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
If some Bond fans believe MI franchise has overtaken Bond, Bond 26 is the ideal time to change things. I think Craig is entitled to have his final film and keep with the current style. I'll be very surprised if Danny Boyle gives us a non-Craig type Bond film. The next Bond actor will give EON the excuse to change things. Moore to Dalton to Brosnan to Craig - all resulted in tonal changes. Dalton more 'human and intense', Brosnan a bit of a 'greatest hits' Bond, Craig a 'Bourne type' Bond. The next actor may be influenced by Mission Impossible or whatever is popular prior to the filming of Bond 26.
When Tom Cruise decides enough is enough with Ethan Hunt, then the series will likely end. Or maybe rebooted. Jeremy Renner entered the series with GP as a potential to take over from Cruise eventually. This looks unlikely to happen.
Whilst they are both spy based action films, that is where the similarity ends. Bond does not need to copy Mission Impossible, or any other series for that matter. It has over the years adapted the films to a popular style or story angle.
With LTK we got our first gritty, realistic type of Bond film. Bond got bloody and bruised.
He was dour and without witty one liners. More akin to Fleming than an action hero. The villains were menacing and dangerous. The tone of the film was similar to popular movies at the time, namely Lethal Weapon. But after a six year hiatus Bond returned with GE, full of wit, charm and gadgets. The villain operated out of an underground lair. The action was spectacular and the film won fans and critics alike over. It was your typical OTT Bond film. The Craig Bond has gone back to the more serious tone of LTK, which has been an element of Craig's tenure. The general reaction from fans and public alike appears to be pretty positive judging by the box office returns of the Craig films. With Bond 25 who knows what will happen. I think Boyle will work on the strengths that Daniel Craig brings to the role as an actor. EON haven't picked Boyle for his action movie ability, but as a director with good story telling and character.
Going forward, Bond will change again with Bond 26 and Bond actor #7. They don't need to copy MI, or have an actor who is willing to do insane stunts. I know it's not Roger Moore hanging from the side of a train in OP, but I don't care. It's James Bond hanging from the side of the train. It's James Bond hanging off the cargo net in TLD.
James Bond is the reason I love these movies. The character. It's what the actor playing the role brings to the character that I like. I love all the actors who have played Bond and have said many times, I believe they have all brought something special to the role. All the Bond films have at least one great scene. Bond doesn't need to copy. He is unique in cinema. With each new movie, I get a new entry to dissect, to compare to enjoy and appreciate. It's never boring being a Bond fan.
On a side note, I often see members refer to the Craig films as Babs and Co or that Barbara Broccoli made this decision, or Babs did that.
Does Michael G Wilson not figure? Is it not possible that he championed some of the more unpopular choices made be EON in recent years. I find the blame for Babs to be a little over the top at times. I could be wrong.
If that happens, I might just stop watching the new films. Had enough about the personal angles and a "broken" Bond.
Me too.
Me as well. I doubt this personal drama can continue indefinitely though. It has to grow too obviously tiresome at some point.
Yes, and Bond 25 will be that "some point."
I’m not denying Bond has followed trends in the past, that much is obvious. What I’m saying is that, other than stunt work, I don’t really see anything groundbreaking in M:I that would provide the catalyst for dramatic change in the Bondverse. There may well be a tonal shift, but where DAD seemed an embarrassment next to Bourne, the same can’t be said about the current films next to M:I. They may not be to everyone’s taste, but I don’t believe they’ve hit a dead end, as so many proclaim. I think they’ll retool slightly for B25, but they’ll play to Craig’s strengths.
As for Craig’s mass appeal, I clearly mean ‘as Bond’. What he does outside that is irrelevant. He’s still an incredibly popular Bond despite the narrative spun by a few posters here.
What if they did a Three Days of the Condor scenario where MI6 is wiped out--I'm talking the core group of M, Moneypenny, Q--and Bond is on his own to track and bring down the bad guy? Again, not saying they would do this but thinking outside the box a bit...
We are completely on the same page there. They absolutely will play to Craig's strength with another drama driven story. But my worry is that they will double down on those elements, when they are no longer as popular and zeitgeisty as when Skyfall released for instance. The culture has moved on from were it was 7 years ago, and I think its safe to say the public has embraced Mission Impossible 6 moreso than SP, even if it ends up making less money globally. Bond is in danger of losing its footing as the action franchise to beat.
SP was nearly 3 years ago, so let’s see what B25 delivers. New director, new writer, new cinematographer, new production designer... there’s no way Boyle is making a Sam Mendes film. I’m optimistic.
M:I 6 is easily the most drama driven and most personal M:I movie since the 3rd film in the franchise back in 2006. Just sayin'...
And no. 6 could have been the same: big, crazy stunts that hid the paper thin story (which is a MacGuffin after all: get the plutonium). However, this instalment does stand out because, like the third, there were the emotional and personal threads, combined with the themes of what it means to be a "hero" (which they mention no less than three times in the film (Alec Baldwin to Tom Cruise; Rhames to Monaghan; Monaghan to Cruise)).
