Well like everyone else i've learnt that Lea Seydoux is apparently back and I for one am disheartened. I think she's a great actress but it means of course that the new film won't be a clean break from Spectre and will be at least somewhat of a direct sequel. Not a good idea at all.
Why make a direct sequel to a critical bomb when you could easily just move on and do something else? Their love story in the film didn't align with the vision they obviously had for it and no one really aside from a few die-hards wishes to see how their romance ended because the filmmakers didn't give the audience any reason to care in the first place.
Because of this decision i'm assuming Waltz and Blofeld will be back to continue on that arch as well and again, it's a terrible idea because Blofelds return in Spectre was an absolute fizzer and the step brother move was diabolical. It didn't work so you cut your losses and move on and make something else. Which is the beauty of Bond and is a damn large reason why the series is still going.
Also, It will be the best part of 4 and a half years between Spectre and Bond 25, there really is no need to continue on from the film.
If he just leaves her because he's bored at the start of the film then that for me would be the only acceptable way for her to be in the film. If she gets killed off early and he then goes on revenge (which is what i suspect will happen) then it will be just another rehash of something Daniel Craig has done before. I don't know why they feel that they have to give Bond extra motivations to pursue a villian other than his professional duty as a double 0. It worked in the first 3 of his flicks but Spectre made it embarrassing.
Though I guess Waltz may not be back at all and she gets bumped off by the new villian and then Bond goes rampaging but still it's eye rolling. Dissappointed to say the least.
Well like everyone else i've learnt that Lea Seydoux is apparently back and I for one am disheartened. I think she's a great actress but it means of course that the new film won't be a clean break from Spectre and will be at least somewhat of a direct sequel. Not a good idea at all.
Why make a direct sequel to a critical bomb when you could easily just move on and do something else? Their love story in the film didn't align with the vision they obviously had for it and no one really aside from a few die-hards wishes to see how their romance ended because the filmmakers didn't give the audience any reason to care in the first place.
Because of this decision i'm assuming Waltz and Blofeld will be back to continue on that arch as well and again, it's a terrible idea because Blofelds return in Spectre was an absolute fizzer and the step brother move was diabolical. It didn't work so you cut your losses and move on and make something else. Which is the beauty of Bond and is a damn large reason why the series is still going.
Also, It will be the best part of 4 and a half years between Spectre and Bond 25, there really is no need to continue on from the film.
If he just leaves her because he's bored at the start of the film then that for me would be the only acceptable way for her to be in the film. If she gets killed off early and he then goes on revenge (which is what i suspect will happen) then it will be just another rehash of something Daniel Craig has done before. I don't know why they feel that they have to give Bond extra motivations to pursue a villian other than his professional duty as a double 0. It worked in the first 3 of his flicks but Spectre made it embarrassing.
Though I guess Waltz may not be back at all and she gets bumped off by the new villian and then Bond goes rampaging but still it's eye rolling. Dissappointed to say the least.
I agree. I think it's a huge mistake. This will be the 2nd longest gap in the series. The new film should re-ignite the series for new audiences the way GOLDENEYE did. Instead it's continuing down a path which has become tiresome. I'm feeling we will get an extremely long gap after the next film. I think we're looking at 20 to life.
I agree. I think it's a huge mistake. This will be the 2nd longest gap in the series. The new film should re-ignite the series for new audiences the way GOLDENEYE did. Instead it's continuing down a path which has become tiresome. I'm feeling we will get an extremely long gap after the next film. I think we're looking at 20 to life.
I wouldn't have missed Lea Seydoux/Madeline not being in Bond 25....but a good compelling script along with a fresh, motivated director (as opposed to a played out Sam Mendes) could right a lot of the wrongs of SPECTRE. For all we know, Lea Seydoux/Madeline might not survive the pre-title sequence. Bond 25 doesn't need to re-ignite the series. Craig has been a very popular Bond and the films have all done quite well, even by Bond standards. As far as a huge gap between Bond 25 and 26? Who knows? Most likely a new Bond will be on board for 26 and EON has a looming date for when Bond film rights become Public Domain.
