Bond 26 (1 Viewer)

[Keith Cobby]

Richard Madden would be the best choice among those named, he would be around 40 on release. I think the next film will be a prequel, perhaps covering the period after Bond leaves the RN and joins the Secret Service, perhaps more of a spy film.

I think Nolan would be a good choice because most of his action is done in camera rather than heavily relying on special effects which the later Bonds have done. For example the car chase in Tenet is one of the best in recent cinema. I accept that Nolan has control over his films, but it would be better if the family relinquish control to really freshen it up.

 

[Rick Thompson]

Few words can strike fear into a moviegoer's heart like "reinvention" and "rebooting."

 

[Worth]

To some extent, Bond has been reinvented every time the role has been recast. In a contemporary setting, I'm not opposed to the idea of a black Bond - or someone from a former colony like Hong Kong or India - but I think he has to remain a he. If they try to make Bond a woman...well, it's just not Bond anymore.

 

[Sam Favate]

I love Nolan and he is certainly capable, but I'm not sure I need a fractured time narrative in a Bond film.

Oh no. I like Nolan too, but his films are completely humorless and that is not what Bond needs now. Also, after decades of Bond films with complicated plots, they do not need the king of complicated plots, Mr. Nolan.

Also, let’s hope “reinvention” means new writers. The same pair of not-so-great writers have been at it for 23 years.

Moore was a reinvention from Connery, Dalton was a reinvention from Moore, and so on through the present.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

I don't have any suggestions at the moment on who to cast, I just can't name a lot of today's actors so don't have a real good feel for who would be good.

I'm a Bond traditionalist so to me Bond should be:

British
Male
A womanizer
Have a bit of a nasty streak
Look like someone that could kick your ass
Be somewhat charming (not overboard on this aspect)

I feel like he should be a white guy as that has been the character all along but if you want to change that this is fine as long as he meets the above requirements.

If you do totally "reinvent" Bond, well, it is not going to be a Bond picture and Bond fans will be pretty unhappy. Personally, I don't think Bond has ever been reinvented, they essentially just try to take aspects of the actor and incorporate them into the role. So, Bond has just shifted a bit depending upon who was playing him and the best Bonds or most memorable ones do take on traits that the actor is good at portraying.

There is a Bond formula that is what has basically sold every picture in the franchise, so I would not tinker with that too much because essentially, we know what has worked and what people expect from Bond. However, when you replace an actor that has been as iconic as Craig was in the role, you do want to freshen things up to create a somewhat new dynamic for the new actor to make his mark.

The primary change I think they could and maybe should make is just hire a younger actor to play Bond. We basically have had a lot of middle aged Bond. Plus if you have a younger guy he can play Bond longer if you want and it makes sense for a younger guy to be doing all the off the wall stuff Bond does.

Also, since the whole Craig Bond deal was kind of this "personal rogue" thing, you could shift to young Bond being sent on missions he needs to complete. And they don't have to be about saving the world.

Now, neither of those things would be a huge reinvention but it would be a reboot and a different take than what we got with Craig.

 

[Joe Wong]

There is a Bond formula that is what has basically sold every picture in the franchise, so I would not tinker with that too much because essentially, we know what has worked and what people expect from Bond. However, when you replace an actor that has been as iconic as Craig was in the role, you do want to freshen things up to create a somewhat new dynamic for the new actor to make his mark.

I believe they consciously dialed down the "girls" aspect of the Bond formula beginning with Brosnan's tenure in Goldeneye. Not that there are no female leads, but less of the "sexual" aspect that was more prominent in the Connery (who would often have encounters with several ladies, including one-off flings) and Moore (witness the bevy of Bond girls in films like Octopussy and Moonraker, usually in swimsuits or similar clothing) eras. One could even argue the Dalton era, with its more serious focus, was leading to this.

This was mentioned by M (Judi Dench) when she called Brosnan a "sexist, misogynistic dinosaur".

I don't think it has hurt the series, though.

 

[Walter Kittel]

I believe they consciously dialed down the "girls" aspect of the Bond formula beginning with Brosnan's tenure in Goldeneye. Not that there are no female leads, but less of the "sexual" aspect that was more prominent in the Connery (who would often have encounters with several ladies, including one-off flings) and Moore (witness the bevy of Bond girls in films like Octopussy and Moonraker, usually in swimsuits or similar clothing) eras. One could even argue the Dalton era, with its more serious focus, was leading to this.

