I'd guess you probably got into the Bond films when you were a teenager? I know that i did. the thought of Halle Berry coming out of the water and the Aston Martin Vanquish got me drooling when I was 11. Audiences who are now 11 or 12 were just being born when SF came out. It's an accepted truth that EON need to entice younger audiences to the franchise, whilst satisfying older fans. I'm 31 now, so hey don't need to worry about selling a ticket to me or others who grew up with the Daniel Craig films. We are going to turn up anyway. However, you need to give younger audiences (who have time and disposal cash to waste) to turn up to the cinema.
Also, Alexa Demie would just make a helluva Bond baddie.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,746Chief of Staff
No I didn’t…I was far younger than that when I first got into Bond…perhaps that should mean we have a return to the Moore style of Bond films? You know, to appeal to the kids 🙂
"I'm 31 now, so hey don't need to worry about selling a ticket to me or others who grew up with the Daniel Craig films. We are going to turn up anyway."
I'm a wee bit older than you, LuciusNightmare, and until NTTD would have absolutely agreed that EON would never have to worry about me turning up for a Bond film. However, I am so completely over the DC Bond that climaxed in NTTD that no matter who the next Bond is or what magnificent scenery or cars they might offer in a preview, if I get even so much as a sniff that B26 is going to be as self-reflective as NTTD and even to some extent SP, I'd skip the cinema completely, veto pay-per-view, and wait for a free-showing on something I already subscribe to.
I get that. However, once those trailers drop and the opinions behind to come out about the film, any longstanding Bond fans curiosity will be piqued enough the see the new film. After all, by the sounds of your post you were already burnt out with SP but the hype of NTTD got you intrigued again at the very least.
Personally, if the films went back to the Roger Moore days then I would be disappointed. However, I would understand as Eon would probably be trying to emulate Marvel or the Uncharted film. I want them to continue with the same tone of NTTD (which was more fun than SF) and make the new Bond in his 20's. I just saw David Zaritsky's new video dressing a potential Bond and I think its clear that some fandom has not moved on from Craig and wants something similar. I feel that is wrong and the next Bond needs to be younger and skew to that audience.
I think the post from Sir Miles confirms that. He got into Bond much younger than me. You need that audience to get intrigued and a younger man, younger leading ladies are a surefire way of reviving interest in the franchise.
Spectre was fine. There was a lot about it that I loved, but I found it dragged a bit. Despite a few misgivings however, I was REALLY looking forward to NTTD. I had tickets for the preview night when it was originally supposed to open pre-Covid. I'd read every spoiler-free bit of coverage I could find, and was as pumped as for any Bond film in my life.
I do agree that B26 needs to be new and fresh, without any question. A new Bond actor provides an opportunity for some change, just as DC's Bond was very different from PB's Bond which was hugely different from TD's Bond which was massively different from RM's Bond etc etc. That said, I still want it to basically be James Bond. Yes, times change, fashions change, villains/enemies/challenges change, but there still should be a recognisable Bond-core to the new actor and the new story.
@The Domino Effect I agree and in fact, for me, this is where utilising the continuation novels might help. While it's perhaps too late to mine John Gardner's output - the plots would need a serious upgrade and many of the best action chapters have already been pinched - I certainly feel that Jeffrey Deaver's Carte Blanche has potential and so too Devil May Care, despite my disliking it. I'm not too sure about Horowitz's trio, which hint at the kind of background info and character insight I don't want for a new Bond. Horowitz writes him as if OO7 is a fifties / sixties Craig-Bond type. I can't take much more of that. However, I believe it is a forlorn hope. Eon will go there own way.
The problem with Carte Blanche is the fact I never had the feeling I was reading a Bond novel. Just replace James Bond by Harry Bosch and you get a Michael Connelly thriller. It was very impersonal, despite Deaver's endeavor to reestablish Fleming's elements. The part in South Africa was endless to me and although there were some good ideas like the final twist, I didn't appreciate the style and I found the story quite long and boring.
I've nothing against Deaver but there's no match with Boyd in terms of style, escapism, creativity and character development. I found Solo's ending not as good as it should have been considering the magnificent first 2/3 of the story, but the book remains great whereas Carte Blanche is clearly not IMHO.
