› ›

Where does Bond go after Craig?

1…455456458460461…531

Comments

  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,533
    @LucknFate It would seem the less the we know about Bond the better. We prefer to see our man in the thick of things. Perhaps playing daddy in NTTD was a bit too much. We don't need to know how his laundry gets done, house cleaned, or meals prepared. Fair enough. But again, I keep coming back to reinvention. What does that look like? Or will it boil down to what it always has. A new guy playing Bond in the current present?
  • jobojobo
    Posts: 7,500
    LucknFate wrote: »
    Sorry for trying. Will save my ideas for myself I guess. Do you all just want May to be a pretty person in the corner? I'm confused.

    It was a joke. I didn't mean to offend.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,554
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @LucknFate It would seem the less the we know about Bond the better. We prefer to see our man in the thick of things. Perhaps playing daddy in NTTD was a bit too much. We don't need to know how his laundry gets done, house cleaned, or meals prepared. Fair enough. But again, I keep coming back to reinvention. What does that look like? Or will it boil down to what it always has. A new guy playing Bond in the current present?

    @CrabKey , as someone who has written for EoN, didn’t PWB say it best?: the world can change around Bond, but he himself can’t change all that much.

    I think this is the best way to approach the character, and I am guessing this is also EoN’s perspective.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,888
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @LucknFate It would seem the less the we know about Bond the better. We prefer to see our man in the thick of things. Perhaps playing daddy in NTTD was a bit too much. We don't need to know how his laundry gets done, house cleaned, or meals prepared. Fair enough. But again, I keep coming back to reinvention. What does that look like? Or will it boil down to what it always has. A new guy playing Bond in the current present?

    @CrabKey , as someone who has written for EoN, didn’t PWB say it best?: the world can change around Bond, but he himself can’t change all that much.

    I think this is the best way to approach the character, and I am guessing this is also EoN’s perspective.

    That's impressive @peter. Was your writing something we can see in any of the Bond films?
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,554
    Oh god that didn’t come off well did it, 😂.

    PWB, as someone who wrote for EoN, said it best….

  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited January 25 Posts: 1,435
    I think he just means PWB worked for Bond, and said it best, with their quote.

    Nothing I pitched about making May casually involved in a minor way in the plot had anything to do with changing the fundamentals of Bond's character, and it's from the books. We don't need to see how Bond's laundry gets done, unless somebody is doing something to his laundry... these explorations into the corners of Bond's world can breed fun new stories. I'm not saying May is the main character, but she can be involved in an innocent way. I don't want them to introduce May just to damsel-in-distress her, is my main point. She doesn't need more than two scenes in the movie to have a significant impact on Bond and the plot.

    And if we're arguing that Bond wouldn't have a housekeeper because "normal people" don't have housekeepers any more, Bond is not normal! He goes on long trips with unknown durations. He would have someone keep up his place. Hell, I live in NYC and have someone wash and fold my laundry for me.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,989
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @LucknFate It would seem the less the we know about Bond the better. We prefer to see our man in the thick of things. Perhaps playing daddy in NTTD was a bit too much. We don't need to know how his laundry gets done, house cleaned, or meals prepared. Fair enough. But again, I keep coming back to reinvention. What does that look like? Or will it boil down to what it always has. A new guy playing Bond in the current present?

    @CrabKey , as someone who has written for EoN, didn’t PWB say it best?: the world can change around Bond, but he himself can’t change all that much.

    I think this is the best way to approach the character, and I am guessing this is also EoN’s perspective.

    Phoebe Waller-Bridge said something similar
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,888
    Is PWB accurate though?
    Hasn't Bond adapted and changed over the course of the series?
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,554
    Benny wrote: »
    Is PWB accurate though?
    Hasn't Bond adapted and changed over the course of the series?

    @LucknFate — thanks for clarifying my clumsy post.

