That's no need for a new James Bond. All we have to do is: EON, Michael G Wilson and Barbara Broccoli will keep Daniel Craig for Bond 25. It's easy right!
That's no need for a new James Bond. All we have to do is: EON, Michael G Wilson and Barbara Broccoli will keep Daniel Craig for Bond 25. It's easy right!
That would be fine by me, but I'm getting the feeling that unless we are being "played" by EON, Craig appears to be moving on.
some people have asserted Brosnan was a return to Moore's style, I disagree
he may have been pretty and looked cool hanging round society events and ordering drinks, but his interpretation was lot more bitter and haunted than Moore's ever was
his first three films are full of bad consequences resulting from no-win choices he's had to make to do his job, and he's always got that clenched jaw because he knows the choices aren't going to get any easier before the end of the movie
Moore on the other hand played it like he was on permanent vacation, and dropping Jaws out a train window was just part of the scheduled vacation activities he'd been looking forward to
some people have asserted Brosnan was a return to Moore's style, I disagree
he may have been pretty and looked cool hanging round society events and ordering drinks, but his interpretation was lot more bitter and haunted than Moore's ever was
his first three films are full of bad consequences resulting from no-win choices he's had to make to do his job, and he's always got that clenched jaw because he knows the choices aren't going to get any easier before the end of the movie
Moore on the other hand played it like he was on permanent vacation, and dropping Jaws out a train window was just part of the scheduled vacation activities he'd been looking forward to
I watched the 2nd half of DAD on cable last night (don't know why I put up with commercials since I have it on disc) and was reminded of how hammy PB's interpretation devolved. And for the hundredth time I asked myself, in-between his excellent introduction in GE to that point ...what the heck happened!?! It was like watching George Clooney as Batman, the dialogue, the fight scenes and other action sequences...all very painful to watch.
We can't really tell how Brosnan's interpretation of Bond would have been like had he taken over in 87 as originally scheduled, since the way he was spoofing himself as Bond in his Diet Coke commercials was much in line with his Remington Steele persona...as well as Moore's Bond. What we do know is that Dalton took over instead and logged in his two films, for certain adding to the collective retinue of Bond actor interpretations. Of course it would have been the new actor's prerogative of which traits to keep, not keep or improvise upon.
Before Dalton, Moore's interpretation had become the long established standard and the producers would have been happy with the momentum to continue albeit with younger blood. However, Dalton introduced a serious contrast to challenge that. When Brosnan's 2nd chance came and was then introduced to the press, he stated that he would be "more flinty, with a little more humor." and went on to say, "We want to see beneath the surface of Bond and also what Ian Fleming has portrayed." His vision of Bond had been tempered by Dalton's interpretation. Why can I say that? Because the comment about humor was obviously about Dalton and the absence of humor in his reign. Yes, it's possible for Brosnan to have similarly taken the initiative to go deep with Fleming, but the way Dalton did it was more regimented, wholehearted and radical, which can perhaps be credited to his stage training and affinity for "the classics." Nonetheless, how different would the mix have been had Brosnan taken over immediately after Moore? We can't predict with absolute certainty, but IMO the tendency would have been "Moore" of the same. )
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
I don't have an answer to my own question except to note that both "Skyfall" and "Spectre" were box office triumphs, which suggests they satisfied millions of moviegoers.
Skyfall had pretty strong literary elements, specifically nods to YOLT and TMWTGG and, for the most part it worked pretty well.
I think Spectre was supposed to have themes similar to OHMSS (only the daughter of a criminal could understand Bond) and the torture scene was shoe-horned in from Colonel Sun, but the execution was generally lacking.
I didn't see anything remotely Flemingesque in Spectre. Adjusted for inflation, Spectre did okay. It did much better overseas, but it is obvious that Bond is falling out of favor with its US audience.
The issue is, I think a "Fleming" Bond should be done but the real question is will the studio allow EON to go beyond the standard parameters of today's film making. After watching the documentary "The Death of Superman Lives; What Happened? ", I don't think so. I wish EON could bring in Forsyth before he dies.