I'm seeing exactly the same here, Mendes has a real problem with DC but tries to hide behind is so called measured responses although his Turner for Bond campaign is a transparent as glass.
I hated SPECTRE, I know a strong word but it sums it up for me. Although I wasn't till this point one of those spelling doom and disaster for the era, I actually really liked it a lot, CR is my no. 2 and SF is resides at no. 5 with Quantum easily making my top 10.
Yes I've always been a big advocate of Craig and made no secret of it so that was why SP was a hard bitter pill to swalllow.
I haven't seen MI 6 and have no desire to see it as I'm not part of the Tom Cruise appreciation society very far from it but that's a different discussion. Critics have never been that big fans of Bond and when ever someone comes along playing around in the same sandbox that lets face it Bond pretty much invented, film critics can't help themselves but pull Bond down.
None of the Craig era has been getting the noshing that Cruise's 6th MI film is getting, the best since and the most amazing since this. Although one day TC won't be able to play Ethan Hunt anymore and the franchise will either have to call it a day or recast the character or introduce someone new to lead the team like Hunt, ie Crusie is somewhat the series strongest and weakest element at the same time.
As much as I can't stand the most famous Scientologist on the planet I can't deny his appeal and what some people see as charisma, I can't so I won't but I personally don't get it but replacing him is going to be nigh on Impossible if you forgive the pun.
I though are quite confident about Bond 25, I'm trying to keep my excitement in check but the definites that we know, Craig is back and obviously will be out to prove something due to SPECTRE's reception and Danny Boyle is directing a John Hodge script, some behind the scenes people, the rest is pure speculation to a degree, although the return of certain cast members could be taken as a given.
Maybe Bond will be in a better place with all the Mission Impossible cult worship going on, people are bound to underestimate and looking to compare. It will be a bit of an underdog possibly but Bond has been around now for 56 years and is unlikely to be going away anytime soon and will no doubt face another example like this after the MI worship has died down and 007 faces another franchise trying to take it on. @RC7 has already pointed out Bourne went down a familiar route and look how that turned out.
Also TDK was followed with TDKR and despite it's box office and those that will argue it's better it got nowhere near the raves that TDK did and there was a backlash.
Lets wait till MI 7 appears then judge if the Cruise juggernaut is impervious to this affect the bar seems to have been raised very high to a degree MI may well like Nolan did put itself in a situation where it can't get any better.
Whereas Bond is back in a similar situation with SF following QOS, personally I really like it but no one is going to deny SF coming off the back of it wasn't put in a more ideal situation, Mendes though had a real task on his hands following it up and the results were one of the most confusing messes of a film the series has ever seen IMPO.
I'm not saying Bond shouldn't learn from other franchises and take notes, yes it has been doing for many years but I think it would be very foolish to write off our super spy just yet. I've a feeling Danny Boyle and John Hodge have got a few tricks up there sleeves and they have the advantage of not even started shooting Bond 25 and they'll no doubt be taking serious MI's success but I think it's best they offer an alternative and don't try and compete.
I did see M:I, and it is great fun. It's the one I enjoy most with no. 3 and no. 1. Outside of M:I, I have a hard time enjoying Cruise (whether in another role, or doing interviews). But there is no mistaking, he IS this franchise. Without him pushing the envelope, these films would have very similar, paper-thin plots.
Cruise and his stunt-team make us forget about that with stomach-turning action. And the third and sixth instalments pepper it with some interesting themes and layer in personal stakes, which give these films a little more dimension.
But do I think it can top Bond, or even compete with Bond?
No. TC and his films are live action cartoons. He's a living and breathing Looney Tune!
Bond has over half-a-century of rich history, style and class. Every time there seems to be a mis-step they come back stronger and on course. And it's clear EoN and their lead actor knew they didn't hit the mark with their last entry.
Boyle is a unique voice, and, as @RC7 has said, they will play to their leading man's strengths-- which is physical and animalistic, with a vulnerability woven into his fabric.
Looks like we have some interested actors in the Maori role. Article mentions two having sent in their interest and Manu Bennet avoiding direct confirmation.
We always seem to be most of the time on the same page @peter, like you I always respected Colonel Sun and found his insights into the industry most enlightening, you seem on a similar page also being a part of it yourself.
@RC7 and I have had our falling outs but again like yourself he holds some postivity for Bond 25 and also has his knowledge. I've not posted for sometime, I from time to time end up getting wound up by some and instead of walking away I'll enter into a petty squabble which for my age is not really becoming of me and frankly not acceptable.
So I walked away for a bit and became a regular watcher over things but held back on posting till I'd had sometime to realise my rash behaviour. Although I do notice a negative wave around Bond 25 so it's good to have those that have some faith around.
I guess it's fair to those that have had their fill of DC and his era, SPECTRE certainly didn't do it any favours to now write Bond 25 off.
