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
Really? DAD's considered one of the worst ones amongst casual fans in my experience! I've heard people refer to it as 'nobody's favourite Bond film'! CR's the one I've found more people remember fondly, and indeed remember more readily.
As for TLD and GE, I'd say those are two noticeably different Bond adventures. But they are similar in the sense that they're Bond films which reinterpret the character for their respective time/eras. Ultimately I'd rather for Bond 26 they go their own route and try to forge this film's own identity within the scope of Bond films. Not try to emulate fully what's come before.
I'd say the same if they went into the film wanting to simply retell a previous Bond adventure in general, agreed. If they find themselves drawn to certain ideas for their story that have been hinted at in previous films and want to expand on them, or use them as a foundation, that's another thing I'd say. I'm not sure they can avoid the latter as it comes with the territory of writing a Bond adventure.
It's not really revisionism. Is it new saying that DAD has some great ideas but didn't execute its story well?
I couldn't agree more :-bd
To be fair it's quite an odd Bond film in many ways, so 'traditional' isn't the immediate word I'd use. How much fun one has with it is debatable (I actually really enjoy parts of it for what it's worth, and at other times I find myself rolling my eyes). I think it's definitely on the more 'nowhere as bad as you remember it' side whenever I've gone back and rewatched it, even with its strange early 2000s slow motion and sped up shots, bizarrely flat looking cinematography, and a fair few odd directorial decisions. It's fine, more a misfire than an abomination of a Bond movie, which is how I'd describe what I'd see as the lesser films of the franchise. As I said, 9/10 times I'd rather watch it over TB or even DAF. I actually see it as similar to many of Hamilton's efforts in many ways - good ideas, but executed in odd, somewhat campy ways, with a fair bit of disorganised filmmaking. Much like DAF or TMWTGG it's a product of its time in many ways. But at least I've never been bored with DAD.
Oh, QOS is another slight misfire in my opinion! Very interesting film though. But I completely understand what you mean, and I agree.
Sure, it's never boring. But I think they could have strengthened the story while maintaining the thrills and fun. SF managed to have its share of 'crowd cheering' and Bondian humour while giving us an interesting story. It seemed to reap the rewards.
I think it was just a case of the wrong film with the wrong actor, and at the wrong time in the series. I really don't think it deserves any hatred though. I honestly think there are worse Bond movies.
Exactly the movie isn't very good at all. And was blown out of the water by casino royale
https://comicbook.com/movies/news/james-bond-26-release-date-gets-disappointing-update-but-it-makes-sense/
We can only hope that what Villeneuve does to Bond is the equivalent of what Nolan did to Batman with The Dark Knight in 2008.
I.E. brought a new maturity to an establish character whilst delivering on the popcorn munching escapism for fans.
I feel in practice it’ll be like what Matt Reeves did with The Batman - that clear reinvention of the franchise/character which gives us a unique but familiar spin on everything. But I get what you mean and it may just be my own wishful thinking! Obviously it’ll be its own thing as well so it’ll be unique in its own way.
Yeah, Villeneuve loves Nolan's work and They've both talked about Bond passionately before. But Mendes has already taken inspiration from The Dark Knight for Skyfall. I think whatever Villeneuve wants to do, being a Bond fan himself...he should understand what makes Bond work. Villeneuve is smart enough to know that Bond isn't Blade Runner, Arrival, Dune or Sicario. Just like Mendes knew Bond isn't American Beauty, Jarhead or Road To Perdition.
More light-hearted. More escapist, but still keep it relatively grounded. Goldeneye and The Living Daylights is a good template.
Not that B26 won't ever get made, it probably will. However, I'm not expecting a GOLDENEYE triumphant return that ensures future entries. Unless the powers that be at Amazon truly have the ambition, drive, talent and resilience to continue the Bondian tradition, I think future Bond movies will be occasional one offs, similar to the Tarzan character.
Only time will tell.
Give us a new take on Bond I say. No cop outs by just saying ‘make it more lighthearted’ (regardless of this film’s tone that means little in itself). They’ll find a story direction, a creative approach to the film, and eventually a new lead they can work with to give us a new Bond. Something different and yet the same as Knight is fond of saying. It’ll obviously draw on something from this franchise’s past (you can’t make something out of nothing as they say), and I’m sure inspiration can come from GE or TLD if that’s the creative road they go down. But ultimately we need something fresh. And for better or worse I think that’s what we’ll get.
Saying you want the new Bond film to be more light-hearted is hardly a cop-out. Of course, theres lots more work to be done in making a film than just deciding its tone. The creative direction and tone a writer and a director decide upon greatly influence the happenings of a screenplay. If Villinueve and Knight decide they want something with a more balanced tone, they'll probably steer away from stories that push it too far out there with the violence or subject matter.
I mostly use the word template is describing the tone that I would like Bond 26 to strike and the fact that i just want a straightforward mission.
We’ll see what we get one way or the other. I really don’t know. I do think just saying ‘it needs to be light hearted’ is absolutely useless though (I wouldn’t say GE or TLD are the most lighthearted Bond films anyway, and as I said they’re quite different from one another. What makes them great goes deeper). Same for a ‘straightforward mission’. What any of that means depends on specifics.
Personally, I want the film to be exciting and fun, as well as a compelling Bond adventure. I hope they do something fresh and interesting with it, all while giving us the sense that this is ‘Bond’. How they do that though is fair game in my view, and I look forward to seeing what they come up with. Whether it lands with me is something I’ll have to wait and see.