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
Having said that from MR onwards with maybe FYEO as an exception the series had become a joke, TLD & LTK tried to reign it in but due to the supposed failure of Dalton's era PB's film went back to the check list approach.
The point being that for me PB may well have had the music, the gadgets and all the ingredients but they didn't feel like Bond films just generic action flicks.
CR grabbed some of that Bond class back and by concentrating on the character like no other entry had created something compelling and made Bond compelling again. I still think QOS PTS is one of the series best and the Opera sequence was pure class and the dialogue although a little brief hinted at things weren't entirely lost although it still just doesn't quite sit comfortably like CR does. Although from this point onwards it will get watched over most of the series as I feel some of those entries which are just plain embarassing save Barry's score and I can always stick those on the turntable and savour the brilliance, yes there are other elements like Adam's sets etc but my life has been devoted enough to those films for me to just want to watch them again.
Bond 23 still looks like to me to be in unsure waters, if they choose to make the film more serious and more grounded then they must stick to it and throwing in utter nonsence like the free fall sequence from QOS will just jar with the tone. It's a hard one how to make Bond relevant break new ground but still deliver a hugely entertaining
blockbuster that will be a success.
It's almost a guarantee that many here will not be happy with the finished product and this may include myself come next November. These films aren't made for niche groups who devote themselves to the series, they are made for mass audiences and despite QOS having had a mixed reception it still wasn't anywhere a flop. My view of Mendes directing is mixed, I only outright American Beauty and watching that recently on BR I found it was allot more quaint and gentle in the light of what followed.
I put my faith in Forster and at that point had only seen Finding Neverland but thought his appointment was an interesting choice but his lack of blockbuster film making and having never attempted an action thriller proved to me as not such a wise one in hindsight, Mendes with his track record doesn't seem a great deal different.
To be honest Fincher's Dragon Tattoo has me more excited as far as Craig goes, I see him finally showing the world outside of Bond what a gifted and talented actor he can be, something none of his outside work since his appointment as really shown. Plus thought of Fincher & Craig together gives me goosebumps!
removing Q is really a bad idea! and where is money penny ? is she coming back soon or what? it just going to be just like any action movie, no story just blowing up cars and places with no purposes! and don't get me started on Daniel Craige! he is nothing like James bond and will never be!!!
Moneypenny has pretty much been a useless character since Lois Maxwell retired after AVTAK. I felt Neither Bliss or Bond were worthy successors had had little chemistry with their Bond actors.
Modern films are all about money, and with MGM in such financial trouble they will be sure to make Bond 23 as widely appealing as possible.
I was 13 When We Saw the Dr. No.
BOND is the SPIRIT OF THE UK AND USA rolled into ONE.
In 1782 the UK and USA signed the TREATY OF PARIS.
The USA and UK Reconciled the War of American INDEPENDENCE.
We have been JOINED AT THE HIP Every Since.
Just Listen to the CD "BOND THEMES".
That is BOND.
Did you ever hear of the GIRLS OF BORNE ULTIMATUM?
NO.
BOND, BOND GIRLS, BOND THEMES.
If you Don't Get It.
You Don't Get It.
Yes, I'd hate to go in that direction http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2P9mTmpZ7s&feature=related
Brosnan, especially in this scene, puts Craige to shame!
"Like sands through the hourglass, so are the days of our Bond" Well then you just don't get it!
This the trap we got into with the PB era, ticking the boxes etc. Yes I'd like to see the GB back at the start and at least have Craig get a full on JB theme moment, preferably the PTS. I think for the benefit of the mainstream audience Bond 23 will need to kick off with a fun PTS.
Meaning that the dour feel of QOS needs to be left behind at least for start of the film, it seems decades since we've had an unrelated PTS, infact the whole PTS myth is an interesting one.
Many people seem to think that most Bond films have one but to be honest it's only actually, GF, MR, FYEO, OP are the only real examples.
