LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Sadly, 3 year gaps appear to be the new norm Understandable in one regard, given the spectacle and logistics of it all these days. It makes Sir Roger the likely Tenure King in perpetuity 8-)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
It'll be interesting to see what they do with the 7th one, but all in due time. It took effort to develop this direction with Craig, so I think 4-5 years is a good amount of time to wait after the last Craig Era film comes out.
I think 4 years is too long to wait. After Die Another Day, and then after QoS people often told me they thought the Bond series was finished whenever I mentioned I was a Bond fan because so much time had passed between the films. Even last year I couldn't believe how many people were surprised when I told them there was another Bond film coming out in 2015, since two years had already passed without a new Bond films or they thought films only came in trilogies. I don't think it's healthy for the series to be dormant for any more than 3 ye
ars between films.
Btw, I meant 4-5 years after Craig is done. Within an era, I think 2 year gaps are good enough.
Although, like Loeffel said, maybe 3 year gaps will be the new norm within an era.
"Hostile takeovers. Shall we?"
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
It'll be interesting to see what they do with the 7th one, but all in due time. It took effort to develop this direction with Craig, so I think 4-5 years is a good amount of time to wait after the last Craig Era film comes out.
I think 4 years is too long to wait. After Die Another Day, and then after QoS people often told me they thought the Bond series was finished whenever I mentioned I was a Bond fan because so much time had passed between the films. Even last year I couldn't believe how many people were surprised when I told them there was another Bond film coming out in 2015, since two years had already passed without a new Bond films or they thought films only came in trilogies. I don't think it's healthy for the series to be dormant for any more than 3 ye
ars between films.
Btw, I meant 4-5 years after Craig is done. Within an era, I think 2 year gaps are good enough.
Although, like Loeffel said, maybe 3 year gaps will be the new norm within an era.
Between actors doesn't make a difference for me. More than 3 years is still too long.
Reading this thread and also the realistic / ridiculous Bond movies thread brought me back to a conundrum that has existed ever since the Craig films came out - which is basically can Craig's Bond and Moore's Bond REALLY be part of the same universe. Of course, if you're a brilliant enthusiast like Thunderpussy this isn't a problem, but i've struggled with it.
Then suddenly i had a moment of revelation (well, something occurred to me, at least) that it's not a million miles away from Batman. I realised that I loved the Adam West semi spoof, liked the Michael Keaton / Tim Burton re-imagining and more or less enjoyed the Christian Bale / Chris Nolan reboot.
And it's all because it's all about viewing the same character from different angles. Bond is ALL those things that Connery, Moore, Craig et al bring to it.
Which, of course, means that the series would have no meaning without Bond as 007.
On that note i'll now go and watch Skyfall, followed by The Man with the Golden Gun and enjoy them both!
Silhouette ManThe last refuge of a scoundrelPosts: 8,866MI6 Agent
It'll be interesting to see what they do with the 7th one, but all in due time. It took effort to develop this direction with Craig, so I think 4-5 years is a good amount of time to wait after the last Craig Era film comes out.
I think 4 years is too long to wait. After Die Another Day, and then after QoS people often told me they thought the Bond series was finished whenever I mentioned I was a Bond fan because so much time had passed between the films. Even last year I couldn't believe how many people were surprised when I told them there was another Bond film coming out in 2015, since two years had already passed without a new Bond films or they thought films only came in trilogies. I don't think it's healthy for the series to be dormant for any more than 3 years between films.
I agree; three years feels like a lot time but it's enough time for the film to ride its wave of popular/critical acclaim, then things quieten, then you get the announcement of the new Bond film and then the countdown. Anything more than three years and people (not fans but the general public) forget the previous film.
As for 'codename' theory, the Bond films have always been fantasies- do we really demand strict realism from a Bond film? We don't need to believe that James Bond is a real person who walks amongst us any more than we believe that Clark Kent exists in our world. In plays of course, you have the same role played by hundreds of different actors. You wouldn't watch Laurence Olivier's film of Hamlet and then be confused when Kenneth Branagh takes on the role. Each actor brings a different interpretation of the role, so we are seeing a new side to the one character.
