disbelief and just let the writers give us a slight variation on Bond's Caribbean ally, without it being a big issue.
  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Not a red herring
    edited May 2023 Posts: 565
    mtm wrote: »
    The main thing will be to avoid running into the "Blofeld in SPECTRE" problem. The old characters are loaded up with meaning for us viewers (and if they weren't, there would be no need to re-use them) but necessarily don't really mean a thing to the characters in the film in the case of a reboot. So you get scenes like in SPECTRE were the actor says "The man inside your head is ERNST STAVRO BLOFELD" and the music swells ominously but really Bond's reaction should have been "Who?" or rather "Who cares?". There's a disconnect between what the characters know and connect to and what the audience connect to.

    To be fair, that is how Craig plays it: Bond just says "Catchy name". I'm not really sure the music swells ominously all that much really, either.

    I quite like seeing the characters meet, but it doesn't have to follow for each one. Quarrel (or Jr) could happily turn up with Bond already knowing him, it depends on the situation I guess.

    It's treated like an important moment, even though it means absolutely nothing to anyone in the movie and its irrelevant to the story, so its intended entirely for the audience, provided they already know who Blofeld is of course.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,958
    The whole film is intended for the audience! That's okay :)
    It's a bit like how whenever Craig's Bond spins around and shoots at the camera it's for our benefit rather than any of the characters; Eve's reveal as Moneypenny etc.
  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Not a red herring
    Posts: 565
    True, but there's not much weight behind it since this Blofeld is not the same one from the early movies, with none of the same history with Bond, so it plays as more of a cheap 'nudge and a wink' namecheck reference. That's provided the audience is familiar with the character, for some people the name will be as meaningless as it is to the characters on screen.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,958
    Same situation with Moneypenny then.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 726
    True, but there's not much weight behind it since this Blofeld is not the same one from the early movies, with none of the same history with Bond, so it plays as more of a cheap 'nudge and a wink' namecheck reference. That's provided the audience is familiar with the character, for some people the name will be as meaningless as it is to the characters on screen.

    Exactly. It’s delivered with this dramatic weight that is totally unwarranted in the context of the story. It makes no sense for Blofeld to deliver his name like that. The filmmakers obviously were expecting the audience to gasp with surprise and delight. For me it was the equivalent of a very unfunny joke followed by a cymbal crash.
  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Not a red herring
    edited May 2023 Posts: 565
    mtm wrote: »
    Same situation with Moneypenny then.

    I think so. Although it's less significant a revelation to that film.
Sign In or Register to comment.