As just an aside, I was talking to my wife's cousin, who has been a patent, intellectual rights, copyright attorney for years and the subject of Bond came up. According to him, EON has Bond trade marked from here to eternity with everything from the logo to the lint in his naval trade marked, devised by their attorneys (who are really really good) to make it very difficult for another company to make a Bond film....not impossible but very difficult. Apparently, EON is set up better than we may think to either make Bond films as long as they can produce progeny to carry on making the films or sell or lease their trademarks, etc to the highest bidders. Apparently, it is good to be EON....for a long, long time.
Why have her in the pre-titles at all unless you are going to use their relationship or her death as the springboard for the entire film. Everybody on here already knows why she will be in it, to die so that Bond can have another personal motivation. When everyone under the sun can guess a plot gimmick a mile away then you know that you shouldn't use it
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,533MI6 Agent
Why have her in the pre-titles at all unless you are going to use their relationship or her death as the springboard for the entire film. Everybody on here already knows why she will be in it, to die so that Bond can have another personal motivation. When everyone under the sun can guess a plot gimmick a mile away then you know that you shouldn't use it
You don’t know how they are going to use her yet. I highly doubt they will kill her off for Bond to be ‘motivated by revenge, again. It’s been done too much already. There are a hundred ways to use the character to a lesser or greater extent without having to kill her off or be one of the main cast members central to the story.
Why have her in the pre-titles at all unless you are going to use their relationship or her death as the springboard for the entire film. Everybody on here already knows why she will be in it, to die so that Bond can have another personal motivation. When everyone under the sun can guess a plot gimmick a mile away then you know that you shouldn't use it
As MI-6's very existence was left an open question at the end of Spectre and there is supposed to be a young MI-6 agent in Bond25, I could imagine a PTS that re-establishes MI-6, with M, Q and Moneypenny in an MI-6 situation room during the end of a mission, a la TND, and also introduces the young agent. Perhaps she is the new 007 as Bond quit or she gets her second kill to become a 00?
Why have her in the pre-titles at all unless you are going to use their relationship or her death as the springboard for the entire film. Everybody on here already knows why she will be in it, to die so that Bond can have another personal motivation. When everyone under the sun can guess a plot gimmick a mile away then you know that you shouldn't use it
You don’t know how they are going to use her yet. I highly doubt they will kill her off for Bond to be ‘motivated by revenge, again. It’s been done too much already. There are a hundred ways to use the character to a lesser or greater extent without having to kill her off or be one of the main cast members central to the story.
Well sure they may not kill her off but then the question is why use her at all unless she is going to have significance to the plot?
I mean i'd be fine with her being in the film for 5 minutes in a completely inconsequential role but that obviously isn't the case because they wouldn't use an in demand actress again unless they had something decent to offer her. I.e. being the motivating force behind the plot or decent screen time.
And that means that there will be a clear and direct link to Spectre which is personally something I wanted Bond 25 to go without.
Why have her in the pre-titles at all unless you are going to use their relationship or her death as the springboard for the entire film. Everybody on here already knows why she will be in it, to die so that Bond can have another personal motivation. When everyone under the sun can guess a plot gimmick a mile away then you know that you shouldn't use it
As MI-6's very existence was left an open question at the end of Spectre and there is supposed to be a young MI-6 agent in Bond25, I could imagine a PTS that re-establishes MI-6, with M, Q and Moneypenny in an MI-6 situation room during the end of a mission, a la TND, and also introduces the young agent. Perhaps she is the new 007 as Bond quit or she gets her second kill to become a 00?
LOL. You sir / madam, are a first class troll. I doff my forum hat to you.
I will bite on one point though - Mi-6's existence at the end of Spectre. I don't beleive that that is implied at all. At the end of the film we find Bond in Q's lab where Q is working on his gagdets and he then says to Bond "I thought you'd left" That obviously implies that MI6 is as per usual and Bond is the only thing that has changed.
Why have her in the pre-titles at all unless you are going to use their relationship or her death as the springboard for the entire film. Everybody on here already knows why she will be in it, to die so that Bond can have another personal motivation. When everyone under the sun can guess a plot gimmick a mile away then you know that you shouldn't use it
You don’t know how they are going to use her yet. I highly doubt they will kill her off for Bond to be ‘motivated by revenge, again. It’s been done too much already. There are a hundred ways to use the character to a lesser or greater extent without having to kill her off or be one of the main cast members central to the story.
