Craig: #23...and more!

Loeffelholz

Great news for fans of the Craigger...he's not going anywhere {[]

Great stuff here, at AICN---who share a brief interview with Craig, Marc Forster and Barbara Broccoli...with possible (spoiler) news about post-QoS villainy:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/38427

Moonraker 5

Ooh, interesting!! So with

the end of this story arc, it leaves the next few films to be "stand alone". Looks like they're hoping to avoid the same mistake that OHMSS/DAF went down.

Though I do have to say, the prospect of Daniel Craig as James Bond 007 going into space on Virgin Galactic has now officially been raised |)

But can I just say - SOD OFF RICHARD BL00DY BRANSON!!!! X-( Has old beardy got it written into his product placement contracts to turn up in every effing film? 8-)

Lexi

Loeffelholz wrote:

Great news for fans of the Craigger...he's not going anywhere {[]

Hurrah, hurrah...I'm a very happy fan-girl!

I knew he wouldn't let us down.....:x

Sir Miles

I'm glad it's been confirmed that DC will carry on as Bond. I just hope they keep the quality of the scripts up.

Barbel

Dum-de-dum.... just sitting waiting patiently till Bond is back. It all goes in cycles, y'know.

(And I hope to be proved wrong when QoS surfaces. It may be great, who can tell?)

Sir Miles

Barbel wrote:

Dum-de-dum.... just sitting waiting patiently till Bond is back. It all goes in cycles, y'know.

(And I hope to be proved wrong when QoS surfaces. It may be great, who can tell?)

That's so right, Barbel - at the moment I seem to have my Bond. I'll cherish it while I can...

Loeffelholz

Sir Miles wrote:

Barbel wrote:

Dum-de-dum.... just sitting waiting patiently till Bond is back. It all goes in cycles, y'know.

(And I hope to be proved wrong when QoS surfaces. It may be great, who can tell?)

That's so right, Barbel - at the moment I seem to have my Bond. I'll cherish it while I can...

Spot on. Everybody gets a turn, it seems...my least favourite Bond was also the longest-tenured When you're drawing the short straw, try to find something to enjoy. I always did, no matter how bleak it seemed to get B-)

DAWUSS

Well, at least when we return to the standalone films I won't have to worry about this reboot stuff any more.

Gassy Man

Craig's the kind of fellow who will get better with age, too, meaning the Bonds are likely to be pretty good -- so long as they don't get cartoony again.

Loeffelholz

Gassy Man wrote:

Craig's the kind of fellow who will get better with age, too, meaning the Bonds are likely to be pretty good -- so long as they don't get cartoony again.

If they even start to trend that way, I think Craig will probably bail---which is a good thing: History should never record a 'bored' Craig performance in the role.

Sweepy the Cat

http://www.mi6.co.uk/news/index.php?itemid=6866&t=mi6&s=news

Lookd like he's going to be Bond until the '50 years, 24 Films' celebration LOL

Loeffelholz

Still hoping for at least seven from Craigger, to tie Roger... :v

Sweepy the Cat

Personnaly I don't want another Bond to hit the big 5-0

Number24

I think 3-5 films for Craig probably is right. hopes are (like someone wrote)that Craig will have the wisdom to quit before he gets bored.

Thunderbird 2

I have liked al the actors as Bond, but Craig is the Bond I can relate to on several levels. I don't think he would commit himself as he has if things didn't work.

Just see his previous work!

Loeffelholz

Looks like, as I'd hoped, we haven't seen the end of Quantum when the QoS closing credits roll:

http://commanderbond.net/article/5670

I think this is great news, if it pans out. It's too good an idea to let fizzle after two pictures.

spy009

I hope he does more then Moore............

Slyguy3129

(This post of course is my own humble opinion. What I enjoy and you enjoy may very well differ. We have that right, please do not take it as an attack or me forcing my opinion on you, or saying yours doesn't matter. I am in no way trying to offend anyone with my post. So if it does offend you, then no, I do not apologize it is just my opinion take it with salt. Thank You.)

So they aren't going to make anymore "sequels"? That is a real shame, that is what I enjoyed about this Bond movie. For the first time ever the previous Bond movie had relevance on the current Bond film.

