So how would Bond 26 work? Would that be the 'real' James Bond or an imposter pretending to be Bond?
Any thoughts/suggestions, Sir Miles?
Apparently it’s all linked with Eon ‘selling up’...the new owners would get a ‘clean slate’ and could do pretty much whatever they wanted...even ‘re-imagine’ the whole series again...it just seems a nice way for Eon to end their ownership.
Well if this is true then it's the biggest shock news in Bond history? Eon selling up! Couldn't B and MG pass the company onto their nearest relatives?
My one concern is about an American playing the role. If Bond is owned by MGM and another studio or MGM sells its stake and another studio has full rights - they could be tempted to cast an American/Canadian actor as Bond. Robert Downey Jnr played Sherlock Holmes. I could imagine Bond going that route.
Well if this is true then it's the biggest shock news in Bond history? Eon selling up! Couldn't B and MG pass the company onto their nearest relatives?
My one concern is about an American playing the role. If Bond is owned by MGM and another studio or MGM sells its stake and another studio has full rights - they could be tempted to cast an American/Canadian actor as Bond. Robert Downey Jnr played Sherlock Holmes. I could imagine Bond going that route.
I don't think American audiences would accept an American Bond.
I get what people are saying about the clean slate for new owners, but honestly, bond doesn't need to die for that, they could have a clean slate either way. New actor and supporting actors = pretty much clean slate IMO.
Anyway, if they do sell, then would that make bond 26 onwards not part of the EON series like NSNA? Or would it still be EON, but just different people?
I say delay Bond 25 to 2020, ditch Craig. He's never been that Bond handsome anyway, and his blunt portrayal has been done enough. Yawn. Let's find some new guy, someone to bring back the GLAMOUR of Bond. I think we should all thank Danny Boyle. His temper tantrum "I'm quitting because Barbara refuses to give me tea during lunch breaks!" is a blessing in disguise. The five year gap may end Bab's infatuation with Daniel and we may get some new bloke.
In other news, Danny Boyle has signed up to direct - 'Brexit - A Disaster Movie'!
Yes....no question EON should give Daniel Craig the boot immediately. What a great opportunity that would be.
Unfortunately for those who dislike Craig, Mr. Short and Homely, as Bond, he is an extremely popular Bond with the folks who count,
the people who plunk down their hard earned money and go see Bond films. Believe it or not there are actually quite a few of us who post on AJB who actually like Craig as Bond....shocking, simply shocking. Seriously though, EON's priority was to get Craig back for
Bond 25. Craig's return for 25 significantly boosts the films box office potential.
If it is true that EON is still interested in using much of Hodge's script, it won't take that much to get it polished up and ready for filming. Add a new director to that mix and there is still a chance that Bond 25 makes its fall 2019 release date.
Very interesting. I find it surprising that you feel that Craig is dissed here, my confirmation bias gets the opposite sense, that he is extremely popular with most posters here (must confess that I have not 'done the math' )
Though Craig remains popular here I've noticed elsewhere his popularity has dwindled quite a lot post Skyfall. I think the combination of Spectre's lackluster reception and his infamous "slash my wrist" comment are the likely cause among other reasons im sure.
Can you reveal more or are you just making a guess?
It’s something he’s been on about for awhile, so I’ve been told. I rather like the idea...
Not against the idea myself and feel that DC and Babs are arrogant enough to want Bond to die with the end of their tenure. Death is no barrier to cinematic rebirth. If it cleared the decks and allowed a fresh start I'm all for it.
From an actors perspective I can see how attractive a proposition it is. As they have creatively reached a dead end it's difficult to see what other moves are left on the board. It would be a good way out and could make for one he'll of a final film.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
I'm sure Ritchie would be a bridge to far for EON. He has a unique style and EON doesn't like directors with a unique style or ideas that are different from Babs and Michael's.
