after craig...carry on or reboot

hot crossed bond

thegreatgalling wrote:

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.

I don't understand the comment...yes he sends in his resignation in CR. QOS , M says "Bond we need you back" his reply "I never left". SK, he wounded,gets his bell rung, cage rattled...how ever you want to put it. goes off to lick his wounds...cos he is pissed off! he is a moody prick...in the books too yeah... 8-)

thegreatgalling

hot crossed bond wrote:

thegreatgalling wrote:

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.

I don't understand the comment...yes he sends in his resignation in CR. QOS , M says "Bond we need you back" his reply "I never left". SK, he wounded,gets his bell rung, cage rattled...how ever you want to put it. goes off to lick his wounds...cos he is pissed off! he is a moody prick...in the books too yeah... 8-)

I was only kidding, but its true each of the films end as if Bond has had a major character arc and is now "ready to be Bond" even more than before. It does not interfere with my enjoyment of the flicks but I find the parallels amusing.

hot crossed bond

thegreatgalling wrote:

hot crossed bond wrote:

thegreatgalling wrote:

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

I don't understand the comment...yes he sends in his resignation in CR. QOS , M says "Bond we need you back" his reply "I never left". SK, he wounded,gets his bell rung, cage rattled...how ever you want to put it. goes off to lick his wounds...cos he is pissed off! he is a moody prick...in the books too yeah... 8-)

I was only kidding, but its true each of the films end as if Bond has had a major character arc and is now "ready to be Bond" even more than before. It does not interfere with my enjoyment of the flicks but I find the parallels amusing.

he is always bond...up to it or not. SF, Bond reporting for duty. he is always being told to go sick his head in the sand, I'm thinking of giving you up, I knew it was too soon to promote you, it's a young mans game and so on. others try and stop him...but from beginning to end he is bond

Absolutely_Cart

After Craig, I'd like to see a new actor remake some of the older films

I really like Craig's original story arc, but I think having 3 actors in a row with their own origin story might stray too far from Fleming's roots.

Blackleiter

Absolutely_Cart wrote:

I'd like to see a new actor remake some of the older films

No thanks. :v

Thunderpussy

I'm with BL, not for me, Thanks.

Absolutely_Cart

Are you telling me Diamonds Are Forever doesn't have room for a fresh new perspective?

There's so many things we could change about the movie. Starting from the Bond actor, the Bond girl and the Bond villains.

chrisisall

The book wasn't that great. I see no need for a remake from any POV.

thegreatgalling

There's just so many places Bond can go that it seems lazy to start looking backwards. Spies are still relevant, Bond's character is still relevant. New stories keep the fan-base invigorated.

With that said, I would love to see a BBC mini series based on the books as period pieces, just cause, but totally independent of the films.

chrisisall

thegreatgalling wrote:

There's just so many places Bond can go that it seems lazy to start looking backwards. Spies are still relevant, Bond's character is still relevant. New stories keep the fan-base invigorated.

With that said, I would love to see a BBC mini series based on the books as period pieces, just cause, but totally independent of the films.

May I buy you a drink, sir? -{

thegreatgalling

Shaken, not stirred.

AlphaOmegaSin

chrisisall wrote:

The book wasn't that great. I see no need for a remake from any POV.

DAF is one of my favorite Fleming Novels

Blackleiter

Absolutely_Cart wrote:

Are you telling me Diamonds Are Forever doesn't have room for a fresh new perspective?

There's so many things we could change about the movie. Starting from the Bond actor, the Bond girl and the Bond villains.

I see no need to remake any of the Bond films. If there are elements of the novels that have been left out of the films or that can be improved upon, I think the filmmakers are clever enough to find ways to incorporate those elements into new Bond films. Rehashing the movies that have already been made (mostly successfully) just doesn't appeal to me on any level.

thegreatgalling

Blackleiter wrote:

I see no need to remake any of the Bond films. If there are elements of the novels that have been left out of the films or that can be improved upon, I think the filmmakers are clever enough to find ways to incorporate those elements into new Bond films. Rehashing the movies that have already been made (mostly successfully) just doesn't appeal to me on any level.

+1, I am even OK with a nod or even recycling of common themes. Hell I didn't mind the diamond laser connection between DAF and DAD, but it should end at homages.