I agree. While it would be the clear OHMSS/DAF story of the rebooted era, I don’t think Swann will end up dying—it’s way too obvious and I’d say EON would understand that. My guess is Bond and Swann part early on (maybe after a Blofeld prison escape and a failed attack on both of them) because Bond thinks a life with him would put her in too much danger. I think they could find a way to do that and not have it take up too much of the story.
I don't think SPECTRE was the disaster some claim. The Oberhauser twist was a big mistake, Blofeld didn't have the impact he should (they should have cast an actor who isn't known internationally for his great villan roles) and some of the action scenes don't have enough energy. In spite of this I can sit down and enjoy the movie and it not near the bottom of my Bond film ranking.
I think Lea Seydoux was good in the movie, even though I never saw her as the love of his life. Bringing her back, especially after so many years, is unnecessary. Now that's she's back I hope she gets good material to work with, she's a good actress so she can make an impact. I don't want her killed early on to motivate Bond for revenge. At he same time I don't want her to be his girlfriend in the entire movie, forcing Bond to be monoganous.
I think SPECTRE must come back in some way, just leaving such an iconic organisation after one movie won't work. There are many ways to do this, one is them being behind the evil plot. Blofeld can be in jail and off camera for most of the film, letting someone else be the main villan in the plot. The Oberhouser should ideally never be mentioned again. Perhaps Bond could stop one big plan to free Blofeld, but near the end Blofeld gets out anyway because SPECTRE had a more subtle and sneaky plan B.
It is odd how some people think a different opinion is somehow bad.
It's oft been said that there are a lot of similarities between the DC Bond films, going rogue being the central evidence.
Soooo, below are my summaries of the DC films and on the basis that his films are very similar, you'll see my Bond25 story speculation is a mix of the common elements.
Casino, Bond kills the only lead for a terrorist network and gets sent on holiday. He goes rogue and uncovers bombing plot. To face off against Le Chiffre, Bond is helped by Mathis and Vesper. Bond is also helped by Leiter, he lives. Vesper betrays him and while Bond tries to save her, she dies as the villain's lair is destroyed. Mathis appears to betray him and is captured.
Quantum, Bond kills the only lead in Haiti for a mystery organisation and goes rogue to Bolivia. He involves a young MI-6 agent, Fields, who helps him find Greene and she is murdered. M is not happy about the loss of her agent. Mathis helps him and he is also killed. Leiter helps Bond find villain's lair, which he destroys. Camille helps Bond, but she lives.
Skyfall, Bond goes rogue after being shot and returns to MI-6 after it's attacked and sent on a mission to find Silva. Severin helps him and is then murdered. Moneypenny helps him in Macao, and lives. Bond returns to London to try to save M, they escape to Scotland. Bond's family's gamekeeper, Kincade, helps Bond, but M still dies and Bond's lair is destroyed. Kincade lives.
Spectre, Bond is supposed to be on holiday, kills a man to find a mystery organisation, then goes rogue with the help of Q. Bond is helped by Mrs Sciarra and she lives. Mr White helps Bond, who kills himself. Bond finds Madeleine and then the mystery organisation, destroys the lair, and escapes with Madeleine to return to London to try to save MI-6. Like Camille, Madeleine lives.
So, my guess at Bond25 is a mashup of the above...
Bond is already 'rogue/on holiday' with Madeleine, a Spectre assassin tries to kill him and Madeleine. Bond kills the assassin, his only lead to find Spectre. He goes to Leiter for help to find Spectre's lair, but Leiter is captured by Spectre. Bond encounters the young MI-6 agent along the way, as she is on a parallel mission to stop some devious Spectre plot, she dies helping Bond. M is not happy with Bond about the loss of his agent. Bond is helped by Q and Moneypenny to finish the young MI-6 agent's mission and to save Leiter. Spectre captures Madeleine to blackmail Bond and the last act is Bond trying to stop Spectre and save his friend and wife, a la Dark Knight, and Madeleine dies. The Spectre lair is destroyed, Leiter lives.
It is odd how some people think a different opinion is somehow bad.
It's oft been said that there are a lot of similarities between the DC Bond films, going rogue being the central evidence.
Soooo, below are my summaries of the DC films and on the basis that his films are very similar, you'll see my Bond25 story speculation is a mix of the common elements.