I find all of Ritchie's films ugly and cold, calling attention to the radical storytelling technique instead of the characters. The more the storyteller calls attention to himself, the less the audience is immersed in the story being told.
But I'm slowly gaining an appreciation for what he does, in a very intellectual sense. Film is a sequence of images creating the illusion of movement forward in time, so his technique with gratuitous flashbacks every other minute is experimenting, and possibly advancing, how time is represented in film. And it was actually sort of appropriate to Sherlock Holmes, where Watson is meant to not know what's going on until Holmes explains it all to him after the fact.
As for Bond films, I don't think they've ever had so much as a conventional flashback. Time is always moving forwards in Bond films. And Ritchie's style would be much too distracting, it'd be worse than Die Another Day (the coldest, most overstylised Bondfilm I can think of)
A Guy Richie Bond movie would be interesting, both if you like it or not. But a director with such a strong personal style is probably exactly what Bond25 doesn't need at this point.
Unfortunately for those who dislike Craig, Mr. Short and Homely, as Bond, he is an extremely popular Bond with the folks who count,
the people who plunk down their hard earned money and go see Bond films. Believe it or not there are actually quite a few of us who post on AJB who actually like Craig as Bond....shocking, simply shocking. Seriously though, EON's priority was to get Craig back for
Bond 25. Craig's return for 25 significantly boosts the films box office potential.
if they really are in a state of crisis after three years of dithering, and forced to delay yet another year, replacing the popular actor may be the worst thing that could do. Craig is actually in the position Connery was in when they promised him any amount of money to do Diamonds..., or Moore when Connery was working on a rival film in the early 80s, they needed Moore to stay in the role at least one more film to get through this new challenge.
But five years? that's approaching the gap between License... and Goldeneye. We know Dalton was offered the role when production finally got rolling again, but he would have had to agree to a new multi-film contract (makes sense from the producers point of view) whereas he saw it as the third film in his original contract. So they got a new guy, to provide continuity for a new generation of filmgoers. Whenever Bond25 ends up coming up, it may be a new generation of filmgoers who end up seeing it, who have no attachment to the old guy.
I'm sure Ritchie would be a bridge to far for EON. He has a unique style and EON doesn't like directors with a unique style or ideas that are different from Babs and Michael's.
I find all of Ritchie's films ugly and cold, calling attention to the radical storytelling technique instead of the characters. The more the storyteller calls attention to himself, the less the audience is immersed in the story being told.
But I'm slowly gaining an appreciation for what he does, in a very intellectual sense. Film is a sequence of images creating the illusion of movement forward in time, so his technique with gratuitous flashbacks every other minute is experimenting, and possibly advancing, how time is represented in film. And it was actually sort of appropriate to Sherlock Holmes, where Watson is meant to not know what's going on until Holmes explains it all to him after the fact.
As for Bond films, I don't think they've ever had so much as a conventional flashback. Time is always moving forwards in Bond films. And Ritchie's style would be much too distracting, it'd be worse than Die Another Day (the coldest, most overstylised Bondfilm I can think of)
This is a good point and I thought about when people were talking about Nolan directing Bond 25--Nolan's films are mostly flashbacks.
The only flashback I can think of in a Bond film is the fight in the PTS in CR.
There are no flashbacks in Dunkirk. There are flashbacks in two of the Batman movies I think, when his parents are killed and in the last one to tell Bane's story. There are in Inception, but that movie is about memories. The same goes for Momento. To sum up: Nolan uses flashbacks when the story dictated it, but he is very much capable of making movies without a single flashback.
There are three separate timelines in Dunkirk--you can't avoid having flashbacks.
"This gives the impression that everything is happening concurrently, when, in fact, there are minuscule flashbacks, flash-forwards and replays of the action from different angles sewn into the editing."
"Nolan’s somewhat perversely structured screenplay tells three stories, also interlocking, laced with flashbacks and revisits to scenes, moments, really, you may not realize are revisits from a new perspective."