    @Benny but there are some identifiable things that remain, and involve consistency in casting as well: a womanizer/seducer, alpha (on a spectrum), fast cars, gambling, skates the line of smart ass/sardonic humour… The differences seems to be how each man interprets and presents these traits…
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,533
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @LucknFate It would seem the less the we know about Bond the better. We prefer to see our man in the thick of things. Perhaps playing daddy in NTTD was a bit too much. We don't need to know how his laundry gets done, house cleaned, or meals prepared. Fair enough. But again, I keep coming back to reinvention. What does that look like? Or will it boil down to what it always has. A new guy playing Bond in the current present?

    @CrabKey , as someone who has written for EoN, didn’t PWB say it best?: the world can change around Bond, but he himself can’t change all that much.

    I think this is the best way to approach the character, and I am guessing this is also EoN’s perspective.

    That's what I love about writing, the various interpretations. I understood you hadn't written for EON.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,500
    Benny wrote: »
    Is PWB accurate though?
    Hasn't Bond adapted and changed over the course of the series?

    I think the character's changed in some ways, but then again, "...change all that much" is subjective.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,554
    CrabKey wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @LucknFate It would seem the less the we know about Bond the better. We prefer to see our man in the thick of things. Perhaps playing daddy in NTTD was a bit too much. We don't need to know how his laundry gets done, house cleaned, or meals prepared. Fair enough. But again, I keep coming back to reinvention. What does that look like? Or will it boil down to what it always has. A new guy playing Bond in the current present?

    @CrabKey , as someone who has written for EoN, didn’t PWB say it best?: the world can change around Bond, but he himself can’t change all that much.

    I think this is the best way to approach the character, and I am guessing this is also EoN’s perspective.

    That's what I love about writing, the various interpretations. I understood you hadn't written for EON.

    The closest I’ve come to EoN HQ was something of mine was pitched to Gregg Wilson (NOT Bond related; a series based on a famous gangster).

    He replied in email. Not positive. Not negative. And…

    That was two years ago.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,888
    Whilst Bond has remained pretty much the same character over the course of the films, he has changed slightly in the way he acts.
    Whilst he could be considered a womaniser, he no longer slaps a woman on the butt or refers to women as 'darling'. Nothing ground breaking as far as sexism goes, but he at least doesn't see women as playthings in quite the same way he may have in the 60's and 70's.
  • Colonel_VenusColonel_Venus
    Posts: 487
    I just realized how I would try to convince EON to let me direct BOND 26 if I were Nolan. First I would write the screenplay and then create a slightly modified non-Bond version of it. The story and pretty much everything would be the same in the two versions except in the non-Bond version the names would be changed and any copyrighted elements would be removed if there were any. (It would basically take no more than a day to create the second, modified version.)

    Then I would take the non-Bond version of the script to market and start a bidding war between various movie studios. (Same as what happened with the Oppenheimer script.) AND at the same time would present the Bond version of the script to EON.

    I could then show EON how many other companies are interested in the non-Bond version of the script and would tell them that I would love to do the Bond version of it with them. If they still say no, it’s fine, I would then just make the non-Bond (but still Bondian) spy movie with another studio.
  • 007ClassicBondFan007ClassicBondFan
    Posts: 2,083
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @LucknFate It would seem the less the we know about Bond the better. We prefer to see our man in the thick of things. Perhaps playing daddy in NTTD was a bit too much. We don't need to know how his laundry gets done, house cleaned, or meals prepared. Fair enough. But again, I keep coming back to reinvention. What does that look like? Or will it boil down to what it always has. A new guy playing Bond in the current present?

    @CrabKey , as someone who has written for EoN, didn’t PWB say it best?: the world can change around Bond, but he himself can’t change all that much.

    I think this is the best way to approach the character, and I am guessing this is also EoN’s perspective.

    That's what I love about writing, the various interpretations. I understood you hadn't written for EON.

    The closest I’ve come to EoN HQ was something of mine was pitched to Gregg Wilson (NOT Bond related; a series based on a famous gangster).

    He replied in email. Not positive. Not negative. And…

    That was two years ago.

    Oh wow! You’ve certainly come closer than any of us have!
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited January 25 Posts: 8,554
    007ClassicBondFan wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @LucknFate It would seem the less the we know about Bond the better. We prefer to see our man in the thick of things. Perhaps playing daddy in NTTD was a bit too much. We don't need to know how his laundry gets done, house cleaned, or meals prepared. Fair enough. But again, I keep coming back to reinvention. What does that look like? Or will it boil down to what it always has. A new guy playing Bond in the current present?