Casino, Bond kills the only lead for a terrorist network and gets sent on holiday. He goes rogue and uncovers bombing plot. To face off against Le Chiffre, Bond is helped by Mathis and Vesper. Bond is also helped by Leiter, he lives. Vesper betrays him and while Bond tries to save her, she dies as the villain's lair is destroyed. Mathis appears to betray him and is captured.
Quantum, Bond kills the only lead in Haiti for a mystery organisation and goes rogue to Bolivia. He involves a young MI-6 agent, Fields, who helps him find Greene and she is murdered. M is not happy about the loss of her agent. Mathis helps him and he is also killed. Leiter helps Bond find villain's lair, which he destroys. Camille helps Bond, but she lives.
Skyfall, Bond goes rogue after being shot and returns to MI-6 after it's attacked and sent on a mission to find Silva. Severin helps him and is then murdered. Moneypenny helps him in Macao, and lives. Bond returns to London to try to save M, they escape to Scotland. Bond's family's gamekeeper, Kincade, helps Bond, but M still dies and Bond's lair is destroyed. Kincade lives.
Spectre, Bond is supposed to be on holiday, kills a man to find a mystery organisation, then goes rogue with the help of Q. Bond is helped by Mrs Sciarra and she lives. Mr White helps Bond, who kills himself. Bond finds Madeleine and then the mystery organisation, destroys the lair, and escapes with Madeleine to return to London to try to save MI-6. Like Camille, Madeleine lives.
So, my guess at Bond25 is a mashup of the above...
Bond is already 'rogue/on holiday' with Madeleine, a Spectre assassin tries to kill him and Madeleine. Bond kills the assassin, his only lead to find Spectre. He goes to Leiter for help to find Spectre's lair, but Leiter is captured by Spectre. Bond encounters the young MI-6 agent along the way, as she is on a parallel mission to stop some devious Spectre plot, she dies helping Bond. M is not happy with Bond about the loss of his agent. Bond is helped by Q and Moneypenny to finish the young MI-6 agent's mission and to save Leiter. Spectre captures Madeleine to blackmail Bond and the last act is Bond trying to stop Spectre and save his friend and wife, a la Dark Knight, and Madeleine dies. The Spectre lair is destroyed, Leiter lives.
I say troll only in reference to your female 007 theory. I thought you were taking the mickey lol! And your above Bond 25 speculation is a plausible possibility for what the plot may end up being -{
I agree. I think it's a huge mistake. This will be the 2nd longest gap in the series. The new film should re-ignite the series for new audiences the way GOLDENEYE did. Instead it's continuing down a path which has become tiresome. I'm feeling we will get an extremely long gap after the next film. I think we're looking at 20 to life.
I wouldn't have missed Lea Seydoux/Madeline not being in Bond 25....but a good compelling script along with a fresh, motivated director (as opposed to a played out Sam Mendes) could right a lot of the wrongs of SPECTRE. For all we know, Lea Seydoux/Madeline might not survive the pre-title sequence. Bond 25 doesn't need to re-ignite the series. Craig has been a very popular Bond and the films have all done quite well, even by Bond standards. As far as a huge gap between Bond 25 and 26? Who knows? Most likely a new Bond will be on board for 26 and EON has a looming date for when Bond film rights become Public Domain.
As just an aside, I was talking to my wife's cousin, who has been a patent, intellectual rights, copyright attorney for years and the subject of Bond came up. According to him, EON has Bond trade marked from here to eternity with everything from the logo to the lint in his naval trade marked, devised by their attorneys (who are really really good) to make it very difficult for another company to make a Bond film....not impossible but very difficult. Apparently, EON is set up better than we may think to either make Bond films as long as they can produce progeny to carry on making the films or sell or lease their trademarks, etc to the highest bidders. Apparently, it is good to be EON....for a long, long time.
Your post made me feel better about the whole situation. I think Eon should always run the Bond films. I'm glad they're not selling as was rumored on the various forums last year.
I do hope, though that B25 is such a success it does jump start the series so we get more frequent releases.
I can’t recall being less excited for a Bond film. Apart from the director, who could bring a much needed fresh interpretation, everything else we know about this movie carries a strong whiff of stagnation.
