Sequels never as good as the originals?

StrangewaysStrangeways London, UKPosts: 1,469MI6 Agent
I was just thinking the other evening, and thought I'd provoke discussion.....

Every time EON re-boot the franchise, the 2nd movie never lives up to our expectations. Examples:

OHMSS -v- DAF
TSWLM -v- MR
TLD -v- LTK
GE -v- TND/TWINE

Does this mean that Bond 22 will be pale in comparison to CR? (The only exception to the rule above is I actually thought TND better than GE, but hey ho!)

What do fellow fans think?

Comments

  • John DrakeJohn Drake On assignmentPosts: 2,564MI6 Agent
    I thought LTK more than lived up to TLD. But I would add FYEO then it's follow-up OP to your list.
  • NightshooterNightshooter In bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
    In almost all those cases, the sequels didn't work because they brought Bond back to camp (or in some cases went further in camp territory). Craig isn't going to let that happen, I think.
  • StrangewaysStrangeways London, UKPosts: 1,469MI6 Agent
    Ah yes, Octopussy is my least favourite Moore entry. I mean, the silly jokes when he's running through the jungle, Tarzan noises etc. Awful.

    Just for the record, I think LTK was very underrated. Would have loved Dalton to do more in the 90s. Loved it, but was just appealing to the masses.

    To conclude, I am keeping an open mind about Bond 22, but I have to say that I do think the series has peaked. 10 BAFTA nominations and all the other awards, nothing can come close to CR. Or can it.........?
  • Kentucky Fried SpyKentucky Fried Spy Posts: 2MI6 Agent
    I dont know about sequels never being as good asthe originals, just look at The Godfather part II for instance, and of course Empire Strikes Back which often tops best ever movie polls. I think the thing with Bond 22, or 007 or whatever its gonna be called is that there are freah faces being the scenes that will make this as different to CR as possible and hopefully will top it too. If Martin Campbell was directing the sequel there might be the danger of things getting a little stale but i dont think with Marc Forster it will happen.
  • taitytaity Posts: 702MI6 Agent
    I think LTK is one of the movies where some people downright hate it, whereas others love it. It really seems to divide fans.

    However, I think what EON does is that they make a rebbot movie, see what works well, and then continue down the path that they were going down. That certainly happened with TSWLM and MR, then GE and TND.

    I think that they may get Bond 22 to avoid the trap, but I think what it will depend on is how much the producers do to make it feel original. After going on for so many years its pretty easy to appear stale. The real challenge for the producers this time around is creating a movie that feels as fresh as Casino Royale, but doesnt repeat anything from that movie - and also doesnt repeat from the first 20 movies. Hard.
  • LoeffelholzLoeffelholz The United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
    CTrent49 wrote:
    In my opinion, FYEO/OP are the only two worthy back-to-back Bond movies in the franchise.

    That's interesting. I suppose I'd have to know what constitutes the 'worthy back-to-back' moniker, as you define it...if you simply mean two good Bond films back-to-back, I'd have to disagree.
    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
  • Sweepy the CatSweepy the Cat Halifax, West Yorkshire, EnglaPosts: 986MI6 Agent
    The only real sequels to me are
    DN/FRWL
    OHMSS/DAF
    and I think both films are pretty close together, to be honest Bond 22 has a lot of oppurtunity's being a fresh start for Bond so lets hope it does us proud.
    207qoznfl4.gif
  • JarvioJarvio EnglandPosts: 4,241MI6 Agent
    OHMSS -v- DAF
    TSWLM -v- MR
    TLD -v- LTK
    GE -v- TND/TWINE

    First of all, although I like DAF, I admit it didn't live up to OHMSS, so agree on that one.

    MR definitely didn't live up to TSWLM, so also agree on that one.

    TND/TWINE were, to be honest, awful compared to GE. GE was a brilliant film, whereas TND and TWINE I rank near the bottom of my entire Bond list tbh (and DAD is even worse).

    The only one I disagree on is the Dalton films. I like TLD, but I actually liked LTK even more. More interesting moments and better villains IMO. Both great films though.
    1 - LALD, 2 - AVTAK, 3 - LTK, 4 - OP, 5 - NTTD, 6 - FYEO, 7 - SF, 8 - DN, 9 - DAF, 10 - TSWLM, 11 - OHMSS, 12 - TMWTGG, 13 - GE, 14 - MR, 15 - TLD, 16 - YOLT, 17 - GF, 18 - DAD, 19 - TWINE, 20 - SP, 21 - TND, 22 - FRWL, 23 - TB, 24 - CR, 25 - QOS

    1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
  • StrangewaysStrangeways London, UKPosts: 1,469MI6 Agent
    Does anyone think that the stories that we have had in the media over the past couple of months feel like we are back to 1997?