    @CrabKey , as someone who has written for EoN, didn’t PWB say it best?: the world can change around Bond, but he himself can’t change all that much.

    I think this is the best way to approach the character, and I am guessing this is also EoN’s perspective.

    That's what I love about writing, the various interpretations. I understood you hadn't written for EON.

    The closest I’ve come to EoN HQ was something of mine was pitched to Gregg Wilson (NOT Bond related; a series based on a famous gangster).

    He replied in email. Not positive. Not negative. And…

    That was two years ago.

    Oh wow! You’ve certainly come closer than any of us have!

    😂.

    It was polite.

    Gregg typed my name out, 😂.

    And that’s where it ended.

    However, the same person who pitched my series, has kept him abreast of the project I’m on now, so, we never give up.

    EDIT: and no, I don’t want to write a Bond script. It’s not an ambition of mine.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited January 25 Posts: 8,554
    peter wrote: »
    007ClassicBondFan wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @LucknFate It would seem the less the we know about Bond the better. We prefer to see our man in the thick of things. Perhaps playing daddy in NTTD was a bit too much. We don't need to know how his laundry gets done, house cleaned, or meals prepared. Fair enough. But again, I keep coming back to reinvention. What does that look like? Or will it boil down to what it always has. A new guy playing Bond in the current present?

    @CrabKey , as someone who has written for EoN, didn’t PWB say it best?: the world can change around Bond, but he himself can’t change all that much.

    I think this is the best way to approach the character, and I am guessing this is also EoN’s perspective.

    That's what I love about writing, the various interpretations. I understood you hadn't written for EON.

    The closest I’ve come to EoN HQ was something of mine was pitched to Gregg Wilson (NOT Bond related; a series based on a famous gangster).

    He replied in email. Not positive. Not negative. And…

    That was two years ago.

    Oh wow! You’ve certainly come closer than any of us have!

    😂.

    It was polite.

    Gregg typed my name out, 😂.

    And that’s where it ended.

    However, the same person who pitched my series, has kept him abreast of the project I’m on now, so, we never give up.

    EDIT: and no, I don’t want to write a Bond script. It’s not an ambition of mine.

    EDIT 2: and @007ClassicBondFan , @ColonelSun was on the editing team of LTK. And he's a filmmaker and writer. Very talented and a great guy. He's been deep in EoN HQ! Look up some of his posts on this forum.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited January 25 Posts: 1,381
    Don't know if this sort of plot would be too farfetched or too outlandish for Bond 26. But something like the villian capturing Bond and through plastic surgery, give one of his henchmen Bond's likeness to go to MI6 and steal a blueprint or something, while Bond plots his escape from the villain's lair to stop the fake Bond. Maybe to make the film lively during Bond's capture, the villain engages Bond in bloody gun, vehicular action sports, bloody casino games, bloody underwater games, engaging dinner table dialogue, etc...almost gladiatorial, but Bond in a suit and scuba gear doing the action. Bond is threatened to behave or the fake Bond kills his MI6 colleagues. Maybe Bond also have suspenseful cat and mouse scenes with a femme fatale during his capture. Then back at MI6, M, Moneypenny, Q & Tanner have to face the fake Bond, but later begin to discover some disimilarities. Maybe the plot is too Mission Impossible or too Face-Off...but it could still be done differently.
    For me though, it sounds like an idea Christopher Nolan can work with brilliantly and do inventive things with. A complex Bond film.
  • 007ClassicBondFan007ClassicBondFan
    Posts: 2,083
    peter wrote: »
    007ClassicBondFan wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @LucknFate It would seem the less the we know about Bond the better. We prefer to see our man in the thick of things. Perhaps playing daddy in NTTD was a bit too much. We don't need to know how his laundry gets done, house cleaned, or meals prepared. Fair enough. But again, I keep coming back to reinvention. What does that look like? Or will it boil down to what it always has. A new guy playing Bond in the current present?

