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
Moreover, as I recall (I haven't seen it) the film was seen as very hip and relevant to the youth culture at the time. Bond needs that now in my view. This could be why they are going in this direction.
Don't forget that Boyle basically introduced Naomie Harris to world cinema in 28 Days Later, so he's likely to feel vested in her success.
I'm concerned to learn about Harris and Boyle's history. I was hoping to see far less of her in B25.
Quote of his:
"To be a film-maker...you have to lead. You have to be psychotic in your desire to do something. People always like the easy route. You have to push very hard to get something unusual, something different."
Quote about him from his Trainspotting producer:
"Boyle takes a subject that you've often seen portrayed realistically, in a politically correct way, whether it's junkies or slum orphans, and he has managed to make it realistic but also incredibly uplifting and joyful."
Boyle on his own films:
"There's a theme running through all of them—and I just realised this. They're all about someone facing impossible odds and overcoming them."
We are in for something rather radically different from how I read this in conjunction with Bambigoye's article.
It definitely needs that again. And 'youth' yes but not in the way that many films now are (see below). Hip to me signals the reactions of rebellious teenagers, young adults, twentysomethings, etc. 'Hip' sort of meaning all the stuff that your parents poo-poo. I wasn't around in the 60s but I understand that Bond firmly fit in with the spirit of the Beatles, the Pythons, David Bailey, Mary Quant, et. al. Twenty years after that, by the late '80s, it seems the franchise might have been in a similar state hipness-wise as now. Is that right?
Thanks for those. He's saying all the right things as far as I'm concerned. I do like listening to him speak. I've posted this before so forgive me, I don't mean to beat everyone over the head with it, but it's likewise encouraging to me: Danny Boyle talks about a "Pixarification of movies"
That interview is pretty encouraging if he can apply that approach to Bond. A bit of 70s grit and realism, where the violence resonates rather than just provides a cartoonish pop art fight sequence. Fleming's Bond certainly suffered out in the field and Craig would be a good Bond to bring out that side of the character on screen again.
One can only hope the plot will be strong and compelling and Boyle brings a visceral reality back to the spy genre. I'm going to remain glass half full on this and hope we genuinely do get an entry in which the franchise is revitalised, Craig leaves on a high and we're back to thinking it's a shame he couldn't have done more...rather than the appetite to see the back of him which we seem to have now.
Yes, I agree that Bond did seem to be somewhat counter-culture and rebellious for its time in its heyday. Provocative and somewhat edgy. Daring and forward leaning - not following or looking back.
I think the only thing we can safely take from piecing together his words is we will have to expect the unexpected from him. He will be unconventional and daring, as he appears to be a film maker who can capture or define the essence of the time or the "zeitgeist". I'm sure we will all interpret what that means through our own filter, lens and preferences for the next year and a 1/2.
If he's as good as he seems, we'll all be pleasantly surprised with the final product.
I'd like think Craig has probably read it at some point. That book was a good read as far as I remember. Been years. I can almost imagine at this point, Eon going for something like an adaptation of this book. Completely different and not the same old Bond.
Considering Boyle has had his Bond idea since 2012, I feel pretty confident in assuming that B25 will not be an adaptation of YOLT, Risico, The Property of a Lady , etc.
I feel cautiously optimistic. I am thrilled there's a different writer. P & W were no Maibaum, IMO.
In a way I'm kind of hoping for a low key Bond thriller, which I imagine Boyle could deliver. At the same time, I would love a return to some classic traditions without the formula conspicuously clicking all the boxes as per TND.
My hunch, however is that we may get a character driven drama that is promoted as being different from all the other Bond films in that "this time.........it's personal."
How do you all feel about the idea of bond dying at the end of bond 25? I think it would be a very bold move.
I doubt that unless they want to retire the whole film series.
I agree.
If that would turn out to be true I‘d end the Bond series with Skyfall for myself and ignore the rest.
Boyle is going to be quite different. Dynamic.
Also, it's very trendy right now to kill off the main characters in beloved franchises: Han Solo, Luke, Superman, etc. Eon is no longer a trendsetter but follower.
I personally think it would make B25 the last film in the series as I wouldn't hold my breath for a re-boot. Then Mickey G could retire and Barbara could focus on her independent films.
That's very true, and therein would lie the difficulty. It would be tough. I'm sure to some extent Barbara and Michael were having the same thoughts during the DAD->CR transition (although as you point out that sort of realism was then a box office driver and would have been perhaps less risky than now).
But this will be a Bond film after all (and so there's automatically going to be box office interest), and it's Boyle (and so a base for critical appeal). If they want to give the film a ridiculously-low-for-Bond budget (say, I don't know, $75-$100 million?) and Boyle goes off and makes a spy thriller with as few action set pieces as and equal in scale to FRWL, and the film ends up being well-received on top of that, their ROI could be more than enough to justify it. A stretch, and risky, but interesting to speculate on.
Has Boyle had his idea since 2012? I might have missed that. I saw something similar in the linked Daiymail (or equal rag and therefore likewise specious) article which said something to the effect that the seed was planted when Boyle worked with Craig on the opening ceremony short. I took that as meaning the idea of working together on a Bond film was planted, not that Boyle had had the idea specifically. In fact I thought the idea was rather last minute, hence Hodge punching out the script as we speak.
Could be I misinterpreted the article. Perhaps he has only come up with his story idea recently?