I like the idea of the boyfriend being involved in the organization. Wouldn't it be interesting if he becomes a recuring nemesis for Bond like Blofeld? It certainly would ad some depth to Bond's desire for justice.
From your mouth to scriptwriter's ear, I love it, I wouldn't be surprised if it's in play.
My hope is that the Vesper angle would be dropped completely, though. Fleming never touched on it again,
BZZT! Wrong! I can get my 00 status back on this ) In Diamonds are Forever, Bond deliberately does not put the record needle on Le Vie en Rose (title from memory so forgive me) "because it had memories for him" Well, in Casino Royale he hears it and associates it with Vesper. Deliberately skipping that song isn't the action of a man who is over "the bitch" so Fleming indeed did mention it in a subtle way. Plus imo you fall for a person, who then not only betrays you, puts what you believe in in peril, but commits suicide in front of you, you don't snap back from that, in Bond's case work is the solution to healing. Also in a sense, Vesper (the film Vesper as done by Eva) was Bond's mirror image. She too had a facade, she too was orphaned. She too toughened herself, she too is isolated and we see later she too is desperate.
You seek someone like you, an ideal, you find it, and you lose it. On top of that, you're struggling with perhaps how much of your own soul you've sacrificed to do your job. To prove yourself. I see Bond as a man who strove to prove himself from the time he lost his parents, to prove his worth, and especially to M.
In the dinner jacket scene, Craig so skillfully does the "hey, I am not half bad, look at me" almost like a little boy, and beginning to come into his own, beginning to develop the self confidence (although you see it in his picking up of that doomed horse woman) and Vesper chuckles because my take on it is she KNOWS him. "She knew you were You" She turned the tables on him about the dress. :007)
Mr. A just asked me to add some comments, so these are his "Bond is a man who doesn't like to lose" He had no control over losing his parents, but he had control over everything else, proving himself, so when M essentially tells him you screwed up royally, (not so much out of cruelty, but my sense is out of wanting him to succeed ) when he loses the first game to Le Chiffre and when he cannot save Vesper, he loses something precious yet again.
In the torture scene, you'd think that was the ultimate loss of control. What is so terrific about that scene is he turns it to his advantage. You can see his terror, but you also see the spine of this man. By making a mockery of Le Chiffre he takes back his dignity, he takes back control and he in a sense "tortures" by reminding him he is next. He accomplishes all this while taking and taking with courage and humour some of the most horrid pain possible. It's that scene that shows us Bond, in my opinion. Anyone can wear the bespoke suits and drink the martinis. In that scene, he becomes Bond. When you see him with Mr. White later, it's just the icing on a cake yet baking.
Personally, I think that the success of CR should demonstrate to the producers that the Fleming plots are capable of winning over modern audiences.
I know that they've said that they won't do "new" versions of the films, based on the original novels.....but that's largely because they don't want to invalidate the previous versions, which are loved by millions.
So, what I'd like to see is this: Have them take the original Fleming plots, but give them NEW titles, either original or based on Fleming's original chapter titles.
Most of the Bond films bare little resemblence to their source novels, so grab the plots, change names where it would cause to much confusion (no re-using villain names, for example), give it a new title and BOOM! Off we go.
Moonraker (the novel) would make a great movie -- just change the name of the villain (since they used it in the film), and the name of the rocket, update some of the dated references, give it a title based on one of the chapter titles...."Dead Reckoning" or "Zero Minus", for example.....
My hope is that the Vesper angle would be dropped completely, though. Fleming never touched on it again
BZZT! Wrong! I can get my 00 status back on this ) In Diamonds are Forever, Bond deliberately does not put the record needle on Le Vie en Rose (title from memory so forgive me) "because it had memories for him" Well, in Casino Royale he hears it and associates it with Vesper. Deliberately skipping that song isn't the action of a man who is over "the bitch" so Fleming indeed did mention it in a subtle way.