    @CrabKey , as someone who has written for EoN, didn’t PWB say it best?: the world can change around Bond, but he himself can’t change all that much.

    I think this is the best way to approach the character, and I am guessing this is also EoN’s perspective.

    That's what I love about writing, the various interpretations. I understood you hadn't written for EON.

    The closest I’ve come to EoN HQ was something of mine was pitched to Gregg Wilson (NOT Bond related; a series based on a famous gangster).

    He replied in email. Not positive. Not negative. And…

    That was two years ago.

    Oh wow! You’ve certainly come closer than any of us have!

    😂.

    It was polite.

    Gregg typed my name out, 😂.

    And that’s where it ended.

    However, the same person who pitched my series, has kept him abreast of the project I’m on now, so, we never give up.

    EDIT: and no, I don’t want to write a Bond script. It’s not an ambition of mine.

    That’s incredibly fascinating!

    But in all honesty, if you were offered a Bond script, would you accept?
    peter wrote: »
    EDIT 2: and @007ClassicBondFan , @ColonelSun was on the editing team of LTK. And he's a filmmaker and writer. Very talented and a great guy. He's been deep in EoN HQ! Look up some of his posts on this forum.

    I’ve read some of his posts! To me LTK is the most fascinating Bond film from a BTS perspective. Everything from the title changes, to the filming at the haunted Rumorosa, and the films final release just intrigues me to no end, so I’ll definitely be interested to read some of his posts!
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,554
    007ClassicBondFan wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    007ClassicBondFan wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    @LucknFate It would seem the less the we know about Bond the better. We prefer to see our man in the thick of things. Perhaps playing daddy in NTTD was a bit too much. We don't need to know how his laundry gets done, house cleaned, or meals prepared. Fair enough. But again, I keep coming back to reinvention. What does that look like? Or will it boil down to what it always has. A new guy playing Bond in the current present?

    @CrabKey , as someone who has written for EoN, didn’t PWB say it best?: the world can change around Bond, but he himself can’t change all that much.

    I think this is the best way to approach the character, and I am guessing this is also EoN’s perspective.

    That's what I love about writing, the various interpretations. I understood you hadn't written for EON.

    The closest I’ve come to EoN HQ was something of mine was pitched to Gregg Wilson (NOT Bond related; a series based on a famous gangster).

    He replied in email. Not positive. Not negative. And…

    That was two years ago.

    Oh wow! You’ve certainly come closer than any of us have!

    😂.

    It was polite.

    Gregg typed my name out, 😂.

    And that’s where it ended.

    However, the same person who pitched my series, has kept him abreast of the project I’m on now, so, we never give up.

    EDIT: and no, I don’t want to write a Bond script. It’s not an ambition of mine.

    That’s incredibly fascinating!

    But in all honesty, if you were offered a Bond script, would you accept?
    peter wrote: »
    EDIT 2: and @007ClassicBondFan , @ColonelSun was on the editing team of LTK. And he's a filmmaker and writer. Very talented and a great guy. He's been deep in EoN HQ! Look up some of his posts on this forum.

    I’ve read some of his posts! To me LTK is the most fascinating Bond film from a BTS perspective. Everything from the title changes, to the filming at the haunted Rumorosa, and the films final release just intrigues me to no end, so I’ll definitely be interested to read some of his posts!

    @ColonelSun has incredible stories, and I've had the honour of reading some projects he has in active development. He's a tremendous talent, and the stories he has...

    As for whether I'd accept script duties on a Bond film, @007ClassicBondFan ... Well to be completely honest, if I was offered the job, that means I'd be blessed with having worked myself up to a small pool of A-plus writers, 😂.

    And although the money would be very welcome, I can say, at this moment, I would never want to be the first writer on a James Bond film. No way.

    Saying that, I know I would love to be involved in the development of one of these scripts, but more as a two week script doctoring gig, either with character/dialogue, or punching up any action sequences.

    So, no, no ambition to be an original creator of one of these scripts, but yes to being one of the doctors on it... If that makes sense?

