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
Yep. Not a frame has been shot and yet people are already finding fault with it.
Reasonable theory.
The next 6 months is going to be more eventful than the last 3 years were for Bond fans, and the next 2 years are going to be more eventful than the last 9 years were for us. It truly is the dawn of a new era, buckle up.
BTW, so we’ll be having a bunch of self confessed overpowered Bond fans at the proverbial helm ;) Ahah, how many have said that would be a nightmare, having fans at the wheel.
I’m, so far, elated. No complains. Now for the actor…
Really sad to see what happened to the Bond franchise.
Do I want fun in a Bond movie? I do. But not fun as comic book fun, or action hero fun, or Argyle fun… I want Bondian, exotic, victoriously horn blasting epic moments. And these two will deliver that, I’m sure. Heck, even Villeneuve has already talked about Bond films being about fun and escapism.
They will rock. Hard. For me it all now lies on who they choose for the part, IMO.
But all and all, I am pretty confident. Amazon, so far, hasn’t struck a wrong note.
I can only imagine the cast and crew of this beast. And the production quality will be even better than what’s come before. It’ll be epic in every sense.
If…if they cast the main man right.
Well, my friend, if you aim to be a positivist, I’d advise that you do have a look at their work, no harm will come from that, quite the contrary ;)
All I know is that I want something a bit different to the Craig era. If their body of work suggests we might be in for more of the same, I'd rather not know until I'm watching the film - or the trailer at least!
And he loves Bond to be fun and escapism. I’d be more worried about Nolan, and I’d also love a Nolan Bond film. Difference is, I believe Villeneuve can do sexy, at least I hope so.
Also, can someone tell me an opposite of gritty? I mean? A word that describes that particular opposite? The dictionary defines gritty as "showing bravery and spirit”, so I’m a bit confused. Is gritty in cinema the same as “real” or “rough”? Rugged? Harsh? Is lavish or lush the opposite?
Isn’t Blade Runner 2049 lavishly beautiful? Even sexy to look at? Is Dune “gritty”? Aren’t Peaky Blinders over the top overdressed pleasure driven gangsters? Is that “gritty”?
I’ll eat my hat if DV+SK make a film as poorly written and concocted as QOS, SP or NTTD. And I highly doubt they’ll want to imitate whatever came before.
We’re in for a ride, gentlemen. In the words of Peter O’Toole as LOA, “It’s going to be fun!”
As long as it's "fun" in comparison to the Craig films, that's a big win. It's been said, but I think TLD is a great blend of capturing the Fleming feel while not trying to "post-modern" the cinematic Bond with Kipling quotes and random familial connections that mean nothing ultimately.
I, for one, loved the literature quotes in SF and NTTD. Lord Tennyson's poem "Ulysses“ in SF was a particular high point in the series for me.
That said, I don’t think they’ll repeat some of the issues that started to weigh the series down. I doubt we’ll get another story where every mission is tied back to Bond’s childhood trauma or a plot where he goes rogue yet again. I also don’t see this team leaning into nostalgia or constantly referencing the older films just to win over longtime fans.
What I’d really like to see,and what I think they could pull off, is something closer to how Fleming wrote the character. The novels gave Bond depth and humanity without turning everything into a personal vendetta. He was damaged and complex, but he was still a focused, professional spy. The stories had emotional undercurrents without being overindulgent or sentimental.
I still expect all the core elements we associate with Bond. The danger, charm, espionage, style, but delivered with intention, not just out of habit. If anything, this feels like the best chance in a long time to move the franchise forward without getting stuck in a cycle of self-reference. CR just about nailed this, SF got close, I think Bond 26 had the potential to hit the bullseye.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with Bond getting personally involved, and indeed I definitely want that to happen. I agree that the childhood angle is mostly played out (although his parents remain unused) and the rogue thing, although overstated by some (he went rogue in, what, Spectre? That’s about it. Otherwise he’s just fairly wayward and headstrong but not actively disobeying orders in the others, or he quits the service completely) , probably won’t be back in the same way but equally I like him to not be a yes man, it’s kind of the point of Bond to do it his way.
