The Unpredictability of EON

discovolante

The most recent entry in the series, QOS, is turning out to be very polarizing among the audience. It got me to thinking about what direction EON will take the franchise in the future. The last 3 films have been totally different from one another. DAD was disliked by most fans, but ending up being successful and making tons of $$. The producers could have cranked out another formulaic film and made alot of $$ again, but they decided to completely reboot the series with CR. This movie was the polar opposite of DAD but was almost universally loved by fans and critics alike. And CR ending up being the most successful JB movie of all time. Just like after DAD, EON could have simply made QOS as a CR clone, and cashed in. Instead QOS is a movie unlike any other film in the series and so far is proving quite profitable. I guess my point is that one may disagree with their choices sometimes, but you have to credit EON for trying new things and not resting on their laurels. If you think about it, Michael and Babs are pretty brilliant because they can do just about anything they want with the franchise now. Any direction they want to go, they can. I don't know if this would have been true of the series in the 60's or 70's. Also, it keeps us JB fans guessing, which isn't always a bad thing. Let me ask you this, would anybody prefer a return to the days of every 2 years there being a predictable, formulaic Bond film, or does anyone agree with me that this is an exciting time to be a Bond fan?

rennervision

Thanks to the upredictability of EON, I can now watch Layer Cake and pretend its a prequel to CR. Daniel Craig's character is never named (which, oddly, kind of ties in with the CR theme song "You Know My Name"), and since all Bond tradition has been thrown out the window, I can just pretend 007 used to work in organized crime before joining MI6.

discovolante

rennervision wrote:

Thanks to the upredictability of EON, I can now watch Layer Cake and pretend its a prequel to CR. Daniel Craig's character is never named (which, oddly, kind of ties in with the CR theme song "You Know My Name"), and since all Bond tradition has been thrown out the window, I can just pretend 007 used to work in organized crime before joining MI6.

That's pretty cool....I never thought of that.

Sweepy the Cat

discovolante wrote:

rennervision wrote:

Thanks to the upredictability of EON, I can now watch Layer Cake and pretend its a prequel to CR. Daniel Craig's character is never named (which, oddly, kind of ties in with the CR theme song "You Know My Name"), and since all Bond tradition has been thrown out the window, I can just pretend 007 used to work in organized crime before joining MI6.

That's pretty cool....I never thought of that.

The Bond film of 2004

Hardyboy

I've been thinking about the "unpredictability" of the producers myself, but I'd go a little further than you, discovolante. While the first two movies of the Mickey and Babs era were pretty formulaic Bond films (though GoldenEye--on which Cubby Broccoli was an in-name-only producer--benefited from introducing an entirely new "Bond team" and updated world for the hero), I think they began to try to break the mold with The World Is Not Enough, creating a female villain/love interest and exploring Bond's emotional side. Also, as much as some people hate DAD, the producers did try two interesting things: having Bond held prisoner and made into a suspect by his own people; and bringing the outlandish elements of Moonraker and other outre Bond offerings into the twenty-first century and playing them more seriously than was done in the past. Mickey and Babs are always trying to do something a little different with Bond. Give 'em credit for that.

Oh, I think Rennervision's "prequel" idea is pretty cool myself, but for it to work,

you have to assume Craig's character didn't get killed at the end of the movie. And, if he didn't, where's the scar?

rennervision

Hardyboy wrote:

I think they began to try to break the mold with The World Is Not Enough

I rank both TWINE and DAD above TND for this very reason. TND is fun, but I felt the producers were playing it too safe with that one. The unconventional elements in the others really make them stand out. Everyone hates DAD, but I love Bond walking into a Hong Kong hotel looking like a homeless Jim Morrison and asking for his usual room. )

Loeffelholz

Here's to The Unpredictability of EON {[]

They've earned my respect for their wildly counterintuitive approach to the films of late---and kudos to them for garnering yet another smash with The Reviled QoS^TM :007)

Fascinatingly, they're beginning to put themselves into a spot by raising the ante each time...although Craig has hinted at something more traditional next time, I can't wait to see what they do...

