It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
You went a bit negative on the end there, but I am starting to lean more and more in the direction that they should focus on one film and one film only and not try to re-build the franchise on day one. Get one very good film done. See where you stand. If the actor worked and can or wants to do another one, keep him. If it's a one-off, that's fine, too.
For a long time, I've thought they would need to take the long view. Find a guy who commits to doing 4 films in 15 years. Get a producing director to oversee the whole thing. Have at least an outline for all of those films, before you start shooting the first one. And the more I am reflecting, the more I feel like that is way too much and they should instead just do one good film.
My post must be poorly written. I didn’t mean to disparage George Lazenby as asexual, just that he wasn’t that well received. I can just imagine the next hire to be bland.
Whenever I try and imagine a ‘best case scenario’ it’s always with some sort of caveat. For example I could potentially see them nailing the actor for 007 but tripping up on the kind of film they want to make for two or three films. Similar to Sir Roger Moore maybe. But I find this less likely because I, for whatever reason, have no confidence they will get the main casting decision right.
A bland Bond isn't the worst-case scenario. The worst-case scenario is a bland and ugly Bond. ;)
It is true that Hollywood makes things very complicated and the obvious is no longer obvious.
1. They deliver a satisfactory product and the public enjoys a moment of resurrected awareness of the series. However, this does not sufficiently steer away from the gradual erosion of the legacy, highlighted by the global cultural decline, now worsened by the foreboding withdrawal of the original owners.
2. Motivated by creative anxiety and the cautionary approach of stakeholder maximization, they seek the lowest common denominator of derivation and adequacy, producing a picture replete with replicas and lacking inspiration, thereby revealing a fundamental misunderstanding of, and misplaced authority over, the Bond mythology, as well as the public consciousness.
3. Aware of the ominous trajectory of the current series, hastened further by change of ownership, endangered by the context of a failing industry, and disassociated from a rapidly fracturing global audience, they deliver an extraordinary response. To ignore the enclosing darkness of the global zeitgeist would avoid a unique opportunity for truly heroic storytelling. As George Lucas recognized in Empire Strikes Back, delivering a somber, dark, threatening and uncomfortable story would ensure the legacy of a masterpiece…
History is offering Bond 26 the stage for a consequential narrative. I believe we should admonish our undeniable national neglect in the threat of globalization. Bond is a hero and representation for the ideal of Mankind; therefore, this action could lead to a pivotal cultural renaissance for the entire world.
Cinema's fictional guise for sociological intervention grants us unique opportunities. Today, the operation desperately needed is a collective pathos. Bond 26 is perfectly poised to execute a cinematic statement against this unspoken global cultural catastrophe; channeling our resistance through his mythical iconography, reviving our most sovereign natural gift: identity. It could inspire Britain to renewed national strength, and stir an awakening which will echo the call for honour, courage, idealism across the world.
Scenario 1 would deliver only momentary relief. Scenario 2 would only accelerate our devolution. Scenario 3 would, after profound and silent uncertainty, achieve immortality in cinema and move the very world we live in...
Now divorced from its true parents, the future series has every risk of becoming self-conscious and lazily sustaining appeal. I do recognize the talent and skill of current attachments. However, I beware this legacy in the hands of a packaging company. I dread the consequence of those who have already so easily started the content factory machine with safe and frequent collaborations. Whereas it took the original and intimately familiar owners so long as this to honestly admit they had no answer to Bond's newest purpose.
Audience Perspective: We have already accepted the “record-breaking” numbers and relentless marketing of Barbie, Rings Of Power, Star Wars and similar properties. Notwithstanding, let us ask ourselves if hindsight proves those valid.
Insider Perspective: You cannot imagine the woeful reality behind the scenes right now. The pride and secrecy of this decrepit industry has installed complete idiots in the most prominent positions around this national treasure, shielding producers who are no less ignorant, much more fearful, desperately uninspired and tragically derivative.
My despair is all the more bitter for this undying and irrational hope in me that our world is even capable of Scenario 3.