    And my god, I'd love to be in story meetings with all these guys... That'd be incredible.
  • UnivexUnivex
    edited January 25 Posts: 6,677
    I'm sorry but the line about the world changing but not Bond was said by Fleming himself in an interview. Had I the time, I'd fetch it. But I'm quite sure. If not the CBC interview, some other later on. edit: Ok definitely not the CBC one. If I find it, I'll post it.

    And I'm sure PWB saw that very same interview, or read it.

    BTW, about the CBC interview, that last answer is priceless, specially now.

  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited January 25 Posts: 2,969
    I thought Fleming said the opposite - that Bond was essentially a modern man with modern vices. Which I guess he would have been. Not to say there wasn’t an element of Bond being an outlier in the books, but the whole ‘man out of his own time’ is much more emphasised from GE onwards, and it’s an effective way of keeping the spirit of the character alive.

    Edit. I think there’s a quote where said his books were ‘out of step’ with the fiction of the day, but that so were presumably the people that read them.
  • UnivexUnivex
    edited January 25 Posts: 6,677
    007HallY wrote: »
    I thought Fleming said the opposite - that Bond was essentially a modern man with modern vices. Which I guess he would have been. Not to say there wasn’t an element of Bond being an outlier in the books, but the whole ‘man out of his own time’ is much more emphasised from GE onwards, and it’s an effective way of keeping the spirit of the character alive.

    Maybe. I have to find that quote. I'm sure I came across it at some point, because I've long said that the trick was to have the world change around Bond and have him react to it. I'm sure I didn't come up with that. Did I? :)

    Oh well... But, @007HallY, my friend, If he was to be a modern man with modern vices in 1955 why would he keep a 30s Blower? I know the cut of his suits was rather sharp. I guess he was a bit more complex than Fleming anticipated ;)

    I suppose if he were a modern man now, we wouldn't recognize our man Bond. What would modern vices constitute? :D
  • 007ClassicBondFan007ClassicBondFan
    edited January 25 Posts: 2,083
    At the very least I feel as if Bond as a character should keep with the trends of modern day, but also follow the beat of his own drum. He shouldn’t explicitly copy what’s trendy/fashionable beat for beat, but at least make an effort to keep up with them. I think the fact that he no longer smokes cigarettes and no longer comes across as a Don Juan type figure bedding every woman he lays eyes on are examples of this.
  • UnivexUnivex
    edited January 25 Posts: 6,677
    This was one of the things I adored about the Craig era. Perfect balance, I'd say. PPK in hand, DB5, appreciation for good old stuff, but no problem on blowing up his family home and wrecking his beloved car. A fully fleshed complex character, as it should be.

    316f8844-bf2c-4847-885e-eb563c4b6c4d_text.gif

    421e2c0f-6e9e-4620-8cf4-23dbd9f63e44_text.gif
  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited January 25 Posts: 2,969
    Univex wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    I thought Fleming said the opposite - that Bond was essentially a modern man with modern vices. Which I guess he would have been. Not to say there wasn’t an element of Bond being an outlier in the books, but the whole ‘man out of his own time’ is much more emphasised from GE onwards, and it’s an effective way of keeping the spirit of the character alive.

    Maybe. I have to find that quote. I'm sure I came across it at some point, because I've long said that the trick was to have the world change around Bond and have him react to it. I'm sure I didn't come up with that. Did I? :)

    Oh well... But, @007HallY, my friend, If he was to be a modern man with modern vices in 1955 why would he keep a 30s Blower? I know the cut of his suits was rather sharp. I guess he was a bit more complex than Fleming anticipated ;)

    I suppose if he were a modern man now, we wouldn't recognize our man Bond. What would modern vices constitute? :D

    To be fair I didn’t get the exact quote/context correct. Fleming said Bond was a ‘creature of the era’, not a typical man of his time but very much of his time. It makes sense in many ways. He’s a man who travels the world for his job in an era where commercial air travel was becoming bigger than ever, he gambles, sleeps with women without much of a thought of marriage or settling down, and he certainly doesn’t have a traditional black and white view of morality when it comes to his job, or even his country at times. So yeah, I guess in many ways the literary Bond is a product of that post WW2 Cold War world.

