Remake of OHMSS?
jamesbondagent007
Divided States of TrumpPosts: 236MI6 Agent
Well not exactly a remake but hear me out:
Do you think it's possible Sam Mendes was persuaded to come back because of the possibility of reimagining this troubled chapter in the Bond saga? Bond fans widely regard it as one of the finest in the series, but almost universally it is hated and considered a black sheep. As a result, the story (which is crucial to understanding Bond as a character) never really made it into the public consciousness.
If you think about it, what they're trying to accomplish with this Bond reboot is essentially a revival of Fleming's literary character and a retelling of his story, updated to a post 9/11 world, for a new generation of moviegoers.
Most people who aren't Bond fanatics are unfamiliar with the idea of a literary Bond character, or his tragic story. To most of the audience, he's just a rinse and repeat action hero who pops out another movie every 2-3 years. Sam Mendes and Daniel Craig, on the other hand, seem to have a much deeper respect for the lore.
Casino Royale provided the opportunity to start from the beginning and tell the whole story over again. While Quantum got a bit derailed and took a turn toward something very different, it did provide a continuum of the character's arc. Skyfall seemed to be less of a reboot than a realignment of the series' new focus, which Mendes is continuing into Spectre.
In this new series we learn about his childhood home, the death of his parents, orphanage and subsequent 'adoption' into the secret service. We see the betrayal and death of Vesper, his first love, and a Cain and Abel sort of encounter with a man that represents the abberation he could have become. Then the death of M, Bond's only strong maternal figure. We meet the new M, Q and Moneypenny...
...and now, it seems, we will uncover SPECTRE and Blofeld, Bond's greatest nemesis, and the truth about what happened to his parents. Maybe he will get married, too.
Do you think it's possible Sam Mendes was persuaded to come back because of the possibility of reimagining this troubled chapter in the Bond saga? Bond fans widely regard it as one of the finest in the series, but almost universally it is hated and considered a black sheep. As a result, the story (which is crucial to understanding Bond as a character) never really made it into the public consciousness.
If you think about it, what they're trying to accomplish with this Bond reboot is essentially a revival of Fleming's literary character and a retelling of his story, updated to a post 9/11 world, for a new generation of moviegoers.
Most people who aren't Bond fanatics are unfamiliar with the idea of a literary Bond character, or his tragic story. To most of the audience, he's just a rinse and repeat action hero who pops out another movie every 2-3 years. Sam Mendes and Daniel Craig, on the other hand, seem to have a much deeper respect for the lore.
Casino Royale provided the opportunity to start from the beginning and tell the whole story over again. While Quantum got a bit derailed and took a turn toward something very different, it did provide a continuum of the character's arc. Skyfall seemed to be less of a reboot than a realignment of the series' new focus, which Mendes is continuing into Spectre.
In this new series we learn about his childhood home, the death of his parents, orphanage and subsequent 'adoption' into the secret service. We see the betrayal and death of Vesper, his first love, and a Cain and Abel sort of encounter with a man that represents the abberation he could have become. Then the death of M, Bond's only strong maternal figure. We meet the new M, Q and Moneypenny...
...and now, it seems, we will uncover SPECTRE and Blofeld, Bond's greatest nemesis, and the truth about what happened to his parents. Maybe he will get married, too.
Comments
They are bringing back Bond's nemesis. Surely thats enough.
No, we "learned" all of that in the earlier, more maligned GOLDENEYE.
And no, Mendes and Craig will not take on the legend of Peter Hunt's and Lazenby's work.
Nor will they ever remake GOLDFINGER or re-use the villains, either.
Your post is the closest to a realistic explanation to what is really going on in the franchise. I think you're on the right track. They will tell the story "Bond vs Blofeld", with everything it involves, and enhancing it with other characters/situations, and updating the elements, very much like they did in CR.
It will not be "OHMSS remake" or a "YOLT remake", neither the novels nor the movies as such, but telling the same story of the Ian Fleming Blofeld trilogy (TB-OHMSS-YOLT). Now they have a key asset: and established and widely accepted Bond.
1) OHMSS is one of the best Bond movies. Why remake something that's pretty much perfect?
2) Daniel Craig has already made a movie about how Bond fell in love, proposed and his lover died after a very short time. This made Bond cynical, especially towards women. It's called Casino Royale.
The reboot.
Remaking OHMSS frame by frame would be a terrible idea, I agree. Telling the story of Bond vs Blofeld in a two movie arch is an amazing idea. They will never fall for the "remake" trap.
Daniel Craig is playing James Bond. Ian Fleming created and developed that character over a number of novels. The first, as you point out, is Casino Royale, in which Bond falls in love, proposes, is betrayed and then becomes cynical towards women. In the tenth Bond novel, Ian Fleming gave Bond another chance with women. He falls in love again, proposes again, and gets married.
However, you have a point. Maybe it would be too much for Craig's Bond to go through another failed love story a couple of movies later, so they might skip the whole Tracy bit.
Totally agree! Keep the fingers off the masterpiece called OHMSS!!!
Or you make Higgins considerably angry! X-(
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
I have no problem with re-imagining Blofeld and SPECTRE for our time in two or three movies is agreat idea if it's done well.
Snow / Blofeld and leave it at that!!
"Slight tribute" if it involves Blofeld is not the way to put it, unless it's a Blofeld cameo.
OHMSS tribute act
If she marries Bond and then Blofeld kills her, that's the OHMSS plot. Why give her a new name? Would it be acceptable for non-remakers giving Tracy a new name?
Exactly. That would be a "slight tribute".
Me too. In Bond 25 I would maybe bet 10 bucks, though.
Trauma in Bond's life. I also can't see DC's Bond getting married.
They might not film it again, and DC might not get married. But Bond surely will, just because it's there in the books and it's the same world, only updated.
Exactly. Those two are pivotal moments in Bond's life. Character defining, absolutely key. Just as much as earning his 00 status.
As in there are other parts of Bond's personality not touched
In the classic series, which DC's Bond is visiting, many of the
Problems Bond had in the later books, have been nodded at with
QOS and SF.
Um, no. The plot of OHMSS is to blackmail western powers by threatening to have girls with viruses release them. Tracy's death is an ELEMENT of the story, and you can put that element into an entirely different plot.