I say delay Bond 25 to 2020, ditch Craig. He's never been that Bond handsome anyway, and his blunt portrayal has been done enough. Yawn. Let's find some new guy, someone to bring back the GLAMOUR of Bond. I think we should all thank Danny Boyle. His temper tantrum "I'm quitting because Barbara refuses to give me tea during lunch breaks!" is a blessing in disguise. The five year gap may end Bab's infatuation with Daniel and we may get some new bloke.
In other news, Danny Boyle has signed up to direct - 'Brexit - A Disaster Movie'!
Yes....no question EON should give Daniel Craig the boot immediately. What a great opportunity that would be.
Unfortunately for those who dislike Craig, Mr. Short and Homely, as Bond, he is an extremely popular Bond with the folks who count,
the people who plunk down their hard earned money and go see Bond films. Believe it or not there are actually quite a few of us who post on AJB who actually like Craig as Bond....shocking, simply shocking. Seriously though, EON's priority was to get Craig back for
Bond 25. Craig's return for 25 significantly boosts the films box office potential.
If it is true that EON is still interested in using much of Hodge's script, it won't take that much to get it polished up and ready for filming. Add a new director to that mix and there is still a chance that Bond 25 makes its fall 2019 release date.
Very interesting. I find it surprising that you feel that Craig is dissed here, my confirmation bias gets the opposite sense, that he is extremely popular with most posters here (must confess that I have not 'done the math' )
For the sake of honest introspection I will say I probably over reacted to Bonded123's post. Right now, speaking for myself, I'm trying to be optimistic regarding Bond 25, but feeling more than a bit anxious and a bit raw about the whole thing. The "this is a great opportunity to dump Craig" felt to me like a bit of piling on and touched a nerve. I understand there are people who don't like Craig as Bond and they have every right to and to also voice that opinion. That being said, I also think that there is no way EON would go to the length of canning Craig and starting fresh with a new Bond....it's enough bad publicity and potential internet and tab fodder with having Boyle move on, starting over without Craig would look like total defeat and chaos for the franchise.
Hopefully EON is gearing up to take a run at keeping the fall 2019 release date. Maybe out of necessity, EON is forced to make the smaller, tighter and better Bond film many of us are hoping for anyway.
Well if this is true then it's the biggest shock news in Bond history? Eon selling up! Couldn't B and MG pass the company onto their nearest relatives?
My one concern is about an American playing the role. If Bond is owned by MGM and another studio or MGM sells its stake and another studio has full rights - they could be tempted to cast an American/Canadian actor as Bond. Robert Downey Jnr played Sherlock Holmes. I could imagine Bond going that route.
I would prefer a Brit to play Bond, but as long as an American actor can do the accent properly and is the right fit I see no reason why not. That being said, the way there has been literally an invasion of Brits and Aussies playing Americans these days, I don't see it happening. Too many good British and Australian actors out there.
but could Ritchie do a film where Bond escapes from a deathtrap without immediately flashing back to 30 seconds before, revealing gadget that had never been previously mentioned in the plot? I would call that a narrative cheat, but its exactly the way Ritchie tells his stories.
actually the Moore era films sometimes would have a very quick flashback to Q explaining the gadget just before MooreBond remembered it could apply to this situation. But they would be repeating a line of dialog we had already seen at the beginning of the film, to remind those of us with short memories. I think that happens in Moonraker.
The precredits of Casino... are actually pretty tricky, because its two timelines rapidly intercut, and filmed in different styles. Not just the usual harp music and dissolve. For a film series that doesn't usually do flashbacks at all, that was really radical, and was an immediate sign this wasn't going to be like those old movies. Goldeneye's precredits is by far the biggest leap backwards in time, but because its at the start of the film, it does not disrupt the forward motion within the film.