Thunderpussy

+1, -{

AlphaOmegaSin

Blackleiter wrote:

Absolutely_Cart wrote:

Are you telling me Diamonds Are Forever doesn't have room for a fresh new perspective?

There's so many things we could change about the movie. Starting from the Bond actor, the Bond girl and the Bond villains.

I see no need to remake any of the Bond films. If there are elements of the novels that have been left out of the films or that can be improved upon, I think the filmmakers are clever enough to find ways to incorporate those elements into new Bond films. Rehashing the movies that have already been made (mostly successfully) just doesn't appeal to me on any level.

I agree 100%

chrisisall

Blackleiter wrote:

Rehashing the movies that have already been made (mostly successfully) just doesn't appeal to me on any level.

How about just pulling a Lucas & fixing/adding/embellishing some films? Like giving us other perspectives of Dr. No's complex exploding in a grander fashion? Slowing the boat down in TB's finale? Adding guts to Kananga's exit? Changing the parasailing to a more reasonable & realistically rendered escape? ?:)

Thunderpussy

I remember on the commentary to TMWTGG, they mentioned that
Given today's technology. They could have " Fixed" the mirror mistake
In the dancers changing room fight sequence, They decided to leave
The film as is.

chrisisall

How about having 6 sets of the Bond movies so that if say, Connery is your favourite, all non-Connery films would now star Connery in set #1, then so on for each actor?

Blackleiter

chrisisall wrote:

Blackleiter wrote:

Rehashing the movies that have already been made (mostly successfully) just doesn't appeal to me on any level.

How about just pulling a Lucas & fixing/adding/embellishing some films? Like giving us other perspectives of Dr. No's complex exploding in a grander fashion? Slowing the boat down in TB's finale? Adding guts to Kananga's exit? Changing the parasailing to a more reasonable & realistically rendered escape? ?:)

How did that work out for Lucas and Star Wars? Not so great, in my opinion. I don't mind sharpening the picture and sound of the films, but other than that I'd prefer they leave the Bond films alone.

Barbel

chrisisall wrote:

How about just pulling a Lucas & fixing/adding/embellishing some films? Like giving us other perspectives of Dr. No's complex exploding in a grander fashion? Slowing the boat down in TB's finale? Adding guts to Kananga's exit? Changing the parasailing to a more reasonable & realistically rendered escape? ?:)

The remastered versions of "Star Trek: The Original Series" have used modern technology to replace iffy old special FX with more modern ones (the Enterprise circling a planet is now CGI rather than models, the backdrops have been enhanced, etc). I'm not against painting out the wires holding up a plane for example or perhaps improving the lava flow from a volcano, as long as it's within limits.

chrisisall

Barbel wrote:

The remastered versions of "Star Trek: The Original Series" have used modern technology to replace iffy old special FX with more modern ones (the Enterprise circling a planet is now CGI rather than models, the backdrops have been enhanced, etc). I'm not against painting out the wires holding up a plane for example or perhaps improving the lava flow from a volcano, as long as it's within limits.

I'm actually a big fan of Trek Remastered- I think it brings scope & depth to the series. But Bond? I was being a little factious there. Small touches might be nice for the higher definition Bonds, but they really must remain the time capsules they are IMHO.

UltimateTruth

Barbel wrote:

chrisisall wrote:

How about just pulling a Lucas & fixing/adding/embellishing some films? Like giving us other perspectives of Dr. No's complex exploding in a grander fashion? Slowing the boat down in TB's finale? Adding guts to Kananga's exit? Changing the parasailing to a more reasonable & realistically rendered escape? ?:)

The remastered versions of "Star Trek: The Original Series" have used modern technology to replace iffy old special FX with more modern ones (the Enterprise circling a planet is now CGI rather than models, the backdrops have been enhanced, etc). I'm not against painting out the wires holding up a plane for example or perhaps improving the lava flow from a volcano, as long as it's within limits.

I detest CGI.........It has ruined movies IMO.....If other people like it, fine, but please keep it away from Bond

Barbel

I think it does have a place (painting out an actor/stuntman's safety harness is fair enough I'd say) as long as it doesn't dominate.