    When TND was being filmed in 1997, EON had script problems, location problems, a release date but no title, they were late starting filming and the cast was not even confirmed prior to filming. [Feel familiar?] The result was a crappie title, ham acting [Pryce, Yeoh] and a rushed storyline that seemed just like a series of set pieces connected by periods of utter boredom.

    When I say sequels are never as good as the original I don't refer to Godfather or Star Wars, whose sequels were years in production but mainly Bond. EON appear guilty of becoming obsessed with making production line movies that never live up to the expectation of the grass roots 100% loyal fanatics, [that’s us btw!] the very people that they should not alienate.

    After the critical and commercial success of CR globally, 10 BAFTA nominations and other awards the expectation for Bond 22 is huge to say the least. I for one would have preferred there to have been a 3-4 year gap to consolidate on CR then produce an outstanding sequel of quality rather than a rush job.

    Don't get me wrong, I can't wait for November and am sooooo excited about Bond 22, but I do remember 1997 like it was yesterday [age setting in] and I fear that the producers will miss out on this huge opportunity and not learn from the lessons of the past 10 years.
  • spidermanspiderman Posts: 20MI6 Agent
    you are right but Licence to Kill is hundred times better than TLD (one of my all-time favourite Bond movies
  • Agent WadeAgent Wade Ann ArborPosts: 321MI6 Agent
    edited January 2008
    How about some sequels that DID live up. We have FRWL to follow Dr. No. That was a far better installment. And then we have Thunderball to come after Goldfinger.

    It happened in the beginning. It could happen again.
  • yodboy007yodboy007 McMinn CountyPosts: 129MI6 Agent
    edited January 2008
    You are right, Agent Wade. FRWL did wind up better than Dr. No and I think Goldfinger and Thunderball are both excellent, but I'll give the nod to the latter.

    Licence to Kill is on the same level as The Living Daylights indeed, but this and GF to TB are probably the only exceptions of sequels living up to their predecessors.

    In my opinion, the Bond films are varied greatly when it comes to tone and quality. I find that to be a good thing. We have had streaks of greatness and mediocrity as well as back and forth stuff.

    The back and forth stuff was pretty much the way it was from YOLT all they way to MR. OTT with slight camp, then serious spy stuff. By the way, I love LALD and do not consider it to be too reliant on humor and other things like TMWTGG, even though that film is still underrated.

    The best streaks of pure greatness in my book only happened twice. The original streak of Connery's first four films is the first. Each got better and better. The other streak, albeit divided by time considerably, is the The Living Daylights, Licence to Kill, and Goldeneye streak. That one could have been even longer going back to Octopussy, but AVTAK hampers it a bit.

    The worst streak is really the only one. The streak beginning with TND to the current. This mediocre streak has not ended for me. The Brosnan films got worse and he was never able to live up to his full potential. Casino Royale took a good idea and still did not really impress me. It's like DAD took a big step in one direction and CR took a big step in another direction. Neither got it just right for me.

    Perhaps this new film can be better than CR. Maybe it will begin a new streak of greatness or maybe it will be back and forth again. I will tell you one thing. They need to ditch Purvis and Wade and get a new guy to help Haggis out because they are not cutting it. If they are still writing, the mediocrity is likely to continue if you ask me.
  • StrangewaysStrangeways London, UKPosts: 1,469MI6 Agent
    One thing that EON could consider perhaps for Bonds 23 and 24 would be to film them "back to back". This was done to great effect with Back to the Future 2 and 3, The Matrix 2 and 3 and the whole of the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