Nor are most aware of the mysterious cause for capitulation by the original owners.
Nor the fear and trepidation enjoining them from any further or slightest participation or comment…
But if they want a current crowd favorite/coronation, akin to a Brosnan, I think we'll see more of a GE, which largely colors inside the lines (albeit with some snarky commentary from the MI6 regulars).
Worst case: no Bond film.
...or vice versa...
Fans
"So what happened to Bond 26?"
Amazon
"Well... we were figuring it out. "
Fans
"Yeah but it's now 2030!"
Amazon
"Is it? My, how time flies."
🤭
Does the "Thunderball loophole" still exist? Someone doing a great TB remake would be cool if the Amazon movies end up being lame.
I could possibly see this. I think in any case they're going to really nix the womanizing and we'll end up with a kind of aesexual Bond as you said but in theory you could have at least one movie that gets a lot of the other elements right (story, action, a great villain). Might still end up feeling more like a Mission: Impossible movie or just a good generic spy film though rather than Bond.
Yeah, would honestly rather it die than turn into Disney Star Wars.
Last Samurai was specifically about a western man stranded in Japan and was based on an actual guy at that, not a good analogy.
Please use the edit button (little wheel in the upper right corner of each post window) instead of double, triple, ... posting. Thanks.
I think the overdose of marvel and DC is exactly what's killing cinema. It's the likes of Mi , bond, top gun and if they'd even bother more original titles that keep cinema special.
Amazon invests big money in Bond movies allowing for spectacular visuals and bold storytelling.
They bring more diversity in casting and stories, making Bond feel modern and relevant.
They use their global streaming platform to release content worldwide instantly, keeping fans engaged and excited.
Worst case:
Amazon over-commercializes the franchise, flooding the market with low-quality Bond content which dilutes the brand.
They treat Bond like just another streaming show, losing the cinematic grandeur that makes it special.
Creative decisions get stuck in corporate pressures, causing boring or repetitive stories.
The franchise suffers from too many spin-offs leading to fatigue.
If they change Bond’s core identity too much, it alienates longtime fans who want the classic feel.
Surely, the worst thing they can do is turn Bond into a porn addict. Sat in his tanktop, late at night and playing all his gambling online, handcream and Moneypenny's only fans account on another window.
Also, he spends most of his time coercing local schoolchildren into buying him a takeaway and becomes irate when they get the order wrong. One wee cad makes off with the money rather than ordering Bond's chicken curry chip, only for our hero to track the little blighter down and beat him
to within an inch of his life, right there, in front of his mates. Girls crying and all sorts, Bond buying them an ice-cream the sick fuck.
Still better than Quantum.
:)) I hope none of this is from personal experience.
Got me.
Should never had stolen his money.
Yep, those absent members like crawling out of the woodwork, once in a while :>
Worst case: we get caught up with a whole lot of one-off cookie cutter formula-driven films like the Roger Moore movies (no offense to Roger Moore).
SF is more akin to the Roger Moore era, minus the tongue-in-cheek charm. Bonkers plot, characters acting like idiots but directed as if it's FRWL.
If anything we need a lot more humour (not smug jingoism) and a lot less of the pretentious, po-faced chaos.
Making a sequel to OHMSS 60 years later, after we got 20 films in-between, would feel so weird... they might remake OHMSS, then make a sequel to it, but then you might as well film the whole Blofeld trilogy.
But part of OHMSS' stature is the missed opportunity, not only of Bond and Tracy but also the meta missed opportunity of a better creative direction.
I liked a few of Gardner's concepts, if not the execution.
Icebreaker had spies from four countries working together on a task force (and of course double-crossing each other). But it felt fresh, kind of like Survivor, if that makes sense.
And which was the Gardner that had the villain start a contest to bring him Bond's head and then everyone chases him across Europe? Nobody Lives Forever? Bond being chased is an underused plot line in the series. It worked so well in TB and OHMSS.
What I don't need to see again is the standard: Bond goes to M, M tells Bond about some suspicious megalomaniac, Bond investigates. Zzzzz.