Bond 25 - "No Time to Die" (2021) (1 Viewer)

[Tommy R]

We'll never know I suppose, but had they gotten Craig's films out quicker, would he have done more? Perhaps he could've had 6 films out by now had they had fewer delays. But would he have done 6, or 7? Would his magic number for exhaustion be 5 anyways? Either way, it's interesting in the least that we got such a variety of ages for him. Up till now only Connery played him in his 30's, 40's AND 50'S.

 

[Lord Dalek]

One would think, since that's their only current moneymaking franchise, they would churn them out more often.

You'd think so but history has proven now multiple times (going all the way back to For Your Eyes Only's success getting wiped out by the colossal failure of Heaven's Gate) that the Bond Franchise isn't big enough to overcome corporate ineptitude.

 

[Tino]

This whole process has been just one giant cluster f*ck.

 

[dpippel]

Maybe after 24 films it's finally time for Jimbo to just hang up the Walther PPK and call it good.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

You know what I'd love to see? A Bond movie that was done as a period piece, set in the 1950s or 1960s, as the original Fleming novels were.

Modern technology takes a lot of fun out of the spy stories. Just look at the first film, "Dr. No," for some examples of storytelling you could never do in a modern story. For the first third or so of the film, if not longer, Bond is followed around in Jamaica by someone he thinks is working for enemy. Eventually, when Bond confronts the man, he learns that it is Felix Leiter, a CIA operative and an ally. This plot point brought suspense to the early scenes in the film, and put Bond in a real "fish out of water" position where he didn't know who to trust or who he could work with. In a modern day story, that could never happen. He'd take out his cell phone and snap a picture of the person following him, or the license plate, and instantly be told "Hey, that's a CIA guy also working on a similar case" and there'd be no conflict or drama, they'd just partner up.

Cell phones, communication satellites and the internet are great for real life spies and real life detective work. They're not great for movie spies.

So I'd love to see a Bond movie that put the character back in the time he was created, that allowed them to play around with all of the old fashioned spy cliches that made the early films so much fun. Keep some of the gritty realism that the modern films bring to the table in terms of violence and action, but put the stories back in the context that they work best in.

Maybe that angle would even work for them to differentiate themselves from competition like Mission Impossible and the Bourne franchises.

 

[Sam Favate]

You know what I'd love to see? A Bond movie that was done as a period piece, set in the 1950s or 1960s, as the original Fleming novels were.

As much I would love to see this, the producers would never do it. It would be an admission that Bond belongs to the past, not the present or future. The Bond films have always tried to be relevant, even when it made for some awkward moments that didn't age well (disco music, 90s computers, etc.).

 

[Tommy R]

I'm sure that Michael and Barbara's plans is to finish this one with Craig, and then have a black actor for Bond #7. I'm sure it'll still be contemporary, but after that era I'm hoping that they will be open to do a cold-war period Bond for a while. I think that idea would be ripe for taking Bond to a tv format. Maybe a six-episode arc per year with original ideas. I don't think doing specifically the books is a good idea, but someone could come up with some really good old school storylines that still feel Bondian.

 

[holtge]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I would love to see them cast Idris Elba as the next James Bond! He has all of the tools necessary to bring Bond into the next decade.

 

[tempest21]

I think Tom Hiddleston should be the next James Bond. After his performance in Kong: Skull Island, he's starting to grow on me as a serious actor. Hated him as Loki in the MCU movies. But, I think he would be awesome as James Bond.

 

[Matt Hough]

I thought James Norton (Grantchester) had the inside track as the next Bond.

 

[Malcolm R]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I would love to see them cast Idris Elba as the next James Bond! He has all of the tools necessary to bring Bond into the next decade.

I don't see the Broccolis casting a black James Bond. They seem averse to making any significant or creative changes in the character or films.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I don't think they are thinking about the next actor with any degree of seriousness right now. It would seem to me that their priority is making this one with Craig, and then when he's done they'll figure out what to do next. They aren't like Kevin Feige who is managing multiple projects at once for the MCU; they seem to have enough trouble getting going when they're doing one at a time with these long gaps between films that I would be very surprised if they already knew what they were going to do once Craig leaves.

 

[Keith Cobby]

I thought James Norton (Grantchester) had the inside track as the next Bond.

Norton is far too soft to play Bond, look at his acting in McMafia.