As for Bond ‘going rogue’, that’s kind of the way the cinematic character has developed since the Dalton films at least, and was further explored in the Brosnan and Craig eras. Bond is a character with a very fixed sense of duty. Often his superiors might not agree with Bond’s methods or even fully share Bond’s motives (and often he won’t want to be tied down by them). He’ll do what it takes to get the job done. I get a similar sense in the First Light trailer (which also incorporates the death of Bond’s parents/that personal angle incidentally), so I imagine to some extent we’ll see Bond clash with his superiors in a new film and go ‘off piste’ in some way. Again, I’m sure if you look into Villeneuve and Knight’s work you’ll find that similar sense of characters operating (or learning to operate) on their own terms…
I mean, there are reasons these people have been hired to make a Bond film. A big part will naturally come down to their ability to flesh out a distinct and interesting new version of this character.
Now it's just a question of how long it will take him, and how long finishing off Dune will be for Denis.
Yeah there kind of is no point to M unless Bond and he conflict in some way: look at the very first M scene in Dr No- they have disagreement over Bond's gun. By Goldfinger he's threatening to take Bond off the case. I struggle to think of many movie characters who have a boss and a relationship entirely based on the hero doing what he's told.
There definitely should be something there. Otherwise there’s little point in hiring a (probably relatively high profile) actor to just give Bond orders and disappear. And for what it’s worth the Bond/M scenes are actually usually quite interesting with stuff going on between the two characters, even if beneath the surface. They kind of have to be otherwise they’d be rather laborious exposition dumps.
Something like TB or FRWL is more likely IMO.
Absolutely! Post of the year, as far as I’m concerned. I subscribe every word of it.
One word regarding Bond and M dynamics: Moonraker (the novel, of course).
Indeed he is, Colonel, indeed he is. Knowing of your approval makes me even more positive about it.
Yeah in the early days they'd bring in a bit of conflict like the gun or 008 in the cases I mentioned, because ultimately you need conflict in any movie scene to make it interesting, otherwise it's just exposition as you say. But those were fairly surface level and went nowhere (shame in a way, Bond taking Masterson's death too personally and M taking him off the case is a promising bit of drama which could have gone somewhere interesting), but by OHMSS we have Bond and M in one of their most dramatic conflicts where Bond almost quits, and it's really good stuff. TMWTGG has M sanctioning an off-the-books mission which is rather nice, and from then on until Dalton it's basically M and Bond rubbing against one another for laughs (although it's easy to forget that Bond actually 'goes rogue', again with M's blessing, in Moonraker, of all things).
I’m sure it’ll have scale while incorporating a sense of espionage (as any Bond film should do). My suspicion is it won’t be dissimilar in many ways to SF, SP, and NTTD in that kind of blend of tone/approach to aesthetics. I can see Villeneuve’s Bond film having locations with a similar ‘otherworldly’ feel (ie. Not quite as naturalistic cinematography-wise as the earlier Bond movies). Otherwise they could go almost any route in terms of story - I can easily see us getting a concept as grounded as FRWL, TLD or SF (ie. Plots built around McGuffins and cat and mouse dynamics. I think that’d be good in a ‘bringing Bond back to its roots’ kind of way with a compelling concept, and could be a nice contrast to a film with visual flair/scale). We could equally get something more elaborate like NTTD, MR or TSWLM (ie. Where the threat is big and made clear from the beginning, which is also good). I don’t think we’ll get something quite like CR or QOS though. My suspicion is it’ll be more a DN or GF type thing - an initial set up that seems more grounded/investigation driven which will eventually give way to the revelation of a bigger threat.
On a separate note I rewatched Blade Runner 2049 last week, and I must say it’s grown on me somewhat, although I liked it first time round with critiques. I definitely get ‘Bond’ from it at various points. I think it’s fair to say Bond should be in good hands (Knight’s writing at its best is very good in my opinion). It has every chance of being successful just by virtue of being a James Bond film, and I genuinely think with this franchise it’s worth taking risks and attempting to make the best Bond film possible rather than simply playing safe and giving us some sort of ‘family friendly’ pastiche of a Bond film. I’m sure there’ll be complaints from some fans about its ideas and tone - frankly it remains to be seen if it’s my cup of tea - but honestly I don’t think it’ll matter.
I think Dune will probably be shooting until either December or January/February next year, which ought to be enough time for Knight to put together a draft or two for Bond.