Napoleon Plural

Well, we'll have to wait. Could be three years 'til the next one. In which case it's hard to see it being a direct continuation taking place two months or ten mins after the final scene of QoS. Don't know how that will work out.

Mickey and Babs switch director each time; it's not always a vision thing. They asked Martin Campbell to return for this one but he refused. For me, it makes the series similar to 1967-73; different director, different genre slightly, so Bond become more iconic but less personable. The universe changes each time slightly.

discovolante

Maybe the most unpredictable thing they could do is make a "traditional" Bond film. Gunbarrel, PTS, naked girl title credits, scene in M's office, a new Moneypenny, a visit to Q branch, hot Bond girl, world domination aspiring villian, 2 or 3 big action sequences, finale. Throw in a Bond, James Bond and a shaken, not stirred, and this movie could write itself:)

rennervision

discovolante - I say they can have all those elements and still be unpredictable. Just to expand a little bit on what Hardyboy was saying, I think we can go back a little further before TWINE. Clearly EON was wanting to try something different during the Dalton era, while still remaining faithful to the Bond tradition. This is why LTK is a polarizing film for some, and the result was a more conventional film with GE.

yodboy007

I feel that the unpredictability of EON is one of the many things that makes this franchise so great. I attribute it to the franchise's longevity. If these films became predictable then they would have failed long ago. I have said time and time again that these films are made in cycles. One film could be a serious spy thriller, the next could be a more comedic and light-hearted adventure and another could be an OTT extravagant epic with borderline sci-fi elements. These films have rotated between three or four different approaches and it is always interesting to see which one they make next. Sometimes the same type of film will be made two or three times in a row while another type may rarely come about, but I think we all know that if they were all the same time and time again it would have gotten old a long time ago.

As many of you know I have not been the biggest fan of the two most recent Bond films. They are very unconventional, serious and quite gritty. However, I still enjoyed them and the experience of seeing them be made and observing everyone's reaction to them is always a lot of fun. I know I would have never predicted a lot of the things that have happened in this franchise the past few years!

So, yes, praise to EON for their unpredictability.

chrisno1

discovolante wrote:

Maybe the most unpredictable thing they could do is make a "traditional" Bond film. Gunbarrel, PTS, naked girl title credits, scene in M's office, a new Moneypenny, a visit to Q branch, hot Bond girl, world domination aspiring villian, 2 or 3 big action sequences, finale. Throw in a Bond, James Bond and a shaken, not stirred, and this movie could write itself:)

The way they are heading I can see this happenning. Also got a suspicion they'll call it Property Of A Lady to continue the "007" logo attachment. However, if they want to be unpredictable, adapting John Gardner's For Special Services and replacing Spectre with Quantum would work nicely; not sure where Mr White would fit in.

Loeffelholz

If they do a three-year gap before #23, that means they won't have a film out for the series' 50th Anniversary. Perhaps this is a good thing, as they'll be less tempted to produce another 'celebratory/tribute'-type Bond like DAD.

Personally, though, I'd rather see them stay on a two-year schedule for the next couple---striking the Craig iron while it's hot, so to speak; he could have four films under his belt by the time he's only 44, with his fourth (final?) one on the 50th Anniversary...

zaphod

discovolante wrote:

Maybe the most unpredictable thing they could do is make a "traditional" Bond film. Gunbarrel, PTS, naked girl title credits, scene in M's office, a new Moneypenny, a visit to Q branch, hot Bond girl, world domination aspiring villian, 2 or 3 big action sequences, finale. Throw in a Bond, James Bond and a shaken, not stirred, and this movie could write itself:)

Very funny. Made me laugh. )

zaphod

I read somewhere that writing for 23 starts in the new year. I think I would like them to start with a well advanced script before selecting a Director. Eon seem to work in strange ways, with a number of commentators and potential Actors & Directors expressing concern re lack of finalised script very late in the day. Of course the writers strike played a big part this time. However I remember during CR that filming had begun before casting for Vesper had been sorted out. It always gets there in the end, and the films hit the screens when they are supposed to, but for me It all seems a bit haphazard. I read in Esquire that Daniel was responsible for a lot of his Dialouge in QOS as it was being written on the hoof.