It makes Sir Roger the likely Tenure King in perpetuity 8-)
You make that sound like a bad thing! )
[clears throat & straightens tie]
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I was thinking about this earlier, thinking about what they would do whe Craig is done and they have to carry on with a younger actor, which would mess up all the continuity. So I thought of an idea: what if when Craig is done, a new character takes the 007 number? So the series would be less about Bond and more about the agents that take the number 007. Would you be happy if they did this?
I respect you for trying to think out of the box, but I don't think it's a good idea. A Bond series without Bond would be like a vodka martini without martini.
As the rest of your have already expressed perfectly, then series would be nothing without JAMES BOND 007.
That being said, because the reboot concept has put a greater emphasis on timeline and history than ever before in the series, I think it would be wise to cast Craig's successor accordingly. Cast an actor considerably younger than Craig and today's audiences (which are used to cohesive timelines, shared universes, and all that jazz) won't buy that it's the same character. Cast an actor whose roughly the same age as Craig (give or take a few years) and Bond can credibly continue in the same timeline. I'm not necessarily hung up on the idea of continuity, especially in Bond, but I do think it would be a good idea to credibly continue the reboot timeline with the next actor after so much work has gone into it.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Righto! :007) -{
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Personally I fix my Cufflinks ( Got to move with the times )
Wonder if we'll have something along those lines in the next one. Hoping so...
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Comments
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Btw, I meant 4-5 years after Craig is done. Within an era, I think 2 year gaps are good enough.
Although, like Loeffel said, maybe 3 year gaps will be the new norm within an era.
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
Between actors doesn't make a difference for me. More than 3 years is still too long.
Then suddenly i had a moment of revelation (well, something occurred to me, at least) that it's not a million miles away from Batman. I realised that I loved the Adam West semi spoof, liked the Michael Keaton / Tim Burton re-imagining and more or less enjoyed the Christian Bale / Chris Nolan reboot.
And it's all because it's all about viewing the same character from different angles. Bond is ALL those things that Connery, Moore, Craig et al bring to it.
Which, of course, means that the series would have no meaning without Bond as 007.
On that note i'll now go and watch Skyfall, followed by The Man with the Golden Gun and enjoy them both!
You make that sound like a bad thing!
I agree; three years feels like a lot time but it's enough time for the film to ride its wave of popular/critical acclaim, then things quieten, then you get the announcement of the new Bond film and then the countdown. Anything more than three years and people (not fans but the general public) forget the previous film.
As for 'codename' theory, the Bond films have always been fantasies- do we really demand strict realism from a Bond film? We don't need to believe that James Bond is a real person who walks amongst us any more than we believe that Clark Kent exists in our world. In plays of course, you have the same role played by hundreds of different actors. You wouldn't watch Laurence Olivier's film of Hamlet and then be confused when Kenneth Branagh takes on the role. Each actor brings a different interpretation of the role, so we are seeing a new side to the one character.
Is that a Serenity reference ?
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
[clears throat & straightens tie]
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
I respect you for trying to think out of the box, but I don't think it's a good idea. A Bond series without Bond would be like a vodka martini without martini.
That being said, because the reboot concept has put a greater emphasis on timeline and history than ever before in the series, I think it would be wise to cast Craig's successor accordingly. Cast an actor considerably younger than Craig and today's audiences (which are used to cohesive timelines, shared universes, and all that jazz) won't buy that it's the same character. Cast an actor whose roughly the same age as Craig (give or take a few years) and Bond can credibly continue in the same timeline. I'm not necessarily hung up on the idea of continuity, especially in Bond, but I do think it would be a good idea to credibly continue the reboot timeline with the next actor after so much work has gone into it.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/wish-i-was-at-disneyland/id1202780413?mt=2
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Wonder if we'll have something along those lines in the next one. Hoping so...
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS