› ›

Would you rather Bond26 be a "Bond Begins" adventure OR a "Bond is Bond" adventure?

1…196197198199200202»

Comments

  • 007ClassicBondFan007ClassicBondFan
    Posts: 2,644
    I'll take an established Bond. We've already had one origin for the character with Craig's Casino Royale, and 007 - First Light is already presenting another one.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 2,219
    Let's go with a "this never happened to the other fellow" opening. I don't need to see a stumbling, bumbling Bond learning the ropes to eventually become head of the spy class. Young, but experienced is just fine.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,826
    "Bond is Bond" please.
  • Reflsin2bourbonsReflsin2bourbons
    Posts: 486
    The thing is there isn't really an origin story per se. Bond kills two chaps and gets his number, that's it. Before killing those chaps he still had a lot of experience in his job. A true origin story would mean teenage Bond, and that's a whole other story.

    Bond should never be "rookie." He may learn things (and probably should), but even if there is an "origin story" (first gadgets or first martini or whatever) we should never doubt Bond's capabilities and rarely doubt his judgement.

    What I'm trying to say is, I'd prefer Bond is Bond, but if there's an origin story, Bond should still be Bond.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,396
    Since First Light is going to be an origin story for Bond, I would prefer Bond 26 have Bond established, perhaps early in his career by 2 or 3 years but not a rookie. I would also like it if M has her or his full trust in Bond as well.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,617
    Bond is Bond. He's ageless, timeless and I don't even want to pinpoint how many years he's been a double O. He just is. The entire Craig era was a pretty much an origin story with a final conclusion.
    TBH, I'm rarely ever in the mood to watch any of those films. :(
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited August 9 Posts: 4,648
    None of the two and inspecialy not Bond origin.

    I whant a Bond save the world mission with depth and growing in being Bond. Shaken Not Stirred, Distraction for an hour or two, Role of Honour, Commander Bond, Risico.
    We know who traters are from the start. The villian takes a lot of people in his plan /falling for a lie.
    Group vibe like Quantum. No more for play/pre production, but Greene (QOS) / Maxwell Tarn (Seafire from John Gardner) and Carver, Zorin, Goldfinger is big.

    So disappointed in NTTD killing of Felix that soon, because he and Tanner should have been there on the atack on the island with suprise comeback of Paloma. In between we should have seen people who take action against Judi Dench M (court) should have Ralph Fiennes M arrest. Something that Tanner is told but deside to go a way (His way of saying No to ''When the storm arrives would you be seen with me'') and Moneypenny takes honours as M.
  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    Posts: 2,307
    Bond is Bond, but with a young actor. Not one who'll be an old man by the third film.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 5,722
    Reflsin2bourbons wrote: »
    The thing is there isn't really an origin story per se. Bond kills two chaps and gets his number, that's it. Before killing those chaps he still had a lot of experience in his job. A true origin story would mean teenage Bond, and that's a whole other story.

    Bond should never be "rookie." He may learn things (and probably should), but even if there is an "origin story" (first gadgets or first martini or whatever) we should never doubt Bond's capabilities and rarely doubt his judgement.

    What I'm trying to say is, I'd prefer Bond is Bond, but if there's an origin story, Bond should still be Bond.

    Yeah, agreed with all this.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 9 Posts: 18,767
    I don't think there's anything wrong with doubting Bond's capabilities or judgement; he's a character, not a flawless superhero. He's always got things wrong here and there, trusted the wrong person, got bonked on the head; in LTK he messes up a big undercover op, for example. What makes Bond Bond is that he almost never doubts himself.
    I'm not desperate to see him as a rookie per se, but that doesn't mean that we can't see him put into a new situation and change from there.
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,285
    Definitely Bond is an established agent. I'd only be interested in an origin story if at some point in the future they decide to do them all as period pieces set from the 1920s through the 1960s.
  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    edited 4:04am Posts: 735
    mtm wrote: »
    Honestly, I lean towards origin. Or some version of origin; there is no 'bitten by a radioactive spider' established origin for Bond, so I think it's fine to get a new version in some way or form. It's a story, I'm happy to see the characters come together and meet and progress over time. Lots of fans say they don't want an origin, and yet there's been such a positive reception to the First Light trailer. And before that, Forever And A Day went down well too. If it's a new Bond, let's have a beginning for him I say.

    How about a bit of both, a variation that kicks off with Bond being Bond, but also construct the story in such a way as to later include flashback sequences that are both relevant to the current mission and yet also serve to reveal the new Bond's backstory / origin (a la Godfather 2 / The Shawshank Redemption / The Usual Suspects / Memento)

    It's a technique which I think might have helped to make SP, with it's Brofeld theme, work better as a story.

    I think the audience will be impatient for an immediate "fix" of the new Bond, after 6 or 7 years of cold turkey, and rather not have to wait through an hour or so of origin story build up at the front end.

    But having got that "at long last" / reunion release of emotion out of the way, then could be the time delve into what the what makes the new Bond tick?
  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    Posts: 735
    Reflsin2bourbons wrote: »
    The thing is there isn't really an origin story per se. Bond kills two chaps and gets his number, that's it. Before killing those chaps he still had a lot of experience in his job. A true origin story would mean teenage Bond, and that's a whole other story.

    Bond should never be "rookie." He may learn things (and probably should), but even if there is an "origin story" (first gadgets or first martini or whatever) we should never doubt Bond's capabilities and rarely doubt his judgement.

    What I'm trying to say is, I'd prefer Bond is Bond, but if there's an origin story, Bond should still be Bond.

    That's right, killing two people in monochrome hardly makes CR an "origin story"

    CR the book was an "introduction" to the character, not an "origin story"

    In both cases Bond is already a secret agent when the story begins and it is not explained why he became one
  • battleshipgreygtbattleshipgreygt
    Posts: 1,237
    Two or 3 years in would be ideal. I feel like OHMSS did a good job of having a younger actor play a Bond who did feel young, but was also experienced, mature and didn’t come off as a rookie. Obviously I’d like a better actor and wouldn’t want to repeat the story beats of OHMSS so soon after SP and NTTD, but they vibe would be great.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 6,025
    Sorry if my use of an origin story is confusing things. I meant that we see Bond become Bond. Not that we see his parents death, how he was raised by an Aunt, etc. Rather that he is newly promoted and a rookie double-o.

    Connery taking the role back in 62 I can't think of a time where he was portrayed as a rookie. Though he did throw up after the spider attack, and when Honey confides to being nervous at the end, he shares he is too. But there was nothing overt in saying he was a rookie. Until Craig we never saw him take the double-o-7 number, deal with being a new agent, etc.

    I do think there is more to mine if they go in that direction. Though I wonder with Denis calling out the Connery films in his Press Release I have wondered if they will go the Connery route and not do anything overt to say he's a new double-o agent.
Sign In or Register to comment.