Generally speaking, I prefer some kind of old school atmosphere. Concerning the movies, I think my allergy started with TND and the modern aesthetic they brought to the series.
Would anyone be against the idea of a proper Young Bond film? One where he is still in University (or younger) and gets recruited into MI6? I personally cannot see Eon doing something akin to Silverfin, but something along those lines. Maybe not a 15 year old but have him be in his late teens or early 20's. I think MGW and Richard Maibaum's original treatment for TLD had a Bond still at Eton. It would be rather bold to go that young with the character. I could see someone like Louis Partridge play a Young Bond.
An early draft of TLD had Bond in the Navy, not Eton. A young Bond TV series could work, perhaps starting with Bond in college and in later seasons in the navy. Don't you think such a series would be om Amazon and not Netflix, Barbel? 😉
But the exact streaming service wasn't really the point you were making, was it?
I think EON had to be careful if they make spin-offs, but it can be done. But if they make LEGO James Bond for the youngest and a young Bond series at Amazon it could work.
Agree with this and Domino’s post. I’m just so tired of CraigBond. I think Deaver did a good job of modernizing Bond, much like Gardner before him.
And while it goes without saying that we need a younger actor in the role (that was arguably the case in 2015, and painfully apparent by 2021), he doesn’t need to be a child. Early/mid thirties would work just fine. Turn out a film every 3 years and you could easily get four pictures. Out of him. That’s the right number, I think.
While I'm not against updating the litteratur James Bond, I didn't like Deaver's version that much.
I do support the idea of casting a younger actor as Bond. Not so much to attract younger audiences, but to get more Bond movies. He could be as young as the late 20's, but he absolutely has to come across as a man and not a teenager.
An actor in his late twenties/early thirties could make three or four movies before reaching the age of 40, which would be great.
Nevertheless, he has to look mature enough to carry the role, like Connery in DN and Lazenby who was only 29 during the shooting of OHMSS. And for God's Sake, give us a dark-haired Bond again !
While a Young Bond adaptation, or a younger James Bond in general, would be interesting to see, it would probably work better as a spin-off TV series.
As far as the actual next Bond film goes...
LuciusNightmare:I personally do not want to see an ordinary Bond adventure where he goes on a conventional mission. That worked in the 60s, 70s and 80s but we are in a new era after Craig. I much prefer the more emotional and personal stories that BB and MGW have been making. The last thing I want is for them to go back to the 'old' model. I would actually rather they avoided making a lighthearted 'fun' film and instead continue in the same vein they are in at the moment with a younger Bond.
I agree. I too want them to try something different. It's a new era for Bond films now and I don't want them to just tread back over the same ground. Albeit I would rather they don't try too hard to emulate the style of the Craig films either, as much as I enjoyed Craig's run. But overall I am partial to the more serious and personal Bond films. I did enjoy the attempts at serialization, and I hope that is something which continues.
In itself I don't have a problem with an older Bond at all. But I'd rather they cast a younger actor simply because it'll mean more longevity in the role.
When GE launched a new Bond actor, Brosnan, it set the beginning of the story back in time, in 1986, as Bond and Trevelyan infiltrate a Soviet chemical weapons facility in the PTS. In GE's contemporary setting, after the titles, the recent history of the collapse of the Soviet Union is presented as a watershed, an event which in Bond's world is a significant marker between 'now and then'. It was Eon's way of suggesting that Bond can be 'reinvented' to keep pace with modern times.
GE's mode of introduction was successful and the approach taken there might be a good way to launch the next Bond, too: i.e. avoiding an 'origins' story as such, but seeding the plot with an episode set years before - perhaps during Bond's time at Eton or in the Royal Navy. It's an approach which would appease a contemporary taste for personally rooted stories, yet GE remains a good model, imho, in the sense that, also, it 'contains' Bond's personal involvement and gets on with delivering a solid Bond yarn.
Critics and material I don't need. I haven't changed my act in 53 years.
Good analysis. I consider Goldeneye to be an apex Bond film insofar as it blends the old and the new style of making the films to perfection. It’s well-written, well-cast, and contains all of the familiar elements without being self-referential or doing anything to the extreme. Even the personal story comes off, unlike the laughably ham-fisted attempts at that during the Craig years.