You could say TB but that is not entirely unrelated as the SPECTRE agent concerned is mentioned after the main title credits. SWLM is interesting as it would be seem as an obvious candidate but the fact XXX boyfriend is one of Bond's pursuers and the actions of that PTS figure as part of Spy's climax then I would argue that it isn't.
None of Dalton's or Brosnan's are, yes I suppose CR does but that to me feels related as this an origin story. I would like to see Craig get something like GF's, while I'm no fan of Bond 3, there is no denying that PTS is one of the series best, pity the rest of the film never recovers from ( a peronal view)
Bond 23 will be indeed a watermark moment for the series, CR threw a spot light on 007 not seen since GE was released and CR's was even bigger. QOS while from a personal stand point was no where near the worst Bond film, did not live up to the promise that CR hinted at.
We can all suggest our peronal wish list for the next film but as I said before these films are not made for Bond geeks they are made for mainstream audiences and the success of the series entirely rests on this fact not some little niche group that wants to see Bond making scramble eggs in his flat.
I've become more distanced from Bond as I've got older and try to look at it from a more objective vantage point, we aren't going to get Fleming wet dreams as much as some of us want it, I enjoyed CR immensely more than any Bond film in years and alongside OHMSS it's my favourite film.
I am of no illusions that we are going to get a film like DN or FRWL again despite the hankering for this, Bond has from LALD borrowed from other films and genres, yes the borrowing from the Bourne films for QOS was for many a step too far but I wouldn't ever expect Bond to re-invent the wheel, it would be nice but the fact these need to make big bucks it won't happen.
I don't what we are going to get next November, Mendes doesn't make me think everything is hunky dory, Mendes isn't a great deal different from Forster in my view and all this talk of taking influence from Le Carre that he went on about seemed totally void in the finished product. It has been said that Mendes is looking to present a new type of Bond film but making the character too serious may well be it's undoing, Bond is Bond and gritty spy thrillers they are not, we need to see a balance that personally I am dubious EON is likely to achieve although I'm happy to be proved wrong.
Don't worry, OP, Bond will be back one day, however you like him.
Moore was a wise guy, not a smart guy. Dalton was a rogue, not a loyalist. Brosnan was a fashion model, not an intelligence asset.
Q and Moneypenny were funny, but would be unrealistic in the current Bond atmosphere. I would love to see the characters mentioned, or receive a cameo, but not return as integral parts of the "formula."
But truly, this has all been argued repetitively since there was any perceived change in the "formula" of EON's Bond films. I'm sure a similar argument occurred between fans even when Lazenby's Bond broke the fourth wall and made a comment about Connery's Bond. Isn't it getting tiresome?
The series is continuously changing, and it will assuredly swing back in the other direction at some point. If the "traditional" Bond is dead, then so will be the unorthodox, eventually.
I know I will be insulted for this, but as bad as they were, the Brosnan movies are more Bondian than the Craig movies. Sure, the Brosnan outings were cliche ridden, and the Bond elements were horribly written, but atleast I felt like I was watching a Bond films. Q, Moneypenny, the Bond theme full blast in action scenes, gadgets, witty one liners whenever Bond disposes of someone... all were there in the movies
With Craig, I don't feel like watching a Bond film. OK, maybe CR is an adaptation of the '53 novel, but if I want that I'll much prefer the actual novel, and that the movies stay close to the cinematographic Bond we've been used too. CR 2006 didn't feel Bondian at all. The 'effets de style' they made (no Bond theme until the end, no Q, no Moneypenny) actually do a round-the-house kick back to EON, as they end up dimishing the Bondness of the films, which I hope wasn't the original intent.
I mean, look at Dalton. As close, if not closer to Fleming's Bond than Craig, but all the familiar Bondian elements (Q, Moneypenny, gadgets...) are there. Hell, the most serious Bond of them all, LTK, has the biggest screentime for Q, Moneypenny is there, the gadgets, witty one liners, the Bond theme...
With QOS, they tried to make Bond more serious. I respect that as I loved Dalton. But when you take away the familiar Bond elements, you end of with a cold, colourless film, miles away from what Bond is.