› ›

Where does Bond go after Craig?

1…742743744745746748»

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 3 Posts: 17,898
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    LucknFate wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    It’s the Daily Mail so I’m expecting very little in there. I presume it doesn’t come out with anything too mad or anything that hasn’t been rumoured in the past few months?

    I’ve always said Bond should be set in the present though (I feel setting a Bond film in the 60s is an admission the character can no longer be done in a modern setting, which I just don’t think has ever been true). That said we’ve had an Australian and Irish Bond so the ‘British’ rule isn’t as fixed in my opinion. But it’s ideal.

    Just click it and read it, jesus.

    It says Cuaron is in talks for two Bond films.

    I still think that the next two Bond films could be filmed back to back. They could learn from EON's mistake made from CR to QOS, or SP to NTTD. Every Bond actor's second film came no more than two years after their first. Matthew Field is just guessing, and that's fine. Also, I imagine that IFP might try to fix a relationship with Amazon, (originally a book publisher) to help them get better advertising campaigns for future Bond books. EON didn't help them out as much as they arguably could have.

    What do you mean about ad campaigns? Why would Amazon help them?
    I think making two films back to back is a bit too ambitious, and I’m not sure the latest Mission Impossibles are a very appetising example: they started making those over five years ago and the second is only about to come out, they must be exhausted.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited May 3 Posts: 5,104
    Yeah, I’m not sure what the IFP/Amazon thing was about…. Maybe there’s an idea there that if Amazon want to pursue spin offs they could use some of IFP’s properties in exchange for advertising? Personally I’d say beyond Fleming and perhaps CS Amazon should take EON’s lead and keep the films at arm’s length from the continuation literary Bond world.

    Agreed about back to back films too. I don’t think it ever works out great in practice, and each Bond film I think should be its own adventure/crafted as its own thing even if there are story overlaps with the previous one.
  • dewiparrydewiparry
    Posts: 120
    Two films; one Bond. At least there'll be enough Space.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 17,898
    007HallY wrote: »
    Agreed about back to back films too. I don’t think it ever works out great in practice, and each Bond film I think should be its own adventure/crafted as its own thing even if there are story overlaps with the previous one.

    Yes I like that every time they make a Bond film they pour everything they've got into it, they don't hold stuff back (unless it's something which gets chopped out and doesn't fit into this one).
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 2,180
    An interesting M could be Mark Rylance.
  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    edited 7:24am Posts: 1,885
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    LucknFate wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    It’s the Daily Mail so I’m expecting very little in there. I presume it doesn’t come out with anything too mad or anything that hasn’t been rumoured in the past few months?

    I’ve always said Bond should be set in the present though (I feel setting a Bond film in the 60s is an admission the character can no longer be done in a modern setting, which I just don’t think has ever been true). That said we’ve had an Australian and Irish Bond so the ‘British’ rule isn’t as fixed in my opinion. But it’s ideal.

    Just click it and read it, jesus.

    It says Cuaron is in talks for two Bond films.

    I still think that the next two Bond films could be filmed back to back. They could learn from EON's mistake made from CR to QOS, or SP to NTTD. Every Bond actor's second film came no more than two years after their first. Matthew Field is just guessing, and that's fine. Also, I imagine that IFP might try to fix a relationship with Amazon, (originally a book publisher) to help them get better advertising campaigns for future Bond books. EON didn't help them out as much as they arguably could have.

    Mission Impossible did that and it didn't work so well.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,765
    I think two films could have worked for Spectre, had it been planned beforehand and had a better script/production.

    You could have Bond defeat the villian in SP, then find the Spectre ring at the end of the film, which would lead him on the path of Spectre and Blofeld in the follow up.
    You'd have to name SP something else I suppose

    Quantum Of Solace and Spectre are still the biggest missed opportunities in the series in my eyes.
  • rollsgoldenrollsgolden
    Posts: 6
    I'd like to see Jared Harris in the cast if possible.
Sign In or Register to comment.