I'm not a film expert, but everyone knew that the writers strike was looming, I would rather they adopt what I believe used to be the practice of developing the next Bond movie while the current on is being shot. I think the timelines are very tight if you start shooting in January for a release in late October. It was clear that Forster felt rushed (he's on record as saying so) with QOS.

I'd really like them to give themselves more time, and make some considered decisions re how to take Bond forward. I'd prefer not to wait three years, but would prefer that to a rushed job.

Loeffelholz

The Writer's Guild will not strike between now and #23...so there's that consolation...

And I agree with the poster who said that perhaps the most unpredictable thing Eon could do would to be to make a more 'traditional' Bond picture. Hopefully Craig will see this, too, as a challenge worth undertaking.

I wouldn't mind a bit of tie-straightening next time round :007)

blueman

I think the modern-era EON (post-GE) has indeed shattered the old EON's ponderous predictability, to good effect $$-wise if not every effort being as successful a Bond adventure as this fan (others too, though they might disagree on particulars) would want them to be. The Brosnan films seem, in hindsight, to be the franchise trying to find its new-era footing, to varying degrees of effectiveness. As a whole they suffer from a not-clear throughline as if EON wasn't quite sure, film to film, what they wanted to do with the new Bond, and generally whatever road they did go down, they went half-heartedly. I'm thankful that with Craig they've at least chosen a path and gone-the-heck-down it, the willy-nillyness of Brosnan Bond had me seasick towards the end (or perhaps that was just Tamahori's weird zoom-cuts initializing each action scene? ). I'd like to think that Babs and MGW have figured out, don't do things halfway. I think that's why I fear Loeff's prediction of a more traditional Bond film for 23, they have a good thing going with Craig's Bond both artistically and at the BO, they should keep with it and be very careful with any deviations. Judging on recent past films, they don't juggle multiple-aspect Bond well at all (even if they have all made serious bank).

heartbroken_mr_drax

I think that the unpredictability of EON is a good thing, but I also think that they arent being too unpredictable....

The problem I think EON are avoiding is the assembly line of films between DAF and DAD (with the exception of LTK and TWINE) as they obviously tire.

Sure they are popular with non Bond fans, but the Bond character goes nowhere and develops like a dead tree. Where they risk having movies like MR, AVTAK and TND which just fill the void and copy the previous success.

So take LTK as an example for the direction they are heading in now. Not the quality ofcourse but what they are attempting to do. This time they are pulling it off successfully.

The latest films keep audiences guessing which is what id rather have...not go and see the types of films every 2-3 years that follow the course of formula like YOLT, DAF, MR, Octopussy, AVTAK, GE, TND, DAD.

Excuse critisims of old Bonds through here, I love most of them they are just good for comparison.

Loeffelholz

blueman wrote:

...I fear Loeff's prediction of a more traditional Bond film for 23, they have a good thing going with Craig's Bond both artistically and at the BO, they should keep with it and be very careful with any deviations.

A fair point. The good news is that they wouldn't really have to do much---I'm not advocating a full-blown tradition-fest. Just a bit here and there. I think that if they do something really 'literary Fleming,' like busting Bond's pinky finger ( :v ), it might take the curse off a shot of a tie being straightened.

There's a lot of uncertainty about where Craig-Bond might go next, but within that uncertainty lies a good deal of exciting promise.

Barbel

heartbroken_mr_drax wrote:

So take LTK as an example for the direction they are heading in now. Not the quality ofcourse but what they are attempting to do. This time they are pulling it off successfully.