They want him gone so we can get someone else although Cavill doesn't excite me one bit and Aidan Turner is a big no no.
As much as I respect and enjoy Tom Hardy I think he's totally unsuitable for Bond.
The next Bond should be as always an actor possibly on the radar but no name and quite possibly the guy hasn't even come into the picture, I like Tom Hughes or James Norton personally but that's not to say they definitely could be Bond.
Though I'm not sure if EON will want a newby to helm Bond 26 if they plan it for the 60th 3 years on from Bond 25 in 2022, I think DC may well get the call back to do one last go, just a feeling on my part. Some people waiting for Bond 26 because they want DC gone might get a shock.
Wonder if Cliff Curtis will be rumoured to play that part.
spy.nzherald.co.nz/spy-news/the-nz-actors-who-could-be-james-bonds-nemesis/
Just who will play the Māori henchman in the new James Bond movie, Bond 25, is the hot topic for actors and their agents in New Zealand at the moment.
Spy understands the movie’s director, Danny Boyle of Trainspotting fame, will be selecting the actor personally. But initial casting calls have not officially gone out, nor has the embargoed script.
The Māori supporting role is for a male aged between 35 and 55, with advanced physical, fighting and stage combat skills.
The characteristics require him to be “authoritative, cunning, ruthless and loyal”. It is also understood Boyle is not necessarily looking for a marquee name, and New Zealand and Australia are both being combed for talent.
Industry insiders are ruling out two of New Zealand’s most well known leading men, citing Temuera Morrison as two years too old and Cliff Curtis as unlikely to be available, given his commitments for the filming of the new Avatar movie.
We hear Shortland Street actor Ben Mitchell and Westside’s Xavier Horan have already sent out video auditions. Both have extensive martial arts training; Horan most recently for his role last year in thriller 6 Days. Spy believes both are more than capable of kick-boxing a martini out of Bond’s hands.
The most obvious name in the mix is Manu Bennett, who has the stunt experience — most recently from his role as Slade on US TV series Arrow. Bennett tells Spy it is too early for him to comment.
Human Traces actor Vinnie Bennett, Westside’s Pana Hema Taylor and Meg star Rob Kipa-Williams are also in the NZ Top 7.
The name Spy has heard bandied around the most is former Outrageous Fortune star Kirk Torrance.
Love that line lol
I think the lack of goodwill for B25 lays heavily on the shoulders of SP. And if Mendes was back for the next one, I might also be joining that chorus.
But Boyle is a great filmmaker who has very different sensibilities to Mendes. He’s using a new writer to this franchise. And he seems to be cruing up with his own people in many positions.
This is an entirely different team with a highly popular James Bond playing the role.
I wish there was more faith in what is to come, but I understand some of the frustrations. My hope is that they will, in the end, be pleasantly surprised with the upcoming film.
Would love to see that happen. But who would be more enraged? Bond, or a Russian villain with serious vodka appreciation?
"You must excuse my Henchman, Mr. Bond. He's Maori and does not know how to appreciate a fine russian Vodka as much as us."
That sounds like a Mexican standoff waiting to happen!
Imagine if the Russian is named Standoff, too :))
I would be a guilty as anyone to take the negative tack if I was basing it on SPECTRE like I said I hate the film and what it did and if Sam had been lured back I would be definitely not be very positive.
Although I'm thinking things can only go up from here and I think all involved no that SP was nowhere received like SF despite some ridiculous 5 star reviews in my own emerald isle.
I'm not Boyle's biggest fan, I like some of his films mostly the earlier one although I did enjoy Steve Jobs but I know he's a talented film maker and will approach Bond 25 differently to Mendes.
I just feel that DC backlash has been growing momentum since those that disliked SF and couldn't understand it's positive word of mouth, that being said it got nothing like MI 6 is now getting, that's more like TDK, possibly the most acclaimed blockbuster since then it seems.
SPECTRE then allowed those who were on the edge to well and truly pile into his era and get stuck in. I understand the frustration around the lack of entries in a 12 year period but I think at times Craig is blamed for this more than he is responsible for although he's not blameless but other factors have led to the length of time between entries.
I just hope the combo of DC with Boyle and Hodge they manage to knock it out the park and play to Daniel's strengths rather than trying to position in something that Rog or Pierce would have been better suited to, SPECTRE for me is that if you throw in the personal element, a confusing mish mash of styles that came together to make a woeful film.
When I read the ongoing jabs at him, I just shake my head with a sigh and refuse to get pulled into the negative whirlpool; it’s the projection of these individuals, and it seems the more they repeat their opinions, the better chance they will have allies— and they seemed to have been successful. On this site.
But in reality, in the film world, DC is a respected actor and his Bond is greatly admired by the industry and international audiences alike.
And that’s what counts. Even his weakest film has admirers and it still made bank. And you’re right, EoN knows they got away with one in that last film. There’s a purpose to B25, one of them being correcting course. And who better to do this with than the man who made Bond cool and, dare I say it(?), interesting again.