Fleming's books often had a flashback starting with chapter 2 (back to M's office after an introductory chapter setting the main scene), then there would be all the backstories as characters were introduced, as well as mini-essays explaining the history of all the other elements. And Bond would often dwell on his own personal memories of moments earlier in his life. So Fleming's own stories did move back and forth in time, and the films opted instead for strict forward movement in time. Compare the linear precredits of Goldfinger with chapter 1 of Fleming's book, which was a flashback. I think that sense of continuous forward movement is important to the way we experience those films, and deliberate.
The earliest films had one temporal device I find odd now. A character would often begin explaining something that would be done, and the voice would continue as narration but the image would cut to a moment ahead in time where we see these predicted actions now occurring. Such as Bond driving to Miss Taro's house, but that device happens several times in those first few movies. So that's more like a flashforward, consistent with the continuous forwards momentum.
There are three separate timelines in Dunkirk--you can't avoid having flashbacks.
"This gives the impression that everything is happening concurrently, when, in fact, there are minuscule flashbacks, flash-forwards and replays of the action from different angles sewn into the editing."
"Nolan’s somewhat perversely structured screenplay tells three stories, also interlocking, laced with flashbacks and revisits to scenes, moments, really, you may not realize are revisits from a new perspective."
They are perhaps not technically flashbacks, the same can be said about Momento. Their structures are more advanced than standard flashbacks. It's a matter of how you define flashbacks. Can we agree that Nolan likes to play with structure and time in his movies?
I do belive he is perfectly able to make James Bond movies with a linear structure.
Yes....no question EON should give Daniel Craig the boot immediately. What a great opportunity that would be.
Unfortunately for those who dislike Craig, Mr. Short and Homely, as Bond, he is an extremely popular Bond with the folks who count,
the people who plunk down their hard earned money and go see Bond films. Believe it or not there are actually quite a few of us who post on AJB who actually like Craig as Bond....shocking, simply shocking. Seriously though, EON's priority was to get Craig back for
Bond 25. Craig's return for 25 significantly boosts the films box office potential.
If it is true that EON is still interested in using much of Hodge's script, it won't take that much to get it polished up and ready for filming. Add a new director to that mix and there is still a chance that Bond 25 makes its fall 2019 release date.
Very interesting. I find it surprising that you feel that Craig is dissed here, my confirmation bias gets the opposite sense, that he is extremely popular with most posters here (must confess that I have not 'done the math' )
For the sake of honest introspection I will say I probably over reacted to Bonded123's post. Right now, speaking for myself, I'm trying to be optimistic regarding Bond 25, but feeling more than a bit anxious and a bit raw about the whole thing. The "this is a great opportunity to dump Craig" felt to me like a bit of piling on and touched a nerve. I understand there are people who don't like Craig as Bond and they have every right to and to also voice that opinion. That being said, I also think that there is no way EON would go to the length of canning Craig and starting fresh with a new Bond....it's enough bad publicity and potential internet and tab fodder with having Boyle move on, starting over without Craig would look like total defeat and chaos for the franchise.
Hopefully EON is gearing up to take a run at keeping the fall 2019 release date. Maybe out of necessity, EON is forced to make the smaller, tighter and better Bond film many of us are hoping for anyway.
I hope so to,
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
There are three separate timelines in Dunkirk--you can't avoid having flashbacks.
"This gives the impression that everything is happening concurrently, when, in fact, there are minuscule flashbacks, flash-forwards and replays of the action from different angles sewn into the editing."
"Nolan’s somewhat perversely structured screenplay tells three stories, also interlocking, laced with flashbacks and revisits to scenes, moments, really, you may not realize are revisits from a new perspective."
They are perhaps not technically flashbacks, the same can be said about Momento. Their structures are more advanced than standard flashbacks. It's a matter of how you define flashbacks. Can we agree that Nolan likes to play with structure and time in his movies?
I do belive he is perfectly able to make James Bond movies with a linear structure.
I'm sure he could make a linear Bond. I just don't think he'd be interested in doing it.
According to MI6community Yann Demage and Edgar Wright are on the shortlist of directors.
