BRING BACK Q

JAMESBOND0071

I THINK THAT THEY SHOULD BRING BACK Q AND THE THE GADGETS

Sweepy the Cat

I agree, although the next Q shouldn't try and simply replicate Desmond Llewelyn's interpretation of the role (I'm looking at you John Cleese!).

Dan Same

Please don't use caps; it's the equivalent to shouting on the internet. Anyway, I agree with you. I love Q and I don't see why he was omitted from CR and QOS. I also think that the gadgets should return. Q's critics argue that his omission was due to a desire to break away from the 'jokey' Q of the past. However, there is no reason why he has to be 'jokey.'

Don't get me wrong; I love the scenes with Q, and I think that both CR and QOS could have been improved if they had featured a scene with Q in the vein of the previous films. However, if the producers truly wanted, they could have included Q; but a different kind of Q. Afterall it would have been incredibly easy to write a Q into CR. I agree; bring him back!!! {[] {[] {[]

walther p99

Its certainly that time to go back to the standard Bond formula, which includes Q and Moneypenny.

Loeffelholz

Hugh Laurie would be my very first choice to play the gadget man, should they decide to bring the character back. As with Moneypenny, if they do, I hope they spin it differently than what we've seen in the past.

Another Loeffelholz

If they can't get Hugh Laurie, and wouldn't mind going a little younger....my schedule is wide open....I'll start sharpening up my Brit accent.
I think that role would be an absolute blast !!! :007)

JADE66

I don't think we need to see 'Q' again. Gadgets are gimmicks and gimmicks just aren't needed in light of the more serious direction the films have taken. Listening devices, hidden cameras and the like are all fine and well within the bounds of technological reality. Laser watches, invisible cars, submarine cars, ski pole rocket launchers, are all unnecessary and in my opinion detract from the pace and suspense of the story.
Bond in a running gun battle, low on ammunition and surrounded by enemies is far more suspenseful than Bond with a gee-whiz jet pack and a rocket launching armoured car.
The tech who injected Bond with a tracking device in CR is about as far as we need to go in terms of gadgets.
I know I sound like a broken record.
Still, a gadgety Bond is going to be a less human Bond. The more he is able to rely on some super gizmo the less he will have to rely on his own courage and brains.
If we go back to the Moonraker/DAD sort of tecno Bond it won't be long before we have a Bond with bionic arms and legs and libido.
Bring back Moneypenny. Make her more like the Moneypenny of the Fleming novels. Leave 'Q' out of it. Please. B-)