after craig...carry on or reboot

hot crossed bond

when DC has been declassified and his tenure is up...how does it continue for continuity sake without a reboot? a lot of talk here about the age of the next actor...well DC will be 50 by bond 25 at least.

The Red Kind

I think they could go either way with it, but personally I'd prefer not to see another reboot.

I hope Ralph Fiennes sticks around long term as M and with the both Naomie Harris and Ben Whishaw being younger than DC, another younger actor could easily fill the role of Bond without too many issues. I like a certain continuity. Of course a lot may depend upon whether the supporting cast actually want to carry on in their roles after Bond 25.

I wouldn't want to see a reboot for reboot's sake. Whenever a new James Bond appears, I've never needed it drummed into me that this is a new fresh faced man, this is his back story etc. In my eyes James Bond is James Bond whoever plays him. I can appreciate the producers like to freshen things up every now and again and I agree that's needed at times. But a reboot after five films is probably not necessary.

AlphaOmegaSin

Too many Reboots spoil the Broth

The Red Kind

AlphaOmegaSin wrote:

Too many Reboots spoil the Broth

Exactly!

MilleniumForce

Casting a younger bond than the previous bond has never really been a problem before.

Thunderpussy

" Then a rebirth, a new world." to quote Mr Drax

AlphaOmegaSin

Heartbroken

chrisisall

MilleniumForce wrote:

Casting a younger bond than the previous bond has never really been a problem before.

Yeah, just do what they did with Dalton. Worked then. -{

Blackleiter

chrisisall wrote:

MilleniumForce wrote:

Casting a younger bond than the previous bond has never really been a problem before.

Yeah, just do what they did with Dalton. Worked then. -{

Yep! -{

Gassy Man

I suspect they will continue the series but with a different actor, which means they are likely to cast someone with similar physical qualities to Craig but more likely younger.

chrisisall

Gassy Man wrote:

I suspect they will continue the series but with a different actor, which means they are likely to cast someone with similar physical qualities to Craig but more likely younger.

No! Taller & darker hair.

Blackleiter

Gassy Man wrote:

I suspect they will continue the series but with a different actor, which means they are likely to cast someone with similar physical qualities to Craig but more likely younger.

And hopefully similar acting ability as well.

superado

Sorry for what I'm about to say, but just by the way they've pulled, stretched and knocked the Bond continuity off center a few times, I wouldn't mind future movies being set free from any timeline and perhaps making several sefl-contained series, trilogies, etc. I'd like to see re-tellings of the novels and short-stories, maybe brought up to date or maybe going retro. As I've said in another thread, we've entered the post-modern Bond era with the reboot and I think that compromised the artistic integrity of the series so that now, anything goes.

chrisisall

superado wrote:

we've entered the post-modern Bond era with the reboot and I think that compromised the artistic integrity of the series so that now, anything goes.

I agree. Let's have a mix of period piece (a' la UNCLE), new, even futuristic! :007)

BIG TAM

I don't see the point of reboots but it seemed to work well for CASINO ROYALE, partly due to its origin tale not being laboured. It's Daniel Craig's first mission, not necessarily James Bond's. But I wouldn't see the point in starting all over again with Bond's 00-status, etc. What I would do is change the style of the films so the new actor can stamp his own identity. Ditch the grittiness & pursue a lighter tone perhaps... Unless they decide to cast a Daniel Craig clone, which I think would be a mistake. For what it's worth, I like the look of Dan Stevens. He was a revelation in THE GUEST.

AlphaOmegaSin

superado wrote:

Sorry for what I'm about to say, but just by the way they've pulled, stretched and knocked the Bond continuity off center a few times, I wouldn't mind future movies being set free from any timeline and perhaps making several sefl-contained series, trilogies, etc. I'd like to see re-tellings of the novels and short-stories, maybe brought up to date or maybe going retro. As I've said in another thread, we've entered the post-modern Bond era with the reboot and I think that compromised the artistic integrity of the series so that now, anything goes.

I would like to see more self contained Stories after Craig leaves -{

Firemass

AlphaOmegaSin wrote:

Too many Reboots spoil the Broth

The series has re-booted itself a few times in smaller, less noticeable ways than CR

First re-boot: 1971 DAF Bring back Connery. Add humor and comedy.

Second re-boot: 1977 TSWLM Re-introduce Roger Moore. Break out of the slumping, campy Guy Hamilton Trilogy

Third re-boot: 1981 FYEO Less gadgets and glamour, more realistic spy plot line.

Fourth re-boot: 1989 LTK Crank up the violence and bloodshed.

Fifth re-boot: 1995 Goldeneye. Can Bond survive in the 90's?

AlphaOmegaSin

Apart from GE, I wouldn't call them Re boots. Up until LTK, they had References to Tracy. The Brosnan Films apart from TWINE, had some kind of Reference to Past Trauma in Bonds Life.