Bottom line is, we don't know to what extent Madeline will figure in the film. I agree, it is too obvious to kill her off right away.
IMO, the time that has passed since SPECTRE might be a good thing for Seydoux if she is a bit more mature looking at 35 and a better match with Craig.
I can’t recall being less excited for a Bond film. Apart from the director, who could bring a much needed fresh interpretation, everything else we know about this movie carries a strong whiff of stagnation.
According to scuttlebutt, it appears the screenplay will be a revised version of the Hodge/Boyle script which is supposed to have a killer premise.
I'm still trying to figure out what Peter Morgan's killer plot twist was supposed to be in Skyfall, so who knows?
Do you guys think that there will be some people that boyle hired left in the final film? Mark Tildesley the production designer for instance. Wasnt that boyle’s employ?
I can’t recall being less excited for a Bond film. Apart from the director, who could bring a much needed fresh interpretation, everything else we know about this movie carries a strong whiff of stagnation.
Have to agree, after the pile of poo that was Spectre I am not even interested in seeing this with what is known so far .
Someone: You have a point, but there was no villan's lair in CR and QoS. One can also claim Moore's Bonds or Brosnan's Bonds had the same type of plots.
To other members who commented on Madeline's return: I don't see how Camille was a better character or better acted. I just don't.
Lea Seydoux is a really good actress, so I think she can do a good job in Bond25 if she gets a better script and better direction than she got last time.
I say troll only in reference to your female 007 theory. I thought you were taking the mickey lol! {
Why is it trolling to suggest a female 007? Bond has left. If MI-6 is still intact as you suggest, there would be a 00 section and a new 007, who could be female.
I agree. I think it's a huge mistake. This will be the 2nd longest gap in the series. The new film should re-ignite the series for new audiences the way GOLDENEYE did. Instead it's continuing down a path which has become tiresome. I'm feeling we will get an extremely long gap after the next film. I think we're looking at 20 to life.
I wouldn't have missed Lea Seydoux/Madeline not being in Bond 25....but a good compelling script along with a fresh, motivated director (as opposed to a played out Sam Mendes) could right a lot of the wrongs of SPECTRE. For all we know, Lea Seydoux/Madeline might not survive the pre-title sequence. Bond 25 doesn't need to re-ignite the series. Craig has been a very popular Bond and the films have all done quite well, even by Bond standards. As far as a huge gap between Bond 25 and 26? Who knows? Most likely a new Bond will be on board for 26 and EON has a looming date for when Bond film rights become Public Domain.
As just an aside, I was talking to my wife's cousin, who has been a patent, intellectual rights, copyright attorney for years and the subject of Bond came up. According to him, EON has Bond trade marked from here to eternity with everything from the logo to the lint in his naval trade marked, devised by their attorneys (who are really really good) to make it very difficult for another company to make a Bond film....not impossible but very difficult. Apparently, EON is set up better than we may think to either make Bond films as long as they can produce progeny to carry on making the films or sell or lease their trademarks, etc to the highest bidders. Apparently, it is good to be EON....for a long, long time.
Your post made me feel better about the whole situation. I think Eon should always run the Bond films. I'm glad they're not selling as was rumored on the various forums last year.
I do hope, though that B25 is such a success it does jump start the series so we get more frequent releases.
EON doesn't mean the Broccoli family. The family could sell EON, as with all those trademarks it is worth heaps of money.
Someone: You have a point, but there was no villan's lair in CR and QoS. One can also claim Moore's Bonds or Brosnan's Bonds had the same type of plots.
The Venetian building in Casino is where the villain's meet and it gets destroyed, so fulfilling the role of past films' stealth ships, volcanoes, oil rigs etc. The same can be said of the hotel in QoS.
BTW does anyone know what the QoS hydrogen fuel sub-plot was all about? As well as the hotel running on hydrogen, the car Camille leaves Bond in is hydrogen fuelled.
One can also claim Moore's Bonds or Brosnan's Bonds had the same type of plots.
Bond films do follow the Hero's Journey, which is the story structure laid down since Sumeria's Epic of Gilgamesh. You have a king or God figure, M, you have a wise advisor, Q, you have helper's, Q and Moneypenny, and others, Bond girls, and a damsel in distress, Bond girl again, and a monster to be slain, the villain.