Canadian director Jean-Marc Vallee is also said to be on the shortlist. He's best known for the movies "Wilde", "Young Victoria" and "Texas Buyers Club". All three are good movies. He has also directed a claimed TV series "Sharp objects" and "Big little lies". He has directed a cyberpunk TV-series and a Western, but there is little action on his CV. On the positive side, he has directed four actors to an Oscar nomination.
Yes, I've seen that on the news-stands several times the last days. No, no wait.... I live in another country.
So has Jean-marc Vallee been discussed here a lot lately since my post was so funny?
Comments
Be interesting to see if he gives an update to confirm or deny this claim.
It’s something DC is very keen to do...
Can you reveal more or are you just making a guess?
The Daily Express leaked the idea in May:
https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/957255/James-Bond-25-Daniel-Craig-007-death-Logan-Wolverine-Hugh-Jackman-Danny-Boyle
It’s something he’s been on about for awhile, so I’ve been told. I rather like the idea...
Any thoughts/suggestions, Sir Miles?
Apparently it’s all linked with Eon ‘selling up’...the new owners would get a ‘clean slate’ and could do pretty much whatever they wanted...even ‘re-imagine’ the whole series again...it just seems a nice way for Eon to end their ownership.
Proof like what...?...written statements
Much stronger than rumour but less than fact...
My one concern is about an American playing the role. If Bond is owned by MGM and another studio or MGM sells its stake and another studio has full rights - they could be tempted to cast an American/Canadian actor as Bond. Robert Downey Jnr played Sherlock Holmes. I could imagine Bond going that route.
And now The Sun is running with the idea of Bond's absolute death, as opposed to his faked or apparent death which we've seen a few times already...
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/7102013/danny-boyle-quit-james-bond-franchise-in-a-row-over-offing-the-super-spy-in-dramatic-finale-to-the-25th-film/
I don't think American audiences would accept an American Bond.
Anyway, if they do sell, then would that make bond 26 onwards not part of the EON series like NSNA? Or would it still be EON, but just different people?
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
Not against the idea myself and feel that DC and Babs are arrogant enough to want Bond to die with the end of their tenure. Death is no barrier to cinematic rebirth. If it cleared the decks and allowed a fresh start I'm all for it.
From an actors perspective I can see how attractive a proposition it is. As they have creatively reached a dead end it's difficult to see what other moves are left on the board. It would be a good way out and could make for one he'll of a final film.
But I'm slowly gaining an appreciation for what he does, in a very intellectual sense. Film is a sequence of images creating the illusion of movement forward in time, so his technique with gratuitous flashbacks every other minute is experimenting, and possibly advancing, how time is represented in film. And it was actually sort of appropriate to Sherlock Holmes, where Watson is meant to not know what's going on until Holmes explains it all to him after the fact.
As for Bond films, I don't think they've ever had so much as a conventional flashback. Time is always moving forwards in Bond films. And Ritchie's style would be much too distracting, it'd be worse than Die Another Day (the coldest, most overstylised Bondfilm I can think of)
But five years? that's approaching the gap between License... and Goldeneye. We know Dalton was offered the role when production finally got rolling again, but he would have had to agree to a new multi-film contract (makes sense from the producers point of view) whereas he saw it as the third film in his original contract. So they got a new guy, to provide continuity for a new generation of filmgoers. Whenever Bond25 ends up coming up, it may be a new generation of filmgoers who end up seeing it, who have no attachment to the old guy.
This is a good point and I thought about when people were talking about Nolan directing Bond 25--Nolan's films are mostly flashbacks.
The only flashback I can think of in a Bond film is the fight in the PTS in CR.