Don't get me wrong I love the "old" Bonds. They were action movies and it was fun to watch them and still is. Those got me started on Bond. But after I read the books, and saw the potential that the books had and then look at the corresponding movies. While they worked then, by all means they do not work anymore, period, and I personally hope we never see Bond like he was "then". Bond is charming and gentlemanly and somewhat humorous, but with a touch of cruelty. I don't want to see another funny Bond, or an Airline Captain Bond, or an over sexed Bond. I enjoyed the gadgets then they were fun. But I don't want a gadget Bond, I want a Bond who has to use his own wits ans skills to survive. The one thing that I absolutely hate (honest to God hate) about the old Bond movies, is that the previous movie has no relevance on the current movie. I mean in OHMSS his wife is murdered. The next movie not even a mention of her. I can't stand that. Of course I'm also one of those people who actually enjoyed the fact that the Gun barrel was at the end of QOS not the beginning

(And if you were to attempt to understand rather than screaming tradition, you would see the point in it being at the end. i.e A True gun barrel seq at the end signifies that the Bond in CR and QOS was who Bond was. Now that the true GBS appeared at the end of QOS showing that Bond has completely matured into his 007 role. Showing that he is the Bond that we know from past films. To me that makes him more real, now that I have seen where he is from and why he does the things he does.)

I would hope by what they mean by "stand alone" is that the missions will no longer carry over like from CR-QOS. But that the previous film still has some relevance (yes I like that word). One more time for record sake, RELEVANCE! That all that a wish if anything that they keep the past two films relevant and not just some abstract film that is brief referenced by a quip one-liner.

I have said all that to say this. My father, a long standing Connery fan made mention to me after we saw QOS. "Wow its not a Super-Spy sort of Kid Movie anymore. Its an honest to God movie with character and plot and action!" To hear this from my father, who is 62 and stubborn and hates change, proved to me that a Bond movie could be MORE than just a Bond movie. I just hope that if they do make the movies stand-alone that they have some depth to them. And if they don't, well then it was nice to have twice, and I will still buy them and watch them because no matter what I love Bond movies. Old, new, Good, bad, Traditional, non traditional, Funny, serious, doesn't matter. Come to think of it, Bond is like crack, you can never get enough of it. {[]

Agent Wade

I remember it used to take IMDB forever to update upcoming movie pages, especially the Bond films and everybody KNEW they were coming, just a matter of when. Well it seems that the message has been heard, because the page for Bond 23 (though incredibly sparse right now) is up.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1074638/

Here's the weird part. There's already a new FAQ started, and it says that Brendan Fraser has voiced a desire to be part of the next movie. Hello? When did this happen and where was that discovered?

yodboy007

I think Craig will do Bonds 23 and 24 and bow out after the 50th anniversary. I feel four films will be a good number for him because while I do not like him enough to stay around longer than Brosnan, I do want him to be able to do AT LEAST two regular Bond films with all the traditional elements like the opening gunbarrel, the James Bond Theme, Q, Monepenny and the ordering of a martini, shakken not stirred.

They need to get a new M for Bond 24 (that is if Dench does Bond 23) so Craig can work with the new M for at least one movie. Doing this will help build a bridge of continuity over to Bond #7 from Craig's Bond. We need that after so many were confused with Dench's M commanding Brosnan and Craig. With a new Q and Moneypenny in two films and a new M in one film Craig will be able have an era identified with those MI6 staff actors. Those MI6 staffers will hopefully stick around for a few more Bond actors as well. They need to cast young for all three of those parts. I liked the old days when we had Bernard, Desmond and Lois together for over ten movies!

Waltherppk007

I'm glad Craig is back for more. I really hope they don't let Forster near another Bond set ever again though.

scaramanga1

I will be happy with four Craig outings as 007 -but would rather have more -but realise that if he manages a fifth that will probably be truly his last as any after that he will I imagine look too old -and despite being in great shape now -the enthusiasm for all that work will no doubt be on some sort of decline -its only natural. But then again if they film 24 and 25 back to back - I'm sure he could squeeze the fifth in -but I can't see the franchise doing this as they always want to see how each movie does before the commit to the next.

blueman

Slyguy3129 wrote:

My father, a long standing Connery fan made mention to me after we saw QOS. "Wow its not a Super-Spy sort of Kid Movie anymore. Its an honest to God movie with character and plot and action!" To hear this from my father, who is 62 and stubborn and hates change, proved to me that a Bond movie could be MORE than just a Bond movie.

Very nice post, thought this above part in particular could bear repeating - a lot! {[]

Surprising the amount of actual hate the film is getting, reminds me of the initial reaction to Craig's casting (is there a QOS-is-not-Bond website yet? ). One would think all Fleming ever wrote was fluffy kittens and cheerful winks the way some of the reviewers go on about missing traditional Bond stuff. Nice to hear other old farts can appreciate this new take on Bond, and very curious to see what EON does with the next film.

Gassy Man

Slyguy3129 wrote:

So they aren't going to make anymore "sequels"? That is a real shame, that is what I enjoyed about this Bond movie. For the first time ever the previous Bond movie had relevance on the current Bond film . . . I mean in OHMSS his wife is murdered. The next movie not even a mention of her. I can't stand that.

Diamonds are Forever opens with Bond, presumably in Japan (in an allusion to the novel You Only Live Twice), hunting down Blofeld, who appears to be globe-trotting to get away from him -- presumably for killing Bond's wife. From Russia with Love references Bond's dispatching of Dr. No and has the Sylvia Trench character, Goldfinger references Dr. No, etc. These aren't sequels in the truest sense, but they do establish continuity among the films, which gets more and more flimsy as the series continues.

Here's the problem with constantly making sequels -- it takes two years or more to produce a Bond film nowadays, much too long because everyone ages, the audience forgets key details from the previous films, times and styles change, etc. And sometimes the wait is unsatisfying or leave loose ends both plotwise and emotionally.

I was terribly disappointed with the Star Trek sequels in the 80s, for instance, where a great film, Star Trek II, itself a sequel to a TV episode, did not lead to greater films but much weaker (though ironically popular) ones in the third and fourth of the series, so that ultimately, it took six years to complete a story that onscreen happens within six months.

Shatner obviously got fatter, hair styles changed, the concepts seemed to drag on, and even then, elements weren't tied together very well -- in that space of time, Kirk loses and gets back his best friend, gets a son and loses him, meets an old flame but loses her and gets a new one but loses her, saves the universe as we know it twice, goes from admiral to captain, travels in time, lives on an alien world, gets his ship back, steals it, blows it up, and gets a brand new one, etc. -- and the emotional resonance of these events is hardly dealt with, except for a shorthand scene here or two that explains emotions but does not sustain them.

Star Trek is a different "universe" than James Bond, but as popular entertainment with a little more thoughfulness than most, share similarities as a franchise to Bond. Given what we received, I eminently would have preferred standalone films that while connected to previous ones took the characters to newer and better places.

Loeffelholz

Whilst beginning his junkets for 'Defiance,' Craigger's talking a bit about Bond #23...

http://www.collider.com/entertainment/news/article.asp/aid/10063/tcid/1

Q and Moneypenny continue to be the buzz for speculation...and the article's author has an idea about Q's origins

We'll see! Meanwhile, I'm thrilled at the prospect of a continuing relationship with Jeffrey Wright's Felix Leiter B-)

blueman

Seems like everybody's on the same page re done with the CR/QOS storyline: Forster cutting the last scene, Craig saying he's done with it, etc. Which leaves me very very curious about what's next for Bond... B-)

Great place to be. :007)

HowardB

According to that interview, Craig seems to be in agreement with many AJB'ers regarding the introduction of Q and Moneypenny. He seems to be actually turning out to be quite the Bond fan and appears to really care about where the series goes. The idea of introducing Q and Moneypenny with some backstory could work very well...it would also give the writers an opportunity to plausibly fit these two charactors into the rebooted Bond universe without it being forced.

frostbitten

"Let’s try and find where Moneypenny came from and where Q comes from. Let’s do all that and have some fun with it"

Wow! I have to admit that I didn't expect to hear that from DC. It's great news to see that he also wants to bring some fun back to the films.

Hey Daniel, I might have just the script for you in the Lit Forum...

Ok, sorry about the shameless plug!

Sweepy the Cat

frostbitten wrote:

"Let’s try and find where Moneypenny came from and where Q comes from. Let’s do all that and have some fun with it"

Wow! I have to admit that I didn't expect to hear that from DC. It's great news to see that he also wants to bring some fun back to the films.

Hey Daniel, I might have just the script for you in the Lit Forum...

Ok, sorry about the shameless plug!

I would like something like this in B23:
Bond entering M's office.
Bond: 'Who's that nice lady in Villers office?'
M: 'Villers got promoted. Miss Moneypenny is his replacement'.
...........

I'm not sure of the comeback of Q. But (a new) Moneypenny would be fun.

youknowmyname

Sweepy the Cat wrote:

frostbitten wrote:

"Let’s try and find where Moneypenny came from and where Q comes from. Let’s do all that and have some fun with it"

Wow! I have to admit that I didn't expect to hear that from DC. It's great news to see that he also wants to bring some fun back to the films.

Hey Daniel, I might have just the script for you in the Lit Forum...

Ok, sorry about the shameless plug!

I would like something like this in B23:
Bond entering M's office.
Bond: 'Who's that nice lady in Villers office?'
M: 'Villers got promoted. Miss Moneypenny is his replacement'.
...........

I'm not sure of the comeback of Q. But (a new) Moneypenny would be fun.

I like the dialogue there Sweepy, nice.


Now, about this not being a 'sequel' or 'trilogy'. Craig still mentions the Quantum organization, so I am pretty sure they will be going after the same guys but without Vesper involved in it at all, Bond is obviously over that with the dropping of the necklace.

Do you think Quantum will continue though? I sure hope so, otherwise there are all types of loose ends about this organization that we never get to find out, nor do we get to see what happens to Mr. White. That would be disappointing indeed.

bacaret

everything with q and moneypenny is just speculation but the best thing is daniel craig is raring to go for bond 23!!!!!!! YES!!!!!!