I believe Dalton's first Bond film, The Living Daylights, was the beginning of dialing back Bond's promiscuity. This probably had more to do with the burgeoning Aids crisis vs. an enlightened attempt to alter Bond's persona.

- Walter.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

I believe they consciously dialed down the "girls" aspect of the Bond formula beginning with Brosnan's tenure in Goldeneye. Not that there are no female leads, but less of the "sexual" aspect that was more prominent in the Connery (who would often have encounters with several ladies, including one-off flings) and Moore (witness the bevy of Bond girls in films like Octopussy and Moonraker, usually in swimsuits or similar clothing) eras. One could even argue the Dalton era, with its more serious focus, was leading to this.

This was mentioned by M (Judi Dench) when she called Brosnan a "sexist, misogynistic dinosaur".

I don't think it has hurt the series, though.

It was sort of dialed down as the Craig films went on. Bond is male fantasy fiction. I mean women may take an interest in the character as a sexy, very capable man but I believe the films are mostly geared toward men. Cars, guns, sexy women, action, and a guy that always gets the job done. It is a fantasy world for guys, right down to the watches Bond wears and the booze he drinks.

I've known plenty of women that like Bond but I've never really seen the films as being something marketed to women unless you count Bond himself being cheesecake for females.

What they were really pushing in the Craig films were very capable women as well but I don't really think that was going to entice more women to enjoy the pictures. Everybody knows Bond is the show and the females in the stories are all second fiddle to him.

I would continue to embrace them as being what they are rather than attempting to make Bond into something it never was nor was meant to be. It is fiction, so you can change it however you want BUT change it too much and you may as well call it something else and make it about some other spy.

The "fans" will say you ruined Bond if you really reinvent him. So, you will just be dumping old fans to try to appeal to new fans that never had an interest in Bond because they did not like him in the first place. I am not sure that is the best way to go.

 

[Alex...]

I believe they consciously dialed down the "girls" aspect of the Bond formula beginning with Brosnan's tenure in Goldeneye. Not that there are no female leads, but less of the "sexual" aspect that was more prominent in the Connery (who would often have encounters with several ladies, including one-off flings) and Moore (witness the bevy of Bond girls in films like Octopussy and Moonraker, usually in swimsuits or similar clothing) eras. One could even argue the Dalton era, with its more serious focus, was leading to this.

This was mentioned by M (Judi Dench) when she called Brosnan a "sexist, misogynistic dinosaur".

I don't think it has hurt the series, though.

I love when she called him that, and she also called him a relic of the cold war.

 

[Sam Favate]

I know Idris Elba is mentioned a lot to be James Bond, and while I like him as an actor and I would like to see a person of color play Bond, I think he's wrong. Elba is great in many roles - his part in The Wire was one of the best things about the best show on television - but I do not feel he's mastered the leading man role. He's often humorless and grim, and those are qualities I think the new Bond should stay away from.

Likewise, I don't support the choice of Tom Hardy, who also has a tendency to be roguish. I think it would be hard to see Hardy fit the part of an English gentleman.

I like Richard Madden, although, thus far, he's also been pretty humorless. But he's young enough that that could change and he could inhabit the role for a while.

I thought Tom Hiddleston would've been great. He can appear dangerous but he also has that gleam in his eye and mischievous smile.

Daniel Craig's casting, I thought, was a reaction to the Bourne films, which came out starting in 2002 and had a secret agent tougher and more no-nonsense than James Bond. Then we got Craig, who was excellent in the role, even when the scripts failed him.

Now I think the role - and the world - needs something lighter. Someone to thrill us, but also make us smile.

 

[Mikael Soderholm]

Both Hiddleston and Madden are way superior to the wooden Cavill.
But Idris Elba could be fine. I could see a female Bond as well, it's a role in MI6, nothing more (as NTTD showed us).
It has basically evolved into an MI6 spy franchise at this time.