True, but what I meant was that Fleming never felt the need for Bond to go careening off on a 'private vendetta' (as M may have referred to it) against the people who drove Vesper to suicide. Bond's pain is best handled when it's bottled up and left alone. It may stoke the fires of the engine, but it doesn't steer the train.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
...what I meant was that Fleming never felt the need for Bond to go careening off on a 'private vendetta' (as M may have referred to it) against the people who drove Vesper to suicide. Bond's pain is best handled when it's bottled up and left alone. It may stoke the fires of the engine, but it doesn't steer the train.
I hope they handle the way Fleming did, and don't go the standard 'hell-bent on revenge' route in #22. I do think the current creative team is capable of this subtle distinction...as long as Michael Wilson doesn't end up doing too much 'polishing'
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
So, what I'd like to see is this: Have them take the original Fleming plots, but give them NEW titles, either original or based on Fleming's original chapter titles.
Most of the Bond films bare little resemblence to their source novels, so grab the plots, change names where it would cause to much confusion (no re-using villain names, for example), give it a new title and BOOM! Off we go.
Moonraker (the novel) would make a great movie -- just change the name of the villain (since they used it in the film), and the name of the rocket, update some of the dated references, give it a title based on one of the chapter titles...."Dead Reckoning" or "Zero Minus", for example.....
You're not alone with this point of view. In another thread here, the idea of filming LALD along the lines you suggest was discussed (the villain being say Buonaparte Ignace Gallia, the girl Simone Latrelle- these names coming from the novel- and I took some stick for suggesting "The Undertaker's Wind" for a title).
However, revamping Fleming's MR has already been done- change Sir Hugo Drax to Sir Gustav Graves (knighted apparent philanthropist millionaire with mysterious past), the Moonraker rocket to the Icarus satellite (ostensibly beneficial technology with ulterior motive), card game confrontation at Blades to sword fight at Blades, Gala Brand to Miranda Frost- and they called that DUD...er, DAD.
However, revamping Fleming's MR has already been done
True, but then again "You Only Live Twice" was remade as "The Spy Who Loved Me" (villain using big vehicle to swallow smaller vehicles in the hopes of causing war between the US and Russia), and "Goldfinger" was remade as "A View To A Kill" (villain causing disaster at commodity center so that they can corner the market), so I doubt anyone would notice.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited November 2007
I'm more interested in seeing specific aspects of the MR novel transferred to the Craig-Era Bond, who's capable of pulling them off, IMO: the steam hose ordeal, Bond allowing himself to get beaten up to distract the villain into leaving a blowtorch (!) in the room, Bond and the girl surviving an overhead cliff collapse, Bond doing a personal favour for M in exposing a villain's dishonest social behaviour, etc. Similarly, many individual elements from LALD (broken pinky finger, pirate's treasure to finance terrorism), DAF ('Brooklyn stomping---80 percenter,' the oceanliner finale, Bond with a gun crew taking down a baddie's copter), TSWLM (as a PTS), OP (the Oberhauser character), etc...
Incredibly, there's a fair amount of unused Fleming---it just requires a bit of surgery to weave them into storylines for Craig's rumoured 5-picture run
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Oh, yeah...and the squid from DN ;%
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
However, revamping Fleming's MR has already been done
True, but then again "You Only Live Twice" was remade as "The Spy Who Loved Me" (villain using big vehicle to swallow smaller vehicles in the hopes of causing war between the US and Russia)
True, but only by ignoring Fleming in both cases rather than adapting previously unfilmed sequences and ideas.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
The movie Casino Royale has successfully re-launched the James Bond series in a bold, new direction. Daniel Craig is superb as the new, raw Bond. Casino Royale takes Ian Fleming’s original first Bond script and sets it within the modern day.
However, there are still discrepancies that span the whole James Bond series and those are carried through into Casino Royale. For example, in the earlier movie Goldeneye, Judi Dench’s M had referred to Bond (Pierce Bronson) as ‘a sexist, misogynist dinosaur, a relic of the Cold War’. In Casino Royale, M makes reference to ‘9/11’ as a past event, and Bond is active within MI-6 before he gains 00 status in the year 2006. In Casino Royale, Bond drives the latest Aston Martin DBS, but wins an Aston Martin DB5 1964 (ala Goldfinger) in a casino game. In the real world, the film media press are rife with gossip about whether ‘Bond is played better by Daniel Craig or Sean Connery’. The problem as ever with a ‘new Bond’ is that the lineage of James Bond has to be ignored whilst the new actor is allowed to establish himself into the rejuvenated role.