The problem with the Dalton Era was twofold. The Bond era fell behind the shifting cinematic styles of the late 80s and the older generation actor held on too long and when change was sudden - it was confusing. I loved TLD and I thought Caroline Bond was great as Moneypenny, but her relationship with Bond did not seem genuine enough. Another example, Felix Leiter was barely noticed in The Living Daylights and less than two years later he is much older and Bond's best friend. The funny thing about Licence to Kill was it was to have been called Licence Revoked, but the studio feared that people would hearing the title mistake it for a Corey Haim and Corey Feldman sequel. I also believe that people were expecting Brosnan at the time and was not sure of Dalton.
I think Bond is at the Q-corner of its existence. I am not sure how much longer a studio is going to finance a Bond film that cost $245 million to make, minus the tax breaks.
"And if I told you that I'm from the Ministry of Defence?" James Bond - The Property of a Lady
some people have asserted Brosnan was a return to Moore's style, I disagree
he may have been pretty and looked cool hanging round society events and ordering drinks, but his interpretation was lot more bitter and haunted than Moore's ever was
his first three films are full of bad consequences resulting from no-win choices he's had to make to do his job, and he's always got that clenched jaw because he knows the choices aren't going to get any easier before the end of the movie
Moore on the other hand played it like he was on permanent vacation, and dropping Jaws out a train window was just part of the scheduled vacation activities he'd been looking forward to
I watched the 2nd half of DAD on cable last night (don't know why I put up with commercials since I have it on disc) and was reminded of how hammy PB's interpretation devolved. And for the hundredth time I asked myself, in-between his excellent introduction in GE to that point ...what the heck happened!?! It was like watching George Clooney as Batman, the dialogue, the fight scenes and other action sequences...all very painful to watch.
We can't really tell how Brosnan's interpretation of Bond would have been like had he taken over in 87 as originally scheduled, since the way he was spoofing himself as Bond in his Diet Coke commercials was much in line with his Remington Steele persona...as well as Moore's Bond. What we do know is that Dalton took over instead and logged in his two films, for certain adding to the collective retinue of Bond actor interpretations. Of course it would have been the new actor's prerogative of which traits to keep, not keep or improvise upon.
Before Dalton, Moore's interpretation had become the long established standard and the producers would have been happy with the momentum to continue albeit with younger blood. However, Dalton introduced a serious contrast to challenge that. When Brosnan's 2nd chance came and was then introduced to the press, he stated that he would be "more flinty, with a little more humor." and went on to say, "We want to see beneath the surface of Bond and also what Ian Fleming has portrayed." His vision of Bond had been tempered by Dalton's interpretation. Why can I say that? Because the comment about humor was obviously about Dalton and the absence of humor in his reign. Yes, it's possible for Brosnan to have similarly taken the initiative to go deep with Fleming, but the way Dalton did it was more regimented, wholehearted and radical, which can perhaps be credited to his stage training and affinity for "the classics." Nonetheless, how different would the mix have been had Brosnan taken over immediately after Moore? We can't predict with absolute certainty, but IMO the tendency would have been "Moore" of the same. )
I don't think this was PBs fault. EON ran out of ideas. In watching "EON: Everything or Nothing" it seems to me that Brosnan and Pike mocked the entire Brosnan era. The funny thing to listen to MGW in the film, MGW made the movie but doesn't seem to shoulder the blame for the era.
"And if I told you that I'm from the Ministry of Defence?" James Bond - The Property of a Lady
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
some people have asserted Brosnan was a return to Moore's style, I disagree
he may have been pretty and looked cool hanging round society events and ordering drinks, but his interpretation was lot more bitter and haunted than Moore's ever was
his first three films are full of bad consequences resulting from no-win choices he's had to make to do his job, and he's always got that clenched jaw because he knows the choices aren't going to get any easier before the end of the movie
Moore on the other hand played it like he was on permanent vacation, and dropping Jaws out a train window was just part of the scheduled vacation activities he'd been looking forward to
I watched the 2nd half of DAD on cable last night (don't know why I put up with commercials since I have it on disc) and was reminded of how hammy PB's interpretation devolved. And for the hundredth time I asked myself, in-between his excellent introduction in GE to that point ...what the heck happened!?! It was like watching George Clooney as Batman, the dialogue, the fight scenes and other action sequences...all very painful to watch.
We can't really tell how Brosnan's interpretation of Bond would have been like had he taken over in 87 as originally scheduled, since the way he was spoofing himself as Bond in his Diet Coke commercials was much in line with his Remington Steele persona...as well as Moore's Bond. What we do know is that Dalton took over instead and logged in his two films, for certain adding to the collective retinue of Bond actor interpretations. Of course it would have been the new actor's prerogative of which traits to keep, not keep or improvise upon.