I think a more mission-oriented and fun Bond doesn't have to be a copy or re-thread of the old movies. In the same way a more emotionally driven style focusing on people's backgrounds can be done in ways that's different from how Craig did it. Personally I would like to see Bond enjoyed himself more in standalone movies while still showing more dept and personality than Ethan Hunt (not hard) and some older versions of Bond.
I've seen a few people mention the idea of the next film being a period piece set in the 50s or 60s. As much as I want them to do something new, at the same time, I actually think a period piece could be really interesting. I think they could still do it in a way that's a little different from the Connery/Lazenby films. It'd also be nice to see more faithful adaptions of a few of the other novels such as Live and Let Die or Moonraker. Or even possibly an adaptation of one of the post-Fleming novels.
Ah, well, it's still something I'd enjoy seeing even if it's highly improbable. Maybe someday they'll change their mind. I can't help but think of their original plans for Bond 15 which was to do it as a prequel set before Dr. No, and I feel that was a great concept which was sadly wasted because they wanted to stick largely to the traditional formula. (Albeit Timothy Dalton is my favourite actor and The Living Daylights is one of my favourite Bond films, so I can't complain too much there.)
Perhaps it could have worked with Brosnan who was only 33 in 1986 and looked (too) young at that time but I'm not sure I would have liked it.
Dalton was 40 and his physical appearance made him mature enough to believe in a Bond full of skills and experience.
Furthermore, if Bond 15 had been a reboot, would we have had LTK two years later ? Not sure at all. LTK is powerful precisely because there's a continuity with what had been done before. There's even a direct reference to OHMSS when Felix tells Della about Bond's past married life. After all those missions, the character we've always known finally gets involved in a genuine personal vendetta and resigns from SIS ! I think making this one the second movie of a reboot wouldn't have had the same impact on the audience.
And given LTK is a masterpiece, I'm very glad they didn't decide to go that way...
Comments
Errrr…no, not for me 🙈
Really? I always thought the whole 'Euphoria'/Instagram aesthetic would really suit a reboot for Bond. It would appeal to teenagers.
Yeah, just makes it look worse…to me…but then I’m not a teenager 🤷🏻♂️ If Bond films went in that direction, then I’m out.
I'd guess you probably got into the Bond films when you were a teenager? I know that i did. the thought of Halle Berry coming out of the water and the Aston Martin Vanquish got me drooling when I was 11. Audiences who are now 11 or 12 were just being born when SF came out. It's an accepted truth that EON need to entice younger audiences to the franchise, whilst satisfying older fans. I'm 31 now, so hey don't need to worry about selling a ticket to me or others who grew up with the Daniel Craig films. We are going to turn up anyway. However, you need to give younger audiences (who have time and disposal cash to waste) to turn up to the cinema.
Also, Alexa Demie would just make a helluva Bond baddie.
No I didn’t…I was far younger than that when I first got into Bond…perhaps that should mean we have a return to the Moore style of Bond films? You know, to appeal to the kids 🙂
"I'm 31 now, so hey don't need to worry about selling a ticket to me or others who grew up with the Daniel Craig films. We are going to turn up anyway."
I'm a wee bit older than you, LuciusNightmare, and until NTTD would have absolutely agreed that EON would never have to worry about me turning up for a Bond film. However, I am so completely over the DC Bond that climaxed in NTTD that no matter who the next Bond is or what magnificent scenery or cars they might offer in a preview, if I get even so much as a sniff that B26 is going to be as self-reflective as NTTD and even to some extent SP, I'd skip the cinema completely, veto pay-per-view, and wait for a free-showing on something I already subscribe to.
I get that. However, once those trailers drop and the opinions behind to come out about the film, any longstanding Bond fans curiosity will be piqued enough the see the new film. After all, by the sounds of your post you were already burnt out with SP but the hype of NTTD got you intrigued again at the very least.
Personally, if the films went back to the Roger Moore days then I would be disappointed. However, I would understand as Eon would probably be trying to emulate Marvel or the Uncharted film. I want them to continue with the same tone of NTTD (which was more fun than SF) and make the new Bond in his 20's. I just saw David Zaritsky's new video dressing a potential Bond and I think its clear that some fandom has not moved on from Craig and wants something similar. I feel that is wrong and the next Bond needs to be younger and skew to that audience.