    But I think you’re right, Bond is probably more complex than Fleming may sometimes have let on. And the truth is many of these qualities - the casual sex, indulgence in gambling/fast cars/materialistic things, his cynicism - could be easily described as ‘symptoms of the era’ today.
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,677
    007HallY wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    I thought Fleming said the opposite - that Bond was essentially a modern man with modern vices. Which I guess he would have been. Not to say there wasn’t an element of Bond being an outlier in the books, but the whole ‘man out of his own time’ is much more emphasised from GE onwards, and it’s an effective way of keeping the spirit of the character alive.

    Maybe. I have to find that quote. I'm sure I came across it at some point, because I've long said that the trick was to have the world change around Bond and have him react to it. I'm sure I didn't come up with that. Did I? :)

    Oh well... But, @007HallY, my friend, If he was to be a modern man with modern vices in 1955 why would he keep a 30s Blower? I know the cut of his suits was rather sharp. I guess he was a bit more complex than Fleming anticipated ;)

    I suppose if he were a modern man now, we wouldn't recognize our man Bond. What would modern vices constitute? :D

    To be fair I didn’t get the exact quote/context correct. Fleming said Bond was a ‘creature of the era’, not a typical man of his time but very much of his time. It makes sense in many ways. He’s a man who travels the world for his job in an era where commercial air travel was becoming bigger than ever, he gambles, sleeps with women without much of a thought of marriage or settling down, and he certainly doesn’t have a traditional black or white view of morality when it comes to his job, or even his country at times. So yeah, I guess in many ways the literary Bond is a product of that post WW2 Cold War world.

    But I think you’re right, Bond is probably more complex than Fleming may sometimes have let on. And the truth is many of these qualities - the womanising, indulgence in gambling/fast cars, and his cynicism - could be easily described as ‘symptoms of the era’ today.

    You are absolutely right. Symptoms of the era, and of Flemings marriage, and his relationship with his parents and his brother, or the bigger shadow of him, anyway. The man had his ghosts, dead and living. A cocktail for complexity.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited January 26 Posts: 2,969
    Oh yeah, there’s a lot there.

    I suppose much like what we got during the Craig era and those Fleming novels, Bond in the next film will be a character who lives in a world where he knows that the enemy/the way they operate are different now, that wars for him are not fought on the battlefield but either through shadowy men behind desks, or indeed computers in the modern films (or whatever variation of this). He’s a blunt instrument in this context - where those enemies operate ‘in the shadows’ he’s an agent out in the field, where the villains embrace nihilism, anarchy, destructive potential of wealth or technology, Bond still retains a basic sense of duty and even good and evil (even if he’s aware of the shades of grey in that modern world).

    So yeah, I suspect it’ll be a riff on those broad ideas. EON do understand this aspect of Bond I believe.
  • FeyadorFeyador Montreal, Canada
    Posts: 735
    They figuratively, not just literally, blew up the default Bond character.

    That was the meaning of the Craig run, with elements present since at least GE. It’s been an increasingly uneasy critique running alongside the traditional Bond. How much further can they take that? Would it even be desirable?

    Or is there an ideologically coherent, but still largely recognizable Bond that they can reestablished post-Craig, one not dependent upon nostalgia?

    Personally, I doubt it ...
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited January 26 Posts: 13,071
    And what could the casual observer think of him, 'Commander James Bond, GMG, RNVSR', also something at the Ministry of Defence', the rather saturnine young man in his middle thirties sitting opposite the Admiral? Something a bit cold and dangerous in that face. Looks pretty fit. May have been attached to Templer in Malaya. Or Nairobi. Mau Mau work. Tough-looking customer. Doesn't look the sort of chap one usually sees in Blades.

    Bond knew that there was something alien and un-English about himself. He knew that he was a difficult man to cover up. Particularly in England. He shrugged his shoulders. Abroad was what mattered. He would never have a job to do in England. Outside the jurisdiction of the Service. Anyway, he didn't need a cover this evening. This was recreation.

    Well ignoring the past would be a mistake.

    I don't expect reestablishing Bond will be a problem in the slightest.

Sign In or Register to comment.