Before Dalton, Moore's interpretation had become the long established standard and the producers would have been happy with the momentum to continue albeit with younger blood. However, Dalton introduced a serious contrast to challenge that. When Brosnan's 2nd chance came and was then introduced to the press, he stated that he would be "more flinty, with a little more humor." and went on to say, "We want to see beneath the surface of Bond and also what Ian Fleming has portrayed." His vision of Bond had been tempered by Dalton's interpretation. Why can I say that? Because the comment about humor was obviously about Dalton and the absence of humor in his reign. Yes, it's possible for Brosnan to have similarly taken the initiative to go deep with Fleming, but the way Dalton did it was more regimented, wholehearted and radical, which can perhaps be credited to his stage training and affinity for "the classics." Nonetheless, how different would the mix have been had Brosnan taken over immediately after Moore? We can't predict with absolute certainty, but IMO the tendency would have been "Moore" of the same. )
I don't think this was PBs fault. EON ran out of ideas. In watching "EON: Everything or Nothing" it seems to me that Brosnan and Pike mocked the entire Brosnan era. The funny thing to listen to MGW in the film, MGW made the movie but doesn't seem to shoulder the blame for the era.
No, I don't think it's PB's fault and I agree with you. MGW didn't directly blame himself but seemed to have spread the blame of the morass of where the series had come to, emphasizing "we." The not too good effect of that was making PB seem like the weakest link since HE was Bond and hence, the rationale for the reboot. The totality of each and every Bond film has always been premeditated by the producers. I don't necessarily agree with how they exactly proceeded with the reboot, but I believe that is why it seems Barbara Broccoli's influence and involvement has increased more and more because basically MGW began to slack big time part way into the PB era, so she "leaned in" and took charge, it seems. You can definitely see a more determined and coordinated effort in the DC era in regard to a tighter production.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
I'm hoping for TH, this picture looks very Bondish to me.
Can anyone identify that trench coat????
I really really want it!!!
I'm not entirely sure but isn't it one of those you used to see in the back pages of the weekend papers? (The same ones Billy Connolly spoke about in one of his routines)?
8-) Apparently someone felt that a few days of quiet had suddenly become too many.
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
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,761Chief of Staff
There's a story floating about the 'net regarding Craig signing on for another film called "Kings" co-starring Halle Berry , however when I did some research it appears that Craig hasn't actually been signed to the film but is being "considered" for the role. Of course all the articles are using the Craig has moved on from Bond angle with this. Until EON announces a new Bond, we won't know whether Craig has in fact, moved on.
There's a story floating about the 'net regarding Craig signing on for another film called "Kings" co-starring Halle Berry , however when I did some research it appears that Craig hasn't actually been signed to the film but is being "considered" for the role. Of course all the articles are using the Craig has moved on from Bond angle with this. Until EON announces a new Bond, we won't know whether Craig has in fact, moved on.
If Craig has actually signed to do "Kings" it does not bode well for him returning in Bond 25.
My guess is if Tom Hiddleston is in fact the new Bond, we will see Bond 25 in November 2018. Filming begins on the next Thor film in early July with an expected finish date of October. There are no other films listed on IMDB for Hiddleston after Thor (hmmm ) so it appears he would be available for Bond 25 late 2016 or early 2017 (need to give him some time to get into Bond shape :007) ). I'm guessing an official announcement would be made a couple months prior to shooting.
If Craig has actually signed to do "Kings" it does not bode well for him returning in Bond 25.
My guess is if Tom Hiddleston is in fact the new Bond, we will see Bond 25 in November 2018. Filming begins on the next Thor film in early July with an expected finish date of October. There are no other films listed on IMDB for Hiddleston after Thor (hmmm ) so it appears he would be available for Bond 25 late 2016 or early 2017 (need to give him some time to get into Bond shape :007) ). I'm guessing an official announcement would be made a couple months prior to shooting.
If Craig has actually signed to do "Kings" it does not bode well for him returning in Bond 25.
My guess is if Tom Hiddleston is in fact the new Bond, we will see Bond 25 in November 2018. Filming begins on the next Thor film in early July with an expected finish date of October. There are no other films listed on IMDB for Hiddleston after Thor (hmmm ) so it appears he would be available for Bond 25 late 2016 or early 2017 (need to give him some time to get into Bond shape :007) ). I'm guessing an official announcement would be made a couple months prior to shooting.