The script sample (Act 1) functions as a mechanism to correct that lineage, to put the record straight. In Act 1 you will see that Daniel Craig’s ‘new Bond’ is in fact just that – a totally new person undertaking an MI-6 Special Agent role under the pseudonym of ‘James Bond’. Daniel Craig’s Bond was literally ‘Born From Fire’. A former Special Forces officer, he was enlisted to MI-6 via an explosive faked death scene during a terrorist hostage rescue mission. Just like reality, there have been many ‘James Bond’ assignees before him. Act 1 of the script rams the point home as a former ‘James Bond’ makes a guest appearance as an elderly, retired ‘Commander James Bond’. A former Bond actor, ideally Sean Connery, should play the role of the Commander.
This new script James Bond 007 – Born From Fire will enable the Bond series to proceed on a firm, established lineage. We will see Daniel Craig’s character within the correct context, as the new Special Agent dealing with today’s crisis, in today’s world
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited November 2007
...
Welcome to AJB, phoenix08. First of all, let me say that I like the title {[]
Beyond that, however, I think you'll run into a great deal of resistance to the notion of 'James Bond' as a code name used by several different men over the years---despite the fact that it's been bandied about for years, even decades---since the producers have demonstrated having no qualms whatsoever about simply recasting the role (prior to CR) and simply pressing onward. Post-CR, with the 'reboot' (however one sees that), it's even less of a concern for them.
And all that says nothing about the difficulties you'll encounter in getting an unsolicited James Bond script onto the desk of anyone in Eon capable of making a decision...as a writer myself, I've often considered writing a spec Bond script...but have long since decided to pursue projects where I have a better chance (however slight! ) of actually seeing financial compensation for my efforts...
Best of luck to you.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Thanks very much Loeffelholz, I really appreciate your feedback.
Actually, your assessment is right on the money. The script sample has sat on Danjaq, LLC and Eon Productions Limited desk's for the last 11 months. They finally returned it to me (via their lawyers in Beverly Hills) marked - ‘We do not accept Unsolicited Material’.
I’ve decided to share it with my fellow Bond enthusiasts, to see what they think.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
You're certainly welcome {[] AJB has an excellent 'Fan Fiction' program ongoing in the 'Literary' forum...check it out!
And, lest I forget the nine most important words for aspiring writers:
Never give up...never give up...never give up B-)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I've for years said that "For Queen and Country" should be a Bond film title . . . and then I came to this board and saw that I was not alone. Given that the next Bond film may involve 007 finding who is really behind "the organization" and Vesper's involvement, the title doesn't quite sound appropriate, though it would fit in with his continued evolution as an agent.
Whatever the title is, it should have Fleming's sense of irony and imagination. The more tedious titles are the ones that speak directly to the plot without being memorable. "Die Another Day" is one of those titles. Bleah.
Shorter, dumber titles are in today, as they fit on a marquee and stay in the minds of the masses better. "Risico" was rumored as a possible title, and it could work. But I'm for remaking all of the Fleming books, with plots and characters closer to what Fleming conceived (but with a little of Richard Maibaum's sensibilities). In that sense, whatever the next book is in the series could easily be the title of the next film.
I have to agree with you, I like the idea of that title.
In a perfect world I see us revisting Bonds most important moments in his life that in the previous movies were left out or left behind with only vague references years down the road. I think it would be absolutely perfect with an actor like Craig. He comes from the charactor driven storyline movies and then become Bond rather than vice versa.
Back on topic, on revisting Bond key moments in his history as a person. We have already seen the begining of Bond in CR. I would enjoy seeing his vengence of Vesper and learning to keep his cool "This is Not a Personal Vendetta 007. If you can treat this justly and dispassionatly than I'll have 008 replace you." I would like to see that reinacted its been while since we've heard that line, correct me if I'm wrong.