 

[Bob Cashill]

Albert Broccoli had the series on an assembly line. That hurt it in some ways; it took two prior entries (and a longer-than-usual three-year-gap) to tailor THE SPY WHO LOVED ME to Roger Moore's particular personality. Then it gradually ran down again until Dalton's arrival, but inspiration was low and the series never really used him to his potential. There was more consistent timing within the Brosnan era, but Craig's films are balkier; it'll be almost five years between SPECTRE and Bond 25, the longest gap since the six years between LICENCE TO KILL and GOLDENEYE, with no "universe" to tide us over.

 

[Matt Hough]

Norton is far too soft to play Bond, look at his acting in McMafia.

I would have said that about Roger Moore before he began in the series. But I have no stake in their selection. I just thought I had read somewhere that Norton was at this moment the most serious contender. I could easily be wrong.

 

[Neil Middlemiss]

I would have said that about Roger Moore before he began in the series. But I have no stake in their selection. I just thought I had read somewhere that Norton was at this moment the most serious contender. I could easily be wrong.

You are correct. He has emerged as the favorite to take the roll in polling (in the UK at least). He certainly commands a Bond look.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

The problem is never the direction. With a second unit that stays consistent for decades, all of the big action sequences will always have the same look, and it'll always "feel" like a Bond movie. The problem is the script. Purvis and Wade are writing again, so I fear this will fall short of being the kind of movie that they should be making at this point in time.

When people complain about Purvis and Wade having helped write the bad recent Bond films, they neglect to mention that they also helped write the good recent Bond films. The 007 franchise has such a deeply bureaucracy driving it that the big decisions crucial to a Bond picture's success or failure are almost entirely out of the screenwriters' hands.

One would think, since that's their only current moneymaking franchise, they would churn them out more often.

If it were purely up to MGM, I'm sure they would. But Eon Productions is really in the driver's seat when it comes to Bond.

 

[tempest21]

When it comes down to it, I think that when it comes to casting, that the Fleming estate might have some input on the casting. I just don't see Broccoli Productions going against the norm just to be different by casting the character of James Bond outside of him being white. Broccoli Productions may even be limited by how much they can change or modify the character outside of what's already been established. Keep in mind that outside of seeing what's in the agreement behind Ian Fleming's estate and Broccoli Productions, that it's impossible to know. Creators/owners of certain franchises often put clauses into rights agreements that prevent a movie studio, even if they purchase the worldwide rights, from implementing drastic changes to the character.

Remember that this is just my personal opinion, without seeing the agreement.

 

[Sam Favate]

When people complain about Purvis and Wade having helped write the bad recent Bond films, they neglect to mention that they also helped write the good recent Bond films.

What "good recent Bond films?"

The World Is Not Enough and Die Another Day are the two worst films in the entire 55 years of Bond films.

Casino Royale had its moments, most of which I attribute to Paul Haggis. Purvis & Wade's usual complicated nonsense shows up throughout the film though, with obtuse subplots. (Dimitrios travels from the Bahamas to Florida in the middle of the night to deliver an airport security uniform?)

Quantum of Solace was written during the writer's strike, and has problems associated with that, but taken as part of Purvis & Wade's work, it is consistently bad.

Skyfall looked good and had a great theme song, but the story was awful. There are so many lapses in logic as to make it laughable. Silva manages to have the subway tunnel collapse just as he escapes and a train is coming? How could this have been coordinated? Also, we should never know as much about Bond's past as we learn here. There needs to be mystery to the character. Also, the death of M? And she's Bond's mother figure? Oh please. (Much of the blame also goes to John Logan, who might be the screenwriter I dislike the most, and I blame him for all the nonsense about Bond's personal life. P&W like to write about bad agents and secret societies that make no sense.)

Spectre remains a huge disappointment, and only darkens the already muddy waters of the intricate plot set up in Casino/Quantum with Mr. White and the Quantum group.

These guys are terrible.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Casino Royale is one of my favorite Bond pictures -- top five for sure. I'd also argue that Skyfall is one of the most memorable and ambitious Bond films, despite its issues. Complaining about lapses in logic with a Bond picture is like complaining about fighting at a hockey game; it's baked into the formula.

Even though I'll fully admit that they're lower grade Bond, I enjoyed The World Is Not Enough and Die Another Day a lot. Certainly more so than Tomorrow Never Dies.

Quantum of Solace feels like it's telling the story of what happens between Bond movies. It's more Casino Royale 1.5 than its own movie. There are some good sequences, but it's slight.

Spectre is a disaster, 10 pounds of shit in a 5 pound bag. But again, I think that goes back to the decisions of Eon Production and Sam Mendes who wanted to check way too many classic Bond boxes.

I'm not saying Wade and Purvis are going to be winning any Oscars, but the reason they keep getting hired is because they're capable at doing what Eon wants them to do: take a list of set pieces and flesh them out into a screenplay.