A potential James Bond TV series

124678

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,682
    I don't know if this fits here, but Dominic Cooper is slated to play Ian Fleming in a four-part miniseries titled 'Fleming':

    http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=98950
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    DB5 wrote:
    OK, for the last time, let me explain the facts of life to everybody who entertains these fantasies of seeing faithful adaptations of the Ian Fleming James Bond novels on television. This is NOT going to happen! At least not over the course of the next thirty years. Eon has the exclusive media rights to the James Bond character. I'd also like to see a faithful adaptation of "You Only Live Twice" and "The Man with the Golden Gun." I'd also like to see Christie Brinkley naked in my bed. Neither one is likely to happen anytime soon!

    3 words - James Bond Jnr.

    This pile of shite was given the go ahead with full cooperation of EON whilst Cubby was still alive and MGWs name even appeared on the credits and who would have predicted that?

    It's unlikely such a TV series will go ahead I'll grant you but unless you are actually MGW or Babs why are you speaking with such certainty on their behalf?
  • edited January 2013 Posts: 11,189
    I quite like the idea of someone adapting the John Pearson Authorised Biography into a short television series.
  • I've seen somewhere, even anime parody of 007
  • Posts: 414
    Funny. I had a dream a month or so ago there was going to be a Bond TV series, and that it was going to focus on Bond prior to getting his Double-Oh rank and License to Kill. The set-up was mainly a classroom scenario, as Bond was in a "spy school." The senior agents had a nickname for Bond. Can't remember what it was in the dream, but when I woke up I thought it should be "rat", to parallel the whole "last rat standing" in Skyfall.

    Before you criticize the idea, keep in mind this was a dream I had, not something I spent waking hours coming up with.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited August 2013 Posts: 23,836
    If they ever do this, I hope they will give us a faithful adaptation of Fleming's novels. New plots or whatever belong in the official films I think. No need wasting time producing entirely original material in TV format when it might as well be the next epic Bond movie.

    Now don't get me wrong. I have to give credit to TV productions these days. They seem to have mastered the skills to work fast and relatively inexpensively, yet can come up with stuff that is very much competitive with big movie projects. Take Sherlock. I'd rather watch the next episode of Sherlock at home than whatever big, expensive 3D thing Cameron throws in the cinematic mix.

    But for Bond, no. It's about the movies first and foremost IMO. For a faithful adaptation of Fleming's novels, the modern movie canvas seems utterly inappropriate though. I believe you can turn for example the novel MR into a very strong 90 minute TV episode where people are accustomed to receiving lots of dialogue, versus a 120 minute Bond movie that requires enough action beats to please the crowds.

    Also, another movie called Moonraker would confuse us all whereas a TV series set in the 50s wouldn't so much I reckon. It's a different medium, hence it'll be less troublesome for us to 'get into it'.

    All of the above, just my two cents. ;-)
  • 007InVT007InVT Classified
    Posts: 893
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I quite like the idea of someone adapting the John Pearson Authorised Biography into a short television series.

    Great idea!

    It's a vastly underrated book (or maybe not?).

    Pearson showed great flair for writing in a Fleming style.
  • I would like a faithful period correct version of the Fleming novels. Maybe after the movie franchise craps out it might happen.
  • edited December 2013 Posts: 97
    I would like a faithful period correct version of the Fleming novels. Maybe after the movie franchise craps out it might happen.

    Big time! I would loooove to see this. Keep it period and keep it absolutely faithful to the original books. I think sometimes the movies can get so excited about spending money on action sequences they forget about the story.

    I'd love to see Bond done as a real TV drama. Can't think of anybody on the TV level who could play him though. Might have to be a complete unknown.
  • 007InVT007InVT Classified
    Posts: 893
    @JamesBondRadio

    I felt Nathaniel Parker would have been a good choice but too old now sadly.

    I hope we see a faithful TV version before I die, not hopeful though.
  • Posts: 267
    This is the thread that @DarthDimi referred @JamesBondRadio to when he launched a thread entitled "Bond Books as a TV Series".
    A thread that he, @DarthDimi, closed because he arbitrarily decided was somehow linked to Sherlock Homes.
    When is this nonsense ever going to stop? One has the impression to be monitored by the STATSI in addition to GCHQ and the NSA.
    For Christ's sake just let these threads role. You are killing any enthusiasm for this site.
    What does it matter if somebody has asked something similar.
    The next thing will be to close all threads on the grounds that Bond has already been discussed!
  • Posts: 2,491
    Agent005 wrote:

    Please, no.