Perhaps the next film after 22 would be one leading up to his marriage and death of his wife? The effects of that on him. Not neccesarly taking the titles of the books but in this order. CR,22,OHMSS,YOLT,TMWTGG. Again the titles need not be the same but I would love a continuality sotryline along this lines, and actually us the book rather than Hollywood it up.
Start from beginning to end with Bond, then have a mission that fills the void between CR and him getting married.
Then have the 3rd film him getting married and the murder of his wife. Rendunant with CR I know, but it shows the internal strife within our hero.
With the 4rth film, Bond in the dumps, failing mission with stupid mistakes. M trying to snap him out of it with an over the top mission to Japan, which is resolved with Bond "death" and dissapearance.
And the 5th and fine Craig film bieng Bond miraculous return and attempted assasination of M, only to be given the pardon. Then recieving M's death warrent mission. I would like to see an open ended ending in this one where we see Bond talking to "Scaramanga" and then "S" shooting Bond and then Bond killing "S" and ending there not certian that our hero is alive? I mean they have "killed off" Superman why can't they "kill off" Bond or atleast fool us to think they did. I think it would be a nice little twist that would surprise us. Of course I don't want them to actually kill him, but like I said make us believe they did. It would make for a fun movie experiance ie Mr. Brooks.
Of course that is my opinion which is subject to yours, and this world is far from perfect but I would love to see this enacted verbatim in a Bond series of films.
"This is Not a Personal Vendetta 007. If you can treat this justly and dispassionatly than I'll have 008 replace you." I would like to see that reinacted its been while since we've heard that line, correct me if I'm wrong.
There are variations on it in LTK (M to Bond re Leiter, in the Hemingway house) and GE (M to Bond re 006, in her office).
This is something I would like to see in a Bond film in the future: high-powered offshore racing boats. This is a very expensive hobby for arab princess, norwegian shipping moguls and other men with far too much money and a strong need to prove their masculinity.
Comments
From your mouth to scriptwriter's ear, I love it, I wouldn't be surprised if it's in play.
My hope is that the Vesper angle would be dropped completely, though. Fleming never touched on it again,
BZZT! Wrong! I can get my 00 status back on this
You seek someone like you, an ideal, you find it, and you lose it. On top of that, you're struggling with perhaps how much of your own soul you've sacrificed to do your job. To prove yourself. I see Bond as a man who strove to prove himself from the time he lost his parents, to prove his worth, and especially to M.
In the dinner jacket scene, Craig so skillfully does the "hey, I am not half bad, look at me" almost like a little boy, and beginning to come into his own, beginning to develop the self confidence (although you see it in his picking up of that doomed horse woman) and Vesper chuckles because my take on it is she KNOWS him. "She knew you were You" She turned the tables on him about the dress. :007)
Mr. A just asked me to add some comments, so these are his "Bond is a man who doesn't like to lose" He had no control over losing his parents, but he had control over everything else, proving himself, so when M essentially tells him you screwed up royally, (not so much out of cruelty, but my sense is out of wanting him to succeed ) when he loses the first game to Le Chiffre and when he cannot save Vesper, he loses something precious yet again.
In the torture scene, you'd think that was the ultimate loss of control. What is so terrific about that scene is he turns it to his advantage. You can see his terror, but you also see the spine of this man. By making a mockery of Le Chiffre he takes back his dignity, he takes back control and he in a sense "tortures" by reminding him he is next. He accomplishes all this while taking and taking with courage and humour some of the most horrid pain possible. It's that scene that shows us Bond, in my opinion. Anyone can wear the bespoke suits and drink the martinis. In that scene, he becomes Bond. When you see him with Mr. White later, it's just the icing on a cake yet baking.
I know that they've said that they won't do "new" versions of the films, based on the original novels.....but that's largely because they don't want to invalidate the previous versions, which are loved by millions.
So, what I'd like to see is this: Have them take the original Fleming plots, but give them NEW titles, either original or based on Fleming's original chapter titles.