 

[Tommy R]

I believe they consciously dialed down the "girls" aspect of the Bond formula beginning with Brosnan's tenure in Goldeneye. Not that there are no female leads, but less of the "sexual" aspect that was more prominent in the Connery (who would often have encounters with several ladies, including one-off flings) and Moore (witness the bevy of Bond girls in films like Octopussy and Moonraker, usually in swimsuits or similar clothing) eras. One could even argue the Dalton era, with its more serious focus, was leading to this.

I’ll go even further and say For Your Eyes Only started the downward trend of promiscuity, with his flat turn down of Bibi Dahl.

 

[Worth]

I’ll go even further and say For Your Eyes Only started the downward trend of promiscuity, with his flat turn down of Bibi Dahl.

I've never understood why she's in that movie. Is it to show that Bond is still attractive to young women? If so, it didn't work - it feels like she's coming on to her dad's friend.

 

[Joe Wong]

I’ll go even further and say For Your Eyes Only started the downward trend of promiscuity, with his flat turn down of Bibi Dahl.

To be fair, maybe Bond realised there was a 30 year age difference .

Also, For Your Eyes Only seems to be an outlier in the Moore period (it's noted for its relative lack of gadgetry), sandwiched as it is between Moonraker and Octopussy (which I mentioned above).

I've never understood why she's in that movie. Is it to show that Bond is still attractive to young women? If so, it didn't work - it feels like she's coming on to her dad's friend.

Probably for Lynn Holly Johnson to show off her skating skills.

 

[fdabbott]

I don't have any suggestions at the moment on who to cast, I just can't name a lot of today's actors so don't have a real good feel for who would be good.

I'm a Bond traditionalist so to me Bond should be:

British
Male
A womanizer
Have a bit of a nasty streak
Look like someone that could kick your ass
Be somewhat charming (not overboard on this aspect)

I feel like he should be a white guy as that has been the character all along but if you want to change that this is fine as long as he meets the above requirements.

If you do totally "reinvent" Bond, well, it is not going to be a Bond picture and Bond fans will be pretty unhappy. Personally, I don't think Bond has ever been reinvented, they essentially just try to take aspects of the actor and incorporate them into the role. So, Bond has just shifted a bit depending upon who was playing him and the best Bonds or most memorable ones do take on traits that the actor is good at portraying.

There is a Bond formula that is what has basically sold every picture in the franchise, so I would not tinker with that too much because essentially, we know what has worked and what people expect from Bond. However, when you replace an actor that has been as iconic as Craig was in the role, you do want to freshen things up to create a somewhat new dynamic for the new actor to make his mark.

The primary change I think they could and maybe should make is just hire a younger actor to play Bond. We basically have had a lot of middle aged Bond. Plus if you have a younger guy he can play Bond longer if you want and it makes sense for a younger guy to be doing all the off the wall stuff Bond does.

Also, since the whole Craig Bond deal was kind of this "personal rogue" thing, you could shift to young Bond being sent on missions he needs to complete. And they don't have to be about saving the world.

Now, neither of those things would be a huge reinvention but it would be a reboot and a different take than what we got with Craig.

That's the only type of Bond Character, that I or anyone I know would bother watching or go to a cinema to watch. I like the pre-Bond, as a real spy action film, without all the CG crap.

 

[SFMike]

Maybe it's just time to ditch the tired franchise concept and just create a new character and storyline for a spy/hitman. Yeah, I know that's just too radical of an idea for Hollywood and would require actual creativity and work.

 

[cadavra]

C'mon, people, there's only one man who's perfect for Bond. Right age, British, suave, can handle a wisecrack as well as a weapon. If the Broccolis are smart they'll get this guy.

Tom Ellis.

 

[Johnny Angell]

Ooh! Ooh! I know what they’re going to do. Bond will like martinis stirred and not shaken.

 

[Johnny Angell]

That's the only type of Bond Character, that I or anyone I know would bother watching or go to a cinema to watch. I like the pre-Bond, as a real spy action film, without all the CG crap.

I will give the benefit of the doubt to any Bond production. If it works, it works. After all this is the age of “Hamilton.” Not many complained about that.

 

[Bob Cashill]

Nothing against Elba but he’ll be 52 if the next film gets released in three years, the same age Craig was when he called it quits (assuming the film had been released in 2020; he’s 54 now). Moore’s hanging on till 57 would be like me taking on the part.