I think the post from Sir Miles confirms that. He got into Bond much younger than me. You need that audience to get intrigued and a younger man, younger leading ladies are a surefire way of reviving interest in the franchise.
Spectre was fine. There was a lot about it that I loved, but I found it dragged a bit. Despite a few misgivings however, I was REALLY looking forward to NTTD. I had tickets for the preview night when it was originally supposed to open pre-Covid. I'd read every spoiler-free bit of coverage I could find, and was as pumped as for any Bond film in my life.
I do agree that B26 needs to be new and fresh, without any question. A new Bond actor provides an opportunity for some change, just as DC's Bond was very different from PB's Bond which was hugely different from TD's Bond which was massively different from RM's Bond etc etc. That said, I still want it to basically be James Bond. Yes, times change, fashions change, villains/enemies/challenges change, but there still should be a recognisable Bond-core to the new actor and the new story.
@The Domino Effect I agree and in fact, for me, this is where utilising the continuation novels might help. While it's perhaps too late to mine John Gardner's output - the plots would need a serious upgrade and many of the best action chapters have already been pinched - I certainly feel that Jeffrey Deaver's Carte Blanche has potential and so too Devil May Care, despite my disliking it. I'm not too sure about Horowitz's trio, which hint at the kind of background info and character insight I don't want for a new Bond. Horowitz writes him as if OO7 is a fifties / sixties Craig-Bond type. I can't take much more of that. However, I believe it is a forlorn hope. Eon will go there own way.
Horowitz writes him in continuity with the Fleming books. Horowitz' second book is Bond's first assignment as a 00.
The problem with Carte Blanche is the fact I never had the feeling I was reading a Bond novel. Just replace James Bond by Harry Bosch and you get a Michael Connelly thriller. It was very impersonal, despite Deaver's endeavor to reestablish Fleming's elements. The part in South Africa was endless to me and although there were some good ideas like the final twist, I didn't appreciate the style and I found the story quite long and boring.
I've nothing against Deaver but there's no match with Boyd in terms of style, escapism, creativity and character development. I found Solo's ending not as good as it should have been considering the magnificent first 2/3 of the story, but the book remains great whereas Carte Blanche is clearly not IMHO.
Generally speaking, I prefer some kind of old school atmosphere. Concerning the movies, I think my allergy started with TND and the modern aesthetic they brought to the series.
Would anyone be against the idea of a proper Young Bond film? One where he is still in University (or younger) and gets recruited into MI6? I personally cannot see Eon doing something akin to Silverfin, but something along those lines. Maybe not a 15 year old but have him be in his late teens or early 20's. I think MGW and Richard Maibaum's original treatment for TLD had a Bond still at Eton. It would be rather bold to go that young with the character. I could see someone like Louis Partridge play a Young Bond.
I'd be interested but feel thar I'd that did happen it'd be more likely to be a Netflix or similar project rather than a feature film.
An early draft of TLD had Bond in the Navy, not Eton. A young Bond TV series could work, perhaps starting with Bond in college and in later seasons in the navy. Don't you think such a series would be om Amazon and not Netflix, Barbel? 😉
Yes, of course.
But the exact streaming service wasn't really the point you were making, was it?
I think EON had to be careful if they make spin-offs, but it can be done. But if they make LEGO James Bond for the youngest and a young Bond series at Amazon it could work.
I’m sorry but when I read AJB members speculating on how to interest the “youts” in 007, I immediately think of this.
🤣🤣🤣
It has to be done really well or not at all.
Agree with this and Domino’s post. I’m just so tired of CraigBond. I think Deaver did a good job of modernizing Bond, much like Gardner before him.
And while it goes without saying that we need a younger actor in the role (that was arguably the case in 2015, and painfully apparent by 2021), he doesn’t need to be a child. Early/mid thirties would work just fine. Turn out a film every 3 years and you could easily get four pictures. Out of him. That’s the right number, I think.
While I'm not against updating the litteratur James Bond, I didn't like Deaver's version that much.