Most of the Bond films bare little resemblence to their source novels, so grab the plots, change names where it would cause to much confusion (no re-using villain names, for example), give it a new title and BOOM! Off we go.
Moonraker (the novel) would make a great movie -- just change the name of the villain (since they used it in the film), and the name of the rocket, update some of the dated references, give it a title based on one of the chapter titles...."Dead Reckoning" or "Zero Minus", for example.....
True, but what I meant was that Fleming never felt the need for Bond to go careening off on a 'private vendetta' (as M may have referred to it) against the people who drove Vesper to suicide. Bond's pain is best handled when it's bottled up and left alone. It may stoke the fires of the engine, but it doesn't steer the train.
I hope they handle the way Fleming did, and don't go the standard 'hell-bent on revenge' route in #22. I do think the current creative team is capable of this subtle distinction...as long as Michael Wilson doesn't end up doing too much 'polishing'
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
You're not alone with this point of view. In another thread here, the idea of filming LALD along the lines you suggest was discussed (the villain being say Buonaparte Ignace Gallia, the girl Simone Latrelle- these names coming from the novel- and I took some stick for suggesting "The Undertaker's Wind" for a title).
However, revamping Fleming's MR has already been done- change Sir Hugo Drax to Sir Gustav Graves (knighted apparent philanthropist millionaire with mysterious past), the Moonraker rocket to the Icarus satellite (ostensibly beneficial technology with ulterior motive), card game confrontation at Blades to sword fight at Blades, Gala Brand to Miranda Frost- and they called that DUD...er, DAD.
True, but then again "You Only Live Twice" was remade as "The Spy Who Loved Me" (villain using big vehicle to swallow smaller vehicles in the hopes of causing war between the US and Russia), and "Goldfinger" was remade as "A View To A Kill" (villain causing disaster at commodity center so that they can corner the market), so I doubt anyone would notice.
Incredibly, there's a fair amount of unused Fleming---it just requires a bit of surgery to weave them into storylines for Craig's rumoured 5-picture run
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
True, but only by ignoring Fleming in both cases rather than adapting previously unfilmed sequences and ideas.
(Loeff- don't forget the Castle Of Death
...followed by "Casino Royale Strikes Again", "Revenge Of Casino Royale", "Trail Of..."- oh wait, Peter Sellers has died.
...AND the castle/poison garden from YOLT ;% ;%
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I'd like to throw another set of ideas into the Bond 22 mix. I have written my own Bond 22 script sample:
James Bond 007 - Born From Fire.
You can read and review the script here:
http://www.scriptbuddy.com/community/?p=4291531750&t=&pg=#leavefeedback
Here's the pitch:
The movie Casino Royale has successfully re-launched the James Bond series in a bold, new direction. Daniel Craig is superb as the new, raw Bond. Casino Royale takes Ian Fleming’s original first Bond script and sets it within the modern day.
However, there are still discrepancies that span the whole James Bond series and those are carried through into Casino Royale. For example, in the earlier movie Goldeneye, Judi Dench’s M had referred to Bond (Pierce Bronson) as ‘a sexist, misogynist dinosaur, a relic of the Cold War’. In Casino Royale, M makes reference to ‘9/11’ as a past event, and Bond is active within MI-6 before he gains 00 status in the year 2006. In Casino Royale, Bond drives the latest Aston Martin DBS, but wins an Aston Martin DB5 1964 (ala Goldfinger) in a casino game. In the real world, the film media press are rife with gossip about whether ‘Bond is played better by Daniel Craig or Sean Connery’. The problem as ever with a ‘new Bond’ is that the lineage of James Bond has to be ignored whilst the new actor is allowed to establish himself into the rejuvenated role.