An interesting use of the word "fact"
Nah, that's a typical usage of the phrase "if in fact" in English.
Tom Hiddleston is hitting the gym and 'bulking up' at present - could just be for the role of Loki though -{
Of course! What else could it be? :v
: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
If Craig has actually signed to do "Kings" it does not bode well for him returning in Bond 25.
My guess is if Tom Hiddleston is in fact the new Bond, we will see Bond 25 in November 2018. Filming begins on the next Thor film in early July with an expected finish date of October. There are no other films listed on IMDB for Hiddleston after Thor (hmmm ) so it appears he would be available for Bond 25 late 2016 or early 2017 (need to give him some time to get into Bond shape :007) ). I'm guessing an official announcement would be made a couple months prior to shooting.
An interesting use of the word "fact"
Nah, that's a typical usage of the phrase "if in fact" in English.
If TH is bulking up for Bond, it's pretty silly to do it now since filming won't start for at least another 16 months. Even Craig waited until a couple of months before shooting to bulk up. I always though that's one reason why his suits didn't fit right (together with the style).
If TH is bulking up for Bond, it's pretty silly to do it now since filming won't start for at least another 16 months. Even Craig waited until a couple of months before shooting to bulk up. I always though that's one reason why his suits didn't fit right (together with the style).
This could be just a process of doing it steadily...or getting ready for an announcement...?...
If TH is bulking up for Bond, it's pretty silly to do it now since filming won't start for at least another 16 months. Even Craig waited until a couple of months before shooting to bulk up. I always though that's one reason why his suits didn't fit right (together with the style).
The style of Craig's suits in SF and SP should fit him just fine if he didn't bulk up. Suits would probably take about 2 months to get from Tom Ford, so if he only started bulking up 2-3 months before shooting that would make sense. If Tom Hiddleston is getting in shape now, good for him!
Tom Hiddleston is hitting the gym and 'bulking up' at present - could just be for the role of Loki though -{
Or he is just going to the gym per his usual routine? Or he's getting a jump on things for Bond 25; may be they are going for the Alexander Skarsgard / Tarzan look super buff look. Jungle Jim Bond? ) -{
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,761Chief of Staff
Tom Hiddleston is hitting the gym and 'bulking up' at present - could just be for the role of Loki though -{
Or he is just going to the gym per his usual routine? Or he's getting a jump on things for Bond 25; may be they are going for the Alexander Skarsgard / Tarzan look super buff look. Jungle Jim Bond? ) -{
Definitely NOT his usual routine ! He is looking to add bulk - I doubt it will be to DC levels, but it is extra work on top his usual routine.
Comments
That would be fine by me, but I'm getting the feeling that unless we are being "played" by EON, Craig appears to be moving on.
he may have been pretty and looked cool hanging round society events and ordering drinks, but his interpretation was lot more bitter and haunted than Moore's ever was
his first three films are full of bad consequences resulting from no-win choices he's had to make to do his job, and he's always got that clenched jaw because he knows the choices aren't going to get any easier before the end of the movie
Moore on the other hand played it like he was on permanent vacation, and dropping Jaws out a train window was just part of the scheduled vacation activities he'd been looking forward to
Ikr. I mean every new Craig movie was said to be his last
I watched the 2nd half of DAD on cable last night (don't know why I put up with commercials since I have it on disc) and was reminded of how hammy PB's interpretation devolved. And for the hundredth time I asked myself, in-between his excellent introduction in GE to that point ...what the heck happened!?! It was like watching George Clooney as Batman, the dialogue, the fight scenes and other action sequences...all very painful to watch.
We can't really tell how Brosnan's interpretation of Bond would have been like had he taken over in 87 as originally scheduled, since the way he was spoofing himself as Bond in his Diet Coke commercials was much in line with his Remington Steele persona...as well as Moore's Bond. What we do know is that Dalton took over instead and logged in his two films, for certain adding to the collective retinue of Bond actor interpretations. Of course it would have been the new actor's prerogative of which traits to keep, not keep or improvise upon.