Yup, that's about the size of it. Or to put it more Flemingesquely ( ;% ), so that's the score...
QoS is a direct relative of LTK- Bond seeking revenge in a Latin American setting, and losing sight of the bigger picture in his own personal vendetta. QoS is the more successful of the two films, and not merely financially.

So having pulled this one off, where do EON go next? Historically, back to a more traditional Bond caper (GE was more trad Bond than LTK). Having ditched many of the classic elements, they will begin to re-introduce them with the next picture: what we don't know is how gradually that will happen. For some of us, not quickly enough. For others, too soon. While no-one (I hope) advocates double-taking pigeons and invisible cars, simple pleasures such as THE LINE and the gunbarrel are surely not too much to ask for.

heartbroken_mr_drax

^^ Thats right. Although I hope they don't go too far down the traditional Bond route like GE, but maybe more of a return to the kind in CR, obviously without the becoming a double-o.

Loeffelholz

Barbel wrote:

So having pulled this one off, where do EON go next? Historically, back to a more traditional Bond caper (GE was more trad Bond than LTK). Having ditched many of the classic elements, they will begin to re-introduce them with the next picture: what we don't know is how gradually that will happen. For some of us, not quickly enough. For others, too soon. While no-one (I hope) advocates double-taking pigeons and invisible cars, simple pleasures such as THE LINE and the gunbarrel are surely not too much to ask for.

My brother and I were talking about this very thing just last night. Another Loeff and I absolutely insist upon the traditional gunbarrel at the opening of the picture.

We both loved the different take we got of it in CR...but we both feel that, while the gunbarrel at the end of QoS is cool and all that, it didn't score enough of an artistic 'bullseye' to make it worth the gambit. In our opinion, QoS gained next to nothing by not having the gunbarrel circle open up on that great flying shot over the lake.

To continue to mess with this particular element runs the risk of p*****g off two of the biggest proponents of Eon's risk-taking that there are in all of fandom :v B-)

Barbel

Loeffelholz wrote:

Another Loeff and I absolutely insist upon the traditional gunbarrel at the opening of the picture.

We both loved the different take we got of it in CR...but we both feel that, while the gunbarrel at the end of QoS is cool and all that, it didn't score enough of an artistic 'bullseye' to make it worth the gambit. In our opinion, QoS gained next to nothing by not having the gunbarrel circle open up on that great flying shot over the lake.

To continue to mess with this particular element runs the risk of p*****g off two of the biggest proponents of Eon's risk-taking that there are in all of fandom :v B-)

Hear hear. {[]

blueman

Barbel wrote:

heartbroken_mr_drax wrote:

So take LTK as an example for the direction they are heading in now. Not the quality ofcourse but what they are attempting to do. This time they are pulling it off successfully.

Yup, that's about the size of it. Or to put it more Flemingesquely ( ;% ), so that's the score...
QoS is a direct relative of LTK- Bond seeking revenge in a Latin American setting, and losing sight of the bigger picture in his own personal vendetta. QoS is the more successful of the two films, and not merely financially.

So having pulled this one off, where do EON go next? Historically, back to a more traditional Bond caper (GE was more trad Bond than LTK). Having ditched many of the classic elements, they will begin to re-introduce them with the next picture: what we don't know is how gradually that will happen. For some of us, not quickly enough. For others, too soon. While no-one (I hope) advocates double-taking pigeons and invisible cars, simple pleasures such as THE LINE and the gunbarrel are surely not too much to ask for.

I realize there are personal issues Bond's working out in QOS, but I don't see revenge-seeking to be the defining motivation for him. If anything, the reverse: while MI6 gets its collective hands tied halfway through the film by the Americans, Bond simply sticks to it - sure there's the double motivation, but he's clear enough to M more than once, these are the bad guys I'm after, the ones who tried to kill you, and I'm not stopping cuz the British government's been bought off with a few barrels of oil. That's devotion to duty IMO, and not going off on a revenge-spree. Very Fleming too, that IMO.