    No Bond 'Expanded Universe'/Young Bond should ever be put on film.
    Exactly my thoughts
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    Bentley wrote:
    This is the thread that @DarthDimi referred @JamesBondRadio to when he launched a thread entitled "Bond Books as a TV Series".
    A thread that he, @DarthDimi, closed because he arbitrarily decided was somehow linked to Sherlock Homes.
    When is this nonsense ever going to stop? One has the impression to be monitored by the STATSI in addition to GCHQ and the NSA.
    For Christ's sake just let these threads role. You are killing any enthusiasm for this site.
    What does it matter if somebody has asked something similar.
    The next thing will be to close all threads on the grounds that Bond has already been discussed!

    That thread was closed because it's content - the Bond books as a TV series - is exactly what this thread is about, the original poster simply alluded to Sherlock, the BBC series, because it's a modern retelling of the Sherlock Holmes stories. @DarthDimi closed that thread for a very good reason.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,836
    @Bentley
    Let me please explain the logic behind deleting duplicate threads.
    Suppose you want to discuss a James Bond TV series. You check our archives. What do you know: it's loaded on threads! You search hard. You notice that a James Bond TV series is being discussed in several threads. Which one do you choose?
    But it's more than that. The more threads we have, the harder it gets to find the proper discussion in the archives. And so the easy way out is to start yet another thread on the subject, adding even more chaos to the chaos already existing. It's a vicious circle.
    That is why we must at all times close duplicate threads. And some members are poor students, I'm sorry to say. We have a James Bond questions thread, yet new threads are still opened on the basis of a single question that last, at best, half a page before they end up as another dead end in the archives, but putting more weight to the archives at the same time. This sort of nonchalant thread spawning makes it almost impossible for us, moderators, to keep the archives somewhat organized. Add to that the laziness with which some members open up threads in sections to which they don't belong, particularly in the news section. It would make a difference if members would pay a little more attention to some of these things.
    But, @Bentley, as some of the responses to your post demonstrate, the MI6Community has many great members who do indeed pay attention to these things. In fact, things have gone very easily in recent times. Only a minor few cases of duplicate threads keep us occupied. And we're not too troubled by that. We close a thread and post a link to a more appropriate one, or we refer to a link suggested by another member because, like I already said, it's not only the moderators who keep an eye on the cleanness of the forums.

    As for this specific case of the James Bond TV series, it's safe to say that this topic needs only one thread. The added Sherlock Holmes detail is but a detail indeed and can be removed from the title if you so desire. By the way, this is certainly not the first time a James Bond TV series has been discussed. We're really not all that inflexible or intolerable I'll have you know.

    Hopefully this explains the rationale behind closing @JamesBondRadio's thread, @Bentley.
  • Posts: 267
    Frankly, all it explains is that this end of the site is a mess without a clear policy.
    Members will come and go and if you want to provoke free flowing enthusiastic discussion, and the thing can't be organised correctly then simply put a time limit on content and delete it.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,836
    @Bentley, why are you so offensive towards the deletion of duplicate threads?

    Furthermore, we have a perfectly solid policy. Duplicate threads get closed. Simple, isn't it? Enthusiastic discussion can happen in the appropriate thread. We stimulate fresh threads by the way, provided they cover sufficiently new ground.

    A time limit on content with certain deletion is totally absurd. Older threads are frequently re-visited with new discussions built on older ones.

    Look, things are being organised correctly - by removing duplicate threads the minute we spot them. It works for hundreds of our fine members; why can't it work for you?
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    @DarthDimi, he simply can't stand that you closed a thread he posted on. That simple.
  • A televison reboot (?) of James Bond à la Sherlock?

    I'll write quote used during "Dr No" casting: No! No! No!
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,836
    @DarthDimi, he simply can't stand that you closed a thread he posted on. That simple.

    I was thinking along that line too, @Agent007391, as I believe that I did patiently and clearly explain how things work here.