FelixLeiter ♀

I wouldn't be completely against a reboot after Craig but it would depend how they finished his final film. For instance, the end of Skyfall leaves us very much set up to continue into the next Craig film and it would seem odd if it had been Craig's final film. If there is a reboot planned by the time he's leaving then it would be nice if his final film had a sense of finality about it. I don't think they need to reboot with every change of actor now but after five films and 10+ years I'd be open to it after Craig.
On choice of actor after Craig, I think they definitely need to go for someone younger. The gaps between films aren't two years anymore and god knows what Craig will look like by the time he finishes. He might have a great body but his face was certainly showing his age a bit in Skyfall. The grey stubble really annoys me! If someone is going to be playing Bond for 15 years they'd be better off picking someone who is nearer 30 than 40.

Firemass

AlphaOmegaSin wrote:

Apart from GE, I wouldn't call them Re boots. Up until LTK, they had References to Tracy. The Brosnan Films apart from TWINE, had some kind of Reference to Past Trauma in Bonds Life.

You're placing too much importance on Tracy, IMO.

The series was doing just fine until Bond had to do a bloody stupid thing and get married!

Thunderpussy

Well it was his creator's idea.

AlphaOmegaSin

Yes

0073

Reboot, absolutely! Now that Bonds are great movies again, I say reboot. Cast Adam Sandler as Bond.... no, no, wait! Chris Rock as Bond (because we want a black Bond now) and bring back gadgets, quips and the twinkle in the eye!!!


8-)

chrisisall

0073 wrote:

Reboot, absolutely! Now that Bonds are great movies again, I say reboot. Cast Adam Sandler as Bond.... no, no, wait! Chris Rock as Bond (because we want a black Bond now) and bring back gadgets, quips and the twinkle in the eye!!!


8-)

You must give me the name of your anger management professional.

Thunderpussy

I think Craig had quite a twinkle in his eye in Skyfall !

Blackleiter

Thunderpussy wrote:

Well it was his creator's idea.

{[]

75vette

Maybe it's because I'm getting older (strange how that happens), but I would hate to see a Bond younger than Craig was when he started in the CR reboot. Though it's one of my top 5 Bond films, imho OHMSS almost misses because Lazenby was so young (29). True, Connery wasn't much older during his first run (DN 31, FRWL 32, GF 33, TB 34, YOLT 35/36), but he came across as more mature and Fleming-Bond-like. While Roger Moore started out okay (LALD 44), he should have hung up his gun well before he did (AVTAK 56). The difference in Craig at 44 and Moore at 44 is epic. Dalton (40-42) and Brosnan (41-49) seemed to be the perfect age for the mid-life Bond most think of when Bond comes to mind. However, when all is said and done, I feel Craig has embodied Bond perfectly (37 with the CR reboot) and 44 in SF. He will be 46-47 in SP which means he should have more than a few years left in him. Though he's only slated for one more film following SP, I hope they will pick him up for a couple more before going younger.

Spoff

Carry on for sure.

I think they have made DC "become" Bond one time too many. Once at the end of Casino Royale, and then again at the end of Skyfall.

0073

chrisisall wrote:

You must give me the name of your anger management professional.

) ) ) ) I will, she´ll do wonders to you!!!

The Red Kind

75vette wrote:

Maybe it's because I'm getting older (strange how that happens), but I would hate to see a Bond younger than Craig was when he started in the CR reboot. Though it's one of my top 5 Bond films, imho OHMSS almost misses because Lazenby was so young (29). True, Connery wasn't much older during his first run (DN 31, FRWL 32, GF 33, TB 34, YOLT 35/36), but he came across as more mature and Fleming-Bond-like. While Roger Moore started out okay (LALD 44), he should have hung up his gun well before he did (AVTAK 56). The difference in Craig at 44 and Moore at 44 is epic. Dalton (40-42) and Brosnan (41-49) seemed to be the perfect age for the mid-life Bond most think of when Bond comes to mind. However, when all is said and done, I feel Craig has embodied Bond perfectly (37 with the CR reboot) and 44 in SF. He will be 46-47 in SP which means he should have more than a few years left in him. Though he's only slated for one more film following SP, I hope they will pick him up for a couple more before going younger.

I think 34-37 is probably a good age for Bond actors in their first film. Although I agree Lazenby looked perfect in OHMSS at just 29. And, as with Connery, I guess just looked and acted more maturely than his years.

Personally, as much as I've enjoyed DC's tenure and think he'll still look fine in Bond 25, I think it will be time for a new man after that.

thegreatgalling

Spoff wrote:

Carry on for sure.

I think they have made DC "become" Bond one time too many. Once at the end of Casino Royale, and then again at the end of Skyfall.

Just wait until the end of SPECTRE, Bond will become Bond - becoming Bond - while BEING Bond.