For Skyfall, I forgot to mention he also kills his only lead, Patrice. But, the Macao casino chip gives him a clue.
I would argue that DC's films differ in that they don't follow the 3 Bond girl rule, he's ALWAYS going rogue, and the threat is not necessarily the end of the world/UK or start of WWIII. There's more of an emotional journey for DC's Bond too. And DC's 007 does kill his only lead a bit often.
I very much doubt the old building under reconstruction, practically a building site, is some sort of HQ for the villans. There is no bedroom, boardroom or office there. I can't even remember seeing a chair there. It's much more likely a building they chose to meet that one time because there were no other people there. Central Venice is packed in the tourist season I understand.
I am not even interested in seeing this with what is known so far .
But what do we know about the movie aside from the return of one character? As near as I can tell we have all been speculating so much over the past year that some things are being taken now as fact, when we really know basically zero right now.
BTW does anyone know what the QoS hydrogen fuel sub-plot was all about? As well as the hotel running on hydrogen, the car Camille leaves Bond in is hydrogen fuelled.
I have always assumed that was all connected to Greene Planet
Like some others I'm not very enthusiastic about the return of Seydoux. Of course it all depends on the context that her character is used. I hope they dont make Waltz the main villain again though. Best to have a totally new villain rather then have Craig's Bond facing his lamest adversary since Dominic Greene again. In fact I would be happy if they just forgot about the Spectre organization all together.
To other members who commented on Madeline's return: I don't see how Camille was a better character or better acted. I just don't.
Lea Seydoux is a really good actress, so I think she can do a good job in Bond25 if she gets a better script and better direction than she got last time.
It just so happens that I would like to see her teaming up with Bond once more, not necessarily as the main Bond-girl, maybe just for the PTS or so. It feels like her character is the only one not finished..
I too wouldn't mind seeing Camille and Bond teaming up for a short while. But I don't think her story is less finished than Madeleine's.
Camille got her revenge on the general and has some some Quantum of solace to regain, but that's it.
Comments
Why make a direct sequel to a critical bomb when you could easily just move on and do something else? Their love story in the film didn't align with the vision they obviously had for it and no one really aside from a few die-hards wishes to see how their romance ended because the filmmakers didn't give the audience any reason to care in the first place.
Because of this decision i'm assuming Waltz and Blofeld will be back to continue on that arch as well and again, it's a terrible idea because Blofelds return in Spectre was an absolute fizzer and the step brother move was diabolical. It didn't work so you cut your losses and move on and make something else. Which is the beauty of Bond and is a damn large reason why the series is still going.
Also, It will be the best part of 4 and a half years between Spectre and Bond 25, there really is no need to continue on from the film.
If he just leaves her because he's bored at the start of the film then that for me would be the only acceptable way for her to be in the film. If she gets killed off early and he then goes on revenge (which is what i suspect will happen) then it will be just another rehash of something Daniel Craig has done before. I don't know why they feel that they have to give Bond extra motivations to pursue a villian other than his professional duty as a double 0. It worked in the first 3 of his flicks but Spectre made it embarrassing.
Though I guess Waltz may not be back at all and she gets bumped off by the new villian and then Bond goes rampaging but still it's eye rolling. Dissappointed to say the least.
I agree. I think it's a huge mistake. This will be the 2nd longest gap in the series. The new film should re-ignite the series for new audiences the way GOLDENEYE did. Instead it's continuing down a path which has become tiresome. I'm feeling we will get an extremely long gap after the next film. I think we're looking at 20 to life.
I wouldn't have missed Lea Seydoux/Madeline not being in Bond 25....but a good compelling script along with a fresh, motivated director (as opposed to a played out Sam Mendes) could right a lot of the wrongs of SPECTRE. For all we know, Lea Seydoux/Madeline might not survive the pre-title sequence. Bond 25 doesn't need to re-ignite the series. Craig has been a very popular Bond and the films have all done quite well, even by Bond standards. As far as a huge gap between Bond 25 and 26? Who knows? Most likely a new Bond will be on board for 26 and EON has a looming date for when Bond film rights become Public Domain.