    It would save on production costs and also mean that characters could appear in both movies. Also, it would mean that we could have 2 Bond films within 12 months of each other for the first time since the 1960s. :))
  • Golden JawsGolden Jaws Posts: 6MI6 Agent
    edited January 2008
    That would be a good idea but it might rush the filming which means that the two films might not be very good.
  • HardyboyHardyboy Posts: 5,912Chief of Staff
    Nothing personal, Strangeways, but you're hardly the first person to suggest EON make "back-to-back" Bonds, and I think it's a bad idea. Bond films have typically had a finger on the pulse of the times, so they seem current and relevant. The "second half" of the two-film production may seem stale and too concerned with yesterday's news. What's more, simultaneous filming worked for Lord of the Rings because Peter Jackson had an established and mammoth-sized novel to work with--he knew ahead of time what was the beginning, middle, and end of the story. The Matrix sequels and especially the two Pirates of the Caribbean flicks that were shot back-to-back were unholy messes that couldn't tell a coherent story in one film, much less two. I say EON should leave well enough alone and concentrate on one Bond film at a time.
    Vox clamantis in deserto
  • Willie GarvinWillie Garvin Posts: 1,412MI6 Agent
    edited January 2008
    I'm not so sure filming James Bond films back to back would be failure.However,both films would absolutely need strong stories and intelligent screenplays before a camera ever started rolling.In my opinion,neither movie has to feature content that'd be so current and so relevant that they'd risk becoming dated within a few years time.Simple--yet suspenseful-- stories that do not place a great premium on the appearances of specific fashions,technology,music and automobiles, are all these films would require.In my opinion even the most "relevant" motion pictures can(and have) dated themselves all too quickly.For example,merely by virtue of ever-changing international circumstances, the James Bond films are always period pieces-even the most immediate ones,including Casino Royale.

    As noted previously,Sean Connery's first four films had the great benefit of being based on some of Ian Fleming's best novels--and aside from some reasonably minor alterations to the storylines made during the adaptation process--they were faithful to their source material.The first four books Eon filmed were also relatively recent and well known best sellers--a few of them being less than ten years old.Additionally, these films also had Connery, who quickly became the most popular actor in the world during this period.Every component fell into place.

    Eon's said in various articles and interviews that they're not interested in remaking any of their older successes, and that they have no intention of ever filming any of the "continuation" novels--prefering instead to generate their own material.Thus,the challenge remains--if Eon can develop two solid screenplays and if Craig is available(and at the right price he probably would be), then I think there's a very good reason for them film two 007 movies together.This would probably prove to be cost efficent--this was certainly the case for Zemeckis' Back to the Future" II & III, and also for the Salkind productions of The Three Musketeers and The Four Musketeers.We all know that Cubby Broccoli was as tight with a dollar as he was adventurous with his productions.His kids probably share his vision.If all the conditions prove promising,the idea of making two Bonds together might just appeal to them.

    But it all starts with the story...
  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,484MI6 Agent
    I think you've underlined the point, WG... :D
    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • StrangewaysStrangeways London, UKPosts: 1,469MI6 Agent
    Excellent! I do love to provoke debate.

    Oh, and no offence taken, thanks!
  • bluemanblueman PDXPosts: 1,667MI6 Agent
    I kinda think the way they set up CR, EON had Craig's second and third films already in mind...just a theory.
  • Willie GarvinWillie Garvin Posts: 1,412MI6 Agent
    edited February 2008
    I think you've underlined the point, WG... :D

    Oops...This is what happens when you're tired and hit the wrong key...:o

    Anyway,I agree with blueman-I think with the introduction of a potentially new criminal organization,Eon's got a pretty good idea of what they'd like to do with 007 in both Bond 22 and 23.Granted,it might only be a loose outline, but could serve as an outline for future films nonetheless.
  • yodboy007yodboy007 McMinn CountyPosts: 129MI6 Agent
    edited January 2008
    I also hope they film back-to-back 007 films so when it reaches the 50th anniversary in 2012 there will be 25 films rather than 24. I loved how there were 20 after 40 years and I would hate to see that perfect pace disappear. It may take a bit longer than I think to catch up though.
  • Dan SameDan Same Victoria, AustraliaPosts: 6,054MI6 Agent
    I was just thinking the other evening, and thought I'd provoke discussion.....

    Every time EON re-boot the franchise, the 2nd movie never lives up to our expectations. Examples:

    OHMSS -v- DAF
    TSWLM -v- MR
    TLD -v- LTK
    GE -v- TND/TWINE

    Does this mean that Bond 22 will be pale in comparison to CR? (The only exception to the rule above is I actually thought TND better than GE, but hey ho!)