"This gives the impression that everything is happening concurrently, when, in fact, there are minuscule flashbacks, flash-forwards and replays of the action from different angles sewn into the editing."
https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/film/2017/07/dunkirk-accomplished-expressive-war-film-without-blood-and-guts
"Nolan’s somewhat perversely structured screenplay tells three stories, also interlocking, laced with flashbacks and revisits to scenes, moments, really, you may not realize are revisits from a new perspective."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/movies/ct-dunkirk-mov-rev-20170717-column.html
This article does a good job of explaining Nolan's non-linear use of time.
https://birthmoviesdeath.com/2017/07/24/convergence-at-dunkirk-transcending-time-and-tribalism
For the sake of honest introspection I will say I probably over reacted to Bonded123's post. Right now, speaking for myself, I'm trying to be optimistic regarding Bond 25, but feeling more than a bit anxious and a bit raw about the whole thing. The "this is a great opportunity to dump Craig" felt to me like a bit of piling on and touched a nerve. I understand there are people who don't like Craig as Bond and they have every right to and to also voice that opinion. That being said, I also think that there is no way EON would go to the length of canning Craig and starting fresh with a new Bond....it's enough bad publicity and potential internet and tab fodder with having Boyle move on, starting over without Craig would look like total defeat and chaos for the franchise.
Hopefully EON is gearing up to take a run at keeping the fall 2019 release date. Maybe out of necessity, EON is forced to make the smaller, tighter and better Bond film many of us are hoping for anyway.
I would prefer a Brit to play Bond, but as long as an American actor can do the accent properly and is the right fit I see no reason why not. That being said, the way there has been literally an invasion of Brits and Aussies playing Americans these days, I don't see it happening. Too many good British and Australian actors out there.
actually the Moore era films sometimes would have a very quick flashback to Q explaining the gadget just before MooreBond remembered it could apply to this situation. But they would be repeating a line of dialog we had already seen at the beginning of the film, to remind those of us with short memories. I think that happens in Moonraker.
The precredits of Casino... are actually pretty tricky, because its two timelines rapidly intercut, and filmed in different styles. Not just the usual harp music and dissolve. For a film series that doesn't usually do flashbacks at all, that was really radical, and was an immediate sign this wasn't going to be like those old movies.
Goldeneye's precredits is by far the biggest leap backwards in time, but because its at the start of the film, it does not disrupt the forward motion within the film.
Fleming's books often had a flashback starting with chapter 2 (back to M's office after an introductory chapter setting the main scene), then there would be all the backstories as characters were introduced, as well as mini-essays explaining the history of all the other elements. And Bond would often dwell on his own personal memories of moments earlier in his life. So Fleming's own stories did move back and forth in time, and the films opted instead for strict forward movement in time. Compare the linear precredits of Goldfinger with chapter 1 of Fleming's book, which was a flashback. I think that sense of continuous forward movement is important to the way we experience those films, and deliberate.
The earliest films had one temporal device I find odd now. A character would often begin explaining something that would be done, and the voice would continue as narration but the image would cut to a moment ahead in time where we see these predicted actions now occurring. Such as Bond driving to Miss Taro's house, but that device happens several times in those first few movies. So that's more like a flashforward, consistent with the continuous forwards momentum.
They are perhaps not technically flashbacks, the same can be said about Momento. Their structures are more advanced than standard flashbacks. It's a matter of how you define flashbacks. Can we agree that Nolan likes to play with structure and time in his movies?
I do belive he is perfectly able to make James Bond movies with a linear structure.
I hope so to,
I'm sure he could make a linear Bond. I just don't think he'd be interested in doing it.
Canadian director Jean-Marc Vallee is also said to be on the shortlist. He's best known for the movies "Wilde", "Young Victoria" and "Texas Buyers Club". All three are good movies. He has also directed a claimed TV series "Sharp objects" and "Big little lies". He has directed a cyberpunk TV-series and a Western, but there is little action on his CV. On the positive side, he has directed four actors to an Oscar nomination.
Well Edgar Wright can do decent action
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMT2RwFFs_g
‘Information’ that’s been in the press all week!
So has Jean-marc Vallee been discussed here a lot lately since my post was so funny?