As just an aside, I was talking to my wife's cousin, who has been a patent, intellectual rights, copyright attorney for years and the subject of Bond came up. According to him, EON has Bond trade marked from here to eternity with everything from the logo to the lint in his naval trade marked, devised by their attorneys (who are really really good) to make it very difficult for another company to make a Bond film....not impossible but very difficult. Apparently, EON is set up better than we may think to either make Bond films as long as they can produce progeny to carry on making the films or sell or lease their trademarks, etc to the highest bidders. Apparently, it is good to be EON....for a long, long time.
You don’t know how they are going to use her yet. I highly doubt they will kill her off for Bond to be ‘motivated by revenge, again. It’s been done too much already. There are a hundred ways to use the character to a lesser or greater extent without having to kill her off or be one of the main cast members central to the story.
As MI-6's very existence was left an open question at the end of Spectre and there is supposed to be a young MI-6 agent in Bond25, I could imagine a PTS that re-establishes MI-6, with M, Q and Moneypenny in an MI-6 situation room during the end of a mission, a la TND, and also introduces the young agent. Perhaps she is the new 007 as Bond quit or she gets her second kill to become a 00?
Well sure they may not kill her off but then the question is why use her at all unless she is going to have significance to the plot?
I mean i'd be fine with her being in the film for 5 minutes in a completely inconsequential role but that obviously isn't the case because they wouldn't use an in demand actress again unless they had something decent to offer her. I.e. being the motivating force behind the plot or decent screen time.
And that means that there will be a clear and direct link to Spectre which is personally something I wanted Bond 25 to go without.
LOL. You sir / madam, are a first class troll. I doff my forum hat to you.
I will bite on one point though - Mi-6's existence at the end of Spectre. I don't beleive that that is implied at all. At the end of the film we find Bond in Q's lab where Q is working on his gagdets and he then says to Bond "I thought you'd left" That obviously implies that MI6 is as per usual and Bond is the only thing that has changed.
I agree. While it would be the clear OHMSS/DAF story of the rebooted era, I don’t think Swann will end up dying—it’s way too obvious and I’d say EON would understand that. My guess is Bond and Swann part early on (maybe after a Blofeld prison escape and a failed attack on both of them) because Bond thinks a life with him would put her in too much danger. I think they could find a way to do that and not have it take up too much of the story.
I think Lea Seydoux was good in the movie, even though I never saw her as the love of his life. Bringing her back, especially after so many years, is unnecessary. Now that's she's back I hope she gets good material to work with, she's a good actress so she can make an impact. I don't want her killed early on to motivate Bond for revenge. At he same time I don't want her to be his girlfriend in the entire movie, forcing Bond to be monoganous.
I think SPECTRE must come back in some way, just leaving such an iconic organisation after one movie won't work. There are many ways to do this, one is them being behind the evil plot. Blofeld can be in jail and off camera for most of the film, letting someone else be the main villan in the plot. The Oberhouser should ideally never be mentioned again. Perhaps Bond could stop one big plan to free Blofeld, but near the end Blofeld gets out anyway because SPECTRE had a more subtle and sneaky plan B.
It is odd how some people think a different opinion is somehow bad.
It's oft been said that there are a lot of similarities between the DC Bond films, going rogue being the central evidence.
Soooo, below are my summaries of the DC films and on the basis that his films are very similar, you'll see my Bond25 story speculation is a mix of the common elements.
Casino, Bond kills the only lead for a terrorist network and gets sent on holiday. He goes rogue and uncovers bombing plot. To face off against Le Chiffre, Bond is helped by Mathis and Vesper. Bond is also helped by Leiter, he lives. Vesper betrays him and while Bond tries to save her, she dies as the villain's lair is destroyed. Mathis appears to betray him and is captured.
Quantum, Bond kills the only lead in Haiti for a mystery organisation and goes rogue to Bolivia. He involves a young MI-6 agent, Fields, who helps him find Greene and she is murdered. M is not happy about the loss of her agent. Mathis helps him and he is also killed. Leiter helps Bond find villain's lair, which he destroys. Camille helps Bond, but she lives.
Skyfall, Bond goes rogue after being shot and returns to MI-6 after it's attacked and sent on a mission to find Silva. Severin helps him and is then murdered. Moneypenny helps him in Macao, and lives. Bond returns to London to try to save M, they escape to Scotland. Bond's family's gamekeeper, Kincade, helps Bond, but M still dies and Bond's lair is destroyed. Kincade lives.