    What do fellow fans think?
    Given that I'm not a huge fan of CR, I am certainly hoping that Bond 22 will be better. ;)

    Of the films that you mentioned; OHMSS is a masterpiece but DAF (although it does have some great things going for it) is nowewhere near as good. I adore TSWLM, but MR (which is not as bad IMO as some people think it is) wasn't as good. I loathe TLD, and I consider LTK (which I didn't particularly like) to be superior. That isn't saying much since IMO TLD was the second worst Bond film of all time. :# I love GE and I do consider it to be better than TND (which I'm not a big fan of) and TWINE (which I love, but not as much as GE.)
    "He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
  • Dan SameDan Same Victoria, AustraliaPosts: 6,054MI6 Agent
    John Drake wrote:
    But I would add FYEO then it's follow-up OP to your list.
    I love both films. I think that FYEO is better but I think that OP is terrific as well.
    "He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
  • Mister BiswasMister Biswas TokyoPosts: 78MI6 Agent
    To Strangways, thanks for starting such an interesting thread!

    Personally, I never saw the 007 films as sequels. Sure, you had a light progression from Dr. No to FRWL to Goldfinger. But, I always thought the connections between these films were tenuous at best. I'm thinking in particular about how "forced" Connery's line was in Goldfinger when he says to Felix something like: "They got much closer to you in Jamaica, didn't they?". Or, even Sylvia Trench's appearance in FRWL was "forced" (though I love her character!). Anyway, these films never seemed like sequels to me, but rather films in a series.

    When you get to a film like OHMSS, whose ending simply begs for a sequel in the proper sense, my sense is that OHMSS's true sequel isn't DAF but rather FYEO. Or perhaps, it's better to say that OHMSS's true sequel is LTK.

    I can only imagine how it would have impacted the series had, say, Peter Hunt had his way with DAF with George Lazenby. Or, perhaps, had a film like LTK appeared immediately after OHMSS. Would it have changed the series? Would it have adversely affected the 007 trajectory? I don't know. Thus, the same sort of issues are present with QoS as a direct sequel to Casino Royale. How will this affect the future of the series? Will it harm it? Help it?

    Perhaps I take solace (ha ha) in the fact that, if we look at the NOVEL You Only Live Twice as a sequel to OHMSS, I see how the literary character of James Bond can survive sequel treatment. In fact, the character almost begs for that kind of attention. So, now that we have the cinematic Daniel Craig incarnation that holds so much potential, I'm excited about this direction for the film series. It's almost as if we fans who wonder how a George Lazenby DAF would have turned out are getting a second chance. Only this time, we have a strong (arguably the best) Bond actor.

    One thing's for sure: the producers can potentially go anywhere they want with this character now that Casino Royale was so successful. The fact that they went with a sequel suggests that they are more concerned now with story-driven action films rather than the Moonrakers, DAD-type entertainment. While I love Moonraker and I'm beginning to warm to DAD, I've always loved the "deeper" Bond films. Anyway, hopefully, QoS will be a film that is so good on its merits that it will beg for yet another true "sequel." (though if they end QoS with Bond getting amnesia and going to China, I'll be upset).
  • cbdouble07cbdouble07 Posts: 132MI6 Agent
    Sequels being weaker than the original is almost guaranteed, as it is very rare when a sequel is better than the original. That being said, I don't consider any of the Bond films sequels to each other in any way. They are simply individual components of a series. Even with QOS continuing on from CR I wouldn't call it a sequel, simply another film in the series that happens to take place right after the previous film.

    As for the producers trying to reboot the series at other times, IMO CR is the first time they've ever tried a serious reboot. OHMSS, FYEO, and others were made to get back to the basics when the producers felt the gadgetry was getting out of hand. Never before have I heard of these being seen as reboots by the producers. They're just films where everyone wanted to go back to the basics. CR also goes back to the basics but CR is the only true reboot because it literally starts the series all over again. OHMSS doesn't do this since it obviously continues on from the other films (the various items in Bond's desk, Blofeld) and FYEO is a continuation of the other films as well (Tracy's grave). CR starts everything fresh again and is unrelated to any of the other films (except for QOS of course).
  • HigginsHiggins GermanyPosts: 16,619MI6 Agent
    edited March 2008
    I must say, that I am having the same fear in my stomach. I regret, that the discussion drifted a bit into the sequel direction, Strangeways has been right to mention reboots:


    During the 007 history, I see the following reboots after EON realized, that their movies went OTT.

    DAF - reboot OHMSS -followed by LALD well. the positive is Roger moore
    Moonraker - reboot FYEO -followed by Octopussy - less than average
    DAD - reboot CR - what will come?

    I sincerely hope, that Marc Forster will not let it happen, but I am seriously concerned.
    However I am more concerned to hear, that 007 will use an attache with secret weapons. I thought, they wanted 007 without gadgets (I know, Sony Computers and SE mobile phones are also gadgets....)
    President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.

    Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Sign In or Register to comment.