Before Dalton, Moore's interpretation had become the long established standard and the producers would have been happy with the momentum to continue albeit with younger blood. However, Dalton introduced a serious contrast to challenge that. When Brosnan's 2nd chance came and was then introduced to the press, he stated that he would be "more flinty, with a little more humor." and went on to say, "We want to see beneath the surface of Bond and also what Ian Fleming has portrayed." His vision of Bond had been tempered by Dalton's interpretation. Why can I say that? Because the comment about humor was obviously about Dalton and the absence of humor in his reign. Yes, it's possible for Brosnan to have similarly taken the initiative to go deep with Fleming, but the way Dalton did it was more regimented, wholehearted and radical, which can perhaps be credited to his stage training and affinity for "the classics." Nonetheless, how different would the mix have been had Brosnan taken over immediately after Moore? We can't predict with absolute certainty, but IMO the tendency would have been "Moore" of the same.
I didn't see anything remotely Flemingesque in Spectre. Adjusted for inflation, Spectre did okay. It did much better overseas, but it is obvious that Bond is falling out of favor with its US audience.
The issue is, I think a "Fleming" Bond should be done but the real question is will the studio allow EON to go beyond the standard parameters of today's film making. After watching the documentary "The Death of Superman Lives; What Happened? ", I don't think so. I wish EON could bring in Forsyth before he dies.
The problem with the Dalton Era was twofold. The Bond era fell behind the shifting cinematic styles of the late 80s and the older generation actor held on too long and when change was sudden - it was confusing. I loved TLD and I thought Caroline Bond was great as Moneypenny, but her relationship with Bond did not seem genuine enough. Another example, Felix Leiter was barely noticed in The Living Daylights and less than two years later he is much older and Bond's best friend. The funny thing about Licence to Kill was it was to have been called Licence Revoked, but the studio feared that people would hearing the title mistake it for a Corey Haim and Corey Feldman sequel. I also believe that people were expecting Brosnan at the time and was not sure of Dalton.
I think Bond is at the Q-corner of its existence. I am not sure how much longer a studio is going to finance a Bond film that cost $245 million to make, minus the tax breaks.
I don't think this was PBs fault. EON ran out of ideas. In watching "EON: Everything or Nothing" it seems to me that Brosnan and Pike mocked the entire Brosnan era. The funny thing to listen to MGW in the film, MGW made the movie but doesn't seem to shoulder the blame for the era.
No, I don't think it's PB's fault and I agree with you. MGW didn't directly blame himself but seemed to have spread the blame of the morass of where the series had come to, emphasizing "we." The not too good effect of that was making PB seem like the weakest link since HE was Bond and hence, the rationale for the reboot. The totality of each and every Bond film has always been premeditated by the producers. I don't necessarily agree with how they exactly proceeded with the reboot, but I believe that is why it seems Barbara Broccoli's influence and involvement has increased more and more because basically MGW began to slack big time part way into the PB era, so she "leaned in" and took charge, it seems. You can definitely see a more determined and coordinated effort in the DC era in regard to a tighter production.
Can anyone identify that trench coat????
I really really want it!!!
It looks military.
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/showbiz-news/daniel-craig-leaves-door-open-11538029
8-) Apparently someone felt that a few days of quiet had suddenly become too many.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Indeed ! It takes a page to tell you nothing at all - journalism at its finest 8-)
Even if it has no actual information.
https://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/daniel-craig-2016-filming-schedule?t=&s=&id=04106
My guess is if Tom Hiddleston is in fact the new Bond, we will see Bond 25 in November 2018. Filming begins on the next Thor film in early July with an expected finish date of October. There are no other films listed on IMDB for Hiddleston after Thor (hmmm
An interesting use of the word "fact"
Nah, that's a typical usage of the phrase "if in fact" in English.
Of course! What else could it be? :v
:007)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I know, but ...... still
This could be just a process of doing it steadily...or getting ready for an announcement...?...
The style of Craig's suits in SF and SP should fit him just fine if he didn't bulk up. Suits would probably take about 2 months to get from Tom Ford, so if he only started bulking up 2-3 months before shooting that would make sense. If Tom Hiddleston is getting in shape now, good for him!
Or he is just going to the gym per his usual routine? Or he's getting a jump on things for Bond 25; may be they are going for the Alexander Skarsgard / Tarzan look super buff look. Jungle Jim Bond?
Definitely NOT his usual routine ! He is looking to add bulk - I doubt it will be to DC levels, but it is extra work on top his usual routine.