Spectre, Bond is supposed to be on holiday, kills a man to find a mystery organisation, then goes rogue with the help of Q. Bond is helped by Mrs Sciarra and she lives. Mr White helps Bond, who kills himself. Bond finds Madeleine and then the mystery organisation, destroys the lair, and escapes with Madeleine to return to London to try to save MI-6. Like Camille, Madeleine lives.
So, my guess at Bond25 is a mashup of the above...
Bond is already 'rogue/on holiday' with Madeleine, a Spectre assassin tries to kill him and Madeleine. Bond kills the assassin, his only lead to find Spectre. He goes to Leiter for help to find Spectre's lair, but Leiter is captured by Spectre. Bond encounters the young MI-6 agent along the way, as she is on a parallel mission to stop some devious Spectre plot, she dies helping Bond. M is not happy with Bond about the loss of his agent. Bond is helped by Q and Moneypenny to finish the young MI-6 agent's mission and to save Leiter. Spectre captures Madeleine to blackmail Bond and the last act is Bond trying to stop Spectre and save his friend and wife, a la Dark Knight, and Madeleine dies. The Spectre lair is destroyed, Leiter lives.
I say troll only in reference to your female 007 theory. I thought you were taking the mickey lol! And your above Bond 25 speculation is a plausible possibility for what the plot may end up being -{
Your post made me feel better about the whole situation. I think Eon should always run the Bond films. I'm glad they're not selling as was rumored on the various forums last year.
I do hope, though that B25 is such a success it does jump start the series so we get more frequent releases.
IG: @thebondarchives
Check it out, you won’t be disappointed
IMO, the time that has passed since SPECTRE might be a good thing for Seydoux if she is a bit more mature looking at 35 and a better match with Craig.
According to scuttlebutt, it appears the screenplay will be a revised version of the Hodge/Boyle script which is supposed to have a killer premise.
I'm still trying to figure out what Peter Morgan's killer plot twist was supposed to be in Skyfall, so who knows?
Have to agree, after the pile of poo that was Spectre I am not even interested in seeing this with what is known so far .
To other members who commented on Madeline's return: I don't see how Camille was a better character or better acted. I just don't.
Lea Seydoux is a really good actress, so I think she can do a good job in Bond25 if she gets a better script and better direction than she got last time.
Why is it trolling to suggest a female 007? Bond has left. If MI-6 is still intact as you suggest, there would be a 00 section and a new 007, who could be female.
EON doesn't mean the Broccoli family. The family could sell EON, as with all those trademarks it is worth heaps of money.
The Venetian building in Casino is where the villain's meet and it gets destroyed, so fulfilling the role of past films' stealth ships, volcanoes, oil rigs etc. The same can be said of the hotel in QoS.
BTW does anyone know what the QoS hydrogen fuel sub-plot was all about? As well as the hotel running on hydrogen, the car Camille leaves Bond in is hydrogen fuelled.
Bond films do follow the Hero's Journey, which is the story structure laid down since Sumeria's Epic of Gilgamesh. You have a king or God figure, M, you have a wise advisor, Q, you have helper's, Q and Moneypenny, and others, Bond girls, and a damsel in distress, Bond girl again, and a monster to be slain, the villain.
For Skyfall, I forgot to mention he also kills his only lead, Patrice. But, the Macao casino chip gives him a clue.
I would argue that DC's films differ in that they don't follow the 3 Bond girl rule, he's ALWAYS going rogue, and the threat is not necessarily the end of the world/UK or start of WWIII. There's more of an emotional journey for DC's Bond too. And DC's 007 does kill his only lead a bit often.
But what do we know about the movie aside from the return of one character? As near as I can tell we have all been speculating so much over the past year that some things are being taken now as fact, when we really know basically zero right now.
I have always assumed that was all connected to Greene Planet
It just so happens that I would like to see her teaming up with Bond once more, not necessarily as the main Bond-girl, maybe just for the PTS or so. It feels like her character is the only one not finished..
IG: @thebondarchives
Check it out, you won’t be disappointed
Camille got her revenge on the general and has some some Quantum of solace to regain, but that's it.