  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,252
    Here's why:
    1) There could be a faithful adaptation of the books without the pressures of appealing to a worldwide casual audience
    2) More character development like HBO's series
    3) More down to earth stories to please Fleming fans
    4) Won't have to wait so long to see Bond on the screen

    The only downsides is it might dampen the anticipation of (a) future announcements of a new James Bond, since there will be two people playing the character concurrently, and (b) a new film. However, a realistic TV series would probably only appeal to hardcore fans of Bond, unlike Sherlock or Batman which seem to have more general appeal (although the Craig era has probably increased the fanbase considerably)
  • DrunkIrishPoetDrunkIrishPoet The Amber Coast
    Posts: 156
    When I was a kid I always reckoned that a crappy TV series would be the inevitable sad end of the James Bond movie franchise--you know, once they ran out of books to film--and that if we were lucky it might be as good as "Mannix" or "Hawaii 5-0."

    Happily, such was not the case and I doubt it will ever be so. It will probably never happen but never say never: it wasn't so long ago that many of us were convinced that Blofeld and SPECTRE would never return.

    As you know, w2bond, we are living in a new Golden Age of Television and I am sure you are right, that a serious Bond series, perhaps by HBO or BBC, could be done that would really blow us away. I'd watch the hell out of it with you!
  • Many of the Bond stories started out as TV treatments. I believe this was the case for Moonraker, Thunderball, and everything in the For Your Eyes Only collection.

    I don't really have an opinion either way, but Fleming definitely saw some potential in the episodic quality of a TV series.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I'd love to see the short stories filmed and set in the 50s / 60s. :)
  • Posts: 2,341
    HELL NO.
    BOND STAYS ON THE BIG SCREEN --- PERIOD

  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,340
    I'd be fine with it. Have Bond movies and tv show period pieces at the same time sounds amazing.
  • Yes, I think it would. But in order for it to work it to work I think it would have to detach itself completely from the trademarks associated with the films and just follow the stories of the books or some original plots.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    I'm pretty torn with this idea, although I suppose I wouldn't mind direct TV adaptations of Fleming's novels.
  • Posts: 12,511
    OHMSS69 wrote: »
    HELL NO.
    BOND STAYS ON THE BIG SCREEN --- PERIOD

    Seconded my friend!!!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    It smacks of overexposure, and the potential to mess up the franchise is too great IMO. Therefore, although there is the possiblity it could be great, I'm afraid I must vote 'no'
  • I think a Bond TV show would be a great idea. We're in a golden age of TV right now so why not make a James Bond TV show?

    There are tons of different directions they could take it in. I think the thing I'd be most excited about is the potential to have a really adult oriented Bond series. The films are always rated 12a (I think that's PG 13 in the states?), which I wouldn't want to change. I was introduced to Bond when I was a kid and I'd bet the same is true for most of the members here.

    But if they did a TV show they could make it more adult oriented. I don't think they should just throw in loads of gore, tits and swearing for the sake of it but I think an adult oriented show would not only make things more entertaining but it'd also help make things seem more real. There have been so many times in the Bond films where in real life the characters would swear, but instead because it's a 12 they'll use some other mild expression ("damn" instead of shit, "bloody hell" instead of fucking hell, etc), and it always feels a bit jarring to me. That's one of the reasons I loved M's "I really f***ed this one up didn't I?" line in SF so much. The first instance of anyone saying fuck in a Bond film and it was perfect, it felt real. If she'd said cocked this one up or something as others were suggesting, I don't think it would have had the same impact.

    More violence would be good too. It'd make the action seem more realistic and credible and as other shows recently have shown, you can use violence to create a lot of dramatic impact. Whether it's showing someone is a threat or killing off a popular character, violence can be used to great effect. Again, I think the danger here is going overboard for the sake of it, shoving in loads of blood and gore for no apparent reason.

    I think if they did do a Bond TV show it'd have to be made by an American cable channel like HBO or someone (maybe even give Netflix a go) because even the bigger budget stuff done by British channels comes across as cheap at times (eg- Doctor Who can go anywhere in time and space but the majority of his adventures happen to take place in present day London). But then look at Game Of Thrones. They have tons of varied locations in that show, the high budget really shows. A big part of Bond is the globe trotting aspect and a British channel alone wouldn't have the budget to do that justice.

    But yeah I really like the idea of a Bond TV show that faithfully adapts the books. I think the only real issue is that it could end up overshadowing the films if it was good enough.
Sign In or Register to comment.