The script sample (Act 1) functions as a mechanism to correct that lineage, to put the record straight. In Act 1 you will see that Daniel Craig’s ‘new Bond’ is in fact just that – a totally new person undertaking an MI-6 Special Agent role under the pseudonym of ‘James Bond’. Daniel Craig’s Bond was literally ‘Born From Fire’. A former Special Forces officer, he was enlisted to MI-6 via an explosive faked death scene during a terrorist hostage rescue mission. Just like reality, there have been many ‘James Bond’ assignees before him. Act 1 of the script rams the point home as a former ‘James Bond’ makes a guest appearance as an elderly, retired ‘Commander James Bond’. A former Bond actor, ideally Sean Connery, should play the role of the Commander.
This new script James Bond 007 – Born From Fire will enable the Bond series to proceed on a firm, established lineage. We will see Daniel Craig’s character within the correct context, as the new Special Agent dealing with today’s crisis, in today’s world
Welcome to AJB, phoenix08. First of all, let me say that I like the title {[]
Beyond that, however, I think you'll run into a great deal of resistance to the notion of 'James Bond' as a code name used by several different men over the years---despite the fact that it's been bandied about for years, even decades---since the producers have demonstrated having no qualms whatsoever about simply recasting the role (prior to CR) and simply pressing onward. Post-CR, with the 'reboot' (however one sees that), it's even less of a concern for them.
And all that says nothing about the difficulties you'll encounter in getting an unsolicited James Bond script onto the desk of anyone in Eon capable of making a decision...as a writer myself, I've often considered writing a spec Bond script...but have long since decided to pursue projects where I have a better chance (however slight!
Best of luck to you.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Actually, your assessment is right on the money. The script sample has sat on Danjaq, LLC and Eon Productions Limited desk's for the last 11 months. They finally returned it to me (via their lawyers in Beverly Hills) marked - ‘We do not accept Unsolicited Material’.
I’ve decided to share it with my fellow Bond enthusiasts, to see what they think.
And, lest I forget the nine most important words for aspiring writers:
Never give up...never give up...never give up B-)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I have to agree with you, I like the idea of that title.
In a perfect world I see us revisting Bonds most important moments in his life that in the previous movies were left out or left behind with only vague references years down the road. I think it would be absolutely perfect with an actor like Craig. He comes from the charactor driven storyline movies and then become Bond rather than vice versa.
Back on topic, on revisting Bond key moments in his history as a person. We have already seen the begining of Bond in CR. I would enjoy seeing his vengence of Vesper and learning to keep his cool "This is Not a Personal Vendetta 007. If you can treat this justly and dispassionatly than I'll have 008 replace you." I would like to see that reinacted its been while since we've heard that line, correct me if I'm wrong.
Perhaps the next film after 22 would be one leading up to his marriage and death of his wife? The effects of that on him. Not neccesarly taking the titles of the books but in this order. CR,22,OHMSS,YOLT,TMWTGG. Again the titles need not be the same but I would love a continuality sotryline along this lines, and actually us the book rather than Hollywood it up.
Start from beginning to end with Bond, then have a mission that fills the void between CR and him getting married.
Then have the 3rd film him getting married and the murder of his wife. Rendunant with CR I know, but it shows the internal strife within our hero.
With the 4rth film, Bond in the dumps, failing mission with stupid mistakes. M trying to snap him out of it with an over the top mission to Japan, which is resolved with Bond "death" and dissapearance.
And the 5th and fine Craig film bieng Bond miraculous return and attempted assasination of M, only to be given the pardon. Then recieving M's death warrent mission. I would like to see an open ended ending in this one where we see Bond talking to "Scaramanga" and then "S" shooting Bond and then Bond killing "S" and ending there not certian that our hero is alive? I mean they have "killed off" Superman why can't they "kill off" Bond or atleast fool us to think they did. I think it would be a nice little twist that would surprise us. Of course I don't want them to actually kill him, but like I said make us believe they did. It would make for a fun movie experiance ie Mr. Brooks.
Of course that is my opinion which is subject to yours, and this world is far from perfect but I would love to see this enacted verbatim in a Bond series of films.
There are variations on it in LTK (M to Bond re Leiter, in the Hemingway house) and GE (M to Bond re 006, in her office).
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=GArE0TGRh5k&feature=related
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=lJJVRLW48Ps