I do support the idea of casting a younger actor as Bond. Not so much to attract younger audiences, but to get more Bond movies. He could be as young as the late 20's, but he absolutely has to come across as a man and not a teenager.
An actor in his late twenties/early thirties could make three or four movies before reaching the age of 40, which would be great.
Nevertheless, he has to look mature enough to carry the role, like Connery in DN and Lazenby who was only 29 during the shooting of OHMSS. And for God's Sake, give us a dark-haired Bond again !
While a Young Bond adaptation, or a younger James Bond in general, would be interesting to see, it would probably work better as a spin-off TV series.
As far as the actual next Bond film goes...
LuciusNightmare: I personally do not want to see an ordinary Bond adventure where he goes on a conventional mission. That worked in the 60s, 70s and 80s but we are in a new era after Craig. I much prefer the more emotional and personal stories that BB and MGW have been making. The last thing I want is for them to go back to the 'old' model. I would actually rather they avoided making a lighthearted 'fun' film and instead continue in the same vein they are in at the moment with a younger Bond.
I agree. I too want them to try something different. It's a new era for Bond films now and I don't want them to just tread back over the same ground. Albeit I would rather they don't try too hard to emulate the style of the Craig films either, as much as I enjoyed Craig's run. But overall I am partial to the more serious and personal Bond films. I did enjoy the attempts at serialization, and I hope that is something which continues.
In itself I don't have a problem with an older Bond at all. But I'd rather they cast a younger actor simply because it'll mean more longevity in the role.
When GE launched a new Bond actor, Brosnan, it set the beginning of the story back in time, in 1986, as Bond and Trevelyan infiltrate a Soviet chemical weapons facility in the PTS. In GE's contemporary setting, after the titles, the recent history of the collapse of the Soviet Union is presented as a watershed, an event which in Bond's world is a significant marker between 'now and then'. It was Eon's way of suggesting that Bond can be 'reinvented' to keep pace with modern times.
GE's mode of introduction was successful and the approach taken there might be a good way to launch the next Bond, too: i.e. avoiding an 'origins' story as such, but seeding the plot with an episode set years before - perhaps during Bond's time at Eton or in the Royal Navy. It's an approach which would appease a contemporary taste for personally rooted stories, yet GE remains a good model, imho, in the sense that, also, it 'contains' Bond's personal involvement and gets on with delivering a solid Bond yarn.
Good analysis. I consider Goldeneye to be an apex Bond film insofar as it blends the old and the new style of making the films to perfection. It’s well-written, well-cast, and contains all of the familiar elements without being self-referential or doing anything to the extreme. Even the personal story comes off, unlike the laughably ham-fisted attempts at that during the Craig years.
I think a more mission-oriented and fun Bond doesn't have to be a copy or re-thread of the old movies. In the same way a more emotionally driven style focusing on people's backgrounds can be done in ways that's different from how Craig did it. Personally I would like to see Bond enjoyed himself more in standalone movies while still showing more dept and personality than Ethan Hunt (not hard) and some older versions of Bond.
I've seen a few people mention the idea of the next film being a period piece set in the 50s or 60s. As much as I want them to do something new, at the same time, I actually think a period piece could be really interesting. I think they could still do it in a way that's a little different from the Connery/Lazenby films. It'd also be nice to see more faithful adaptions of a few of the other novels such as Live and Let Die or Moonraker. Or even possibly an adaptation of one of the post-Fleming novels.
EON has gone on record repeatedly saying they won’t do period. It’s not going to happen.
Ah, well, it's still something I'd enjoy seeing even if it's highly improbable. Maybe someday they'll change their mind. I can't help but think of their original plans for Bond 15 which was to do it as a prequel set before Dr. No, and I feel that was a great concept which was sadly wasted because they wanted to stick largely to the traditional formula. (Albeit Timothy Dalton is my favourite actor and The Living Daylights is one of my favourite Bond films, so I can't complain too much there.)
Perhaps it could have worked with Brosnan who was only 33 in 1986 and looked (too) young at that time but I'm not sure I would have liked it.
Dalton was 40 and his physical appearance made him mature enough to believe in a Bond full of skills and experience.
Furthermore, if Bond 15 had been a reboot, would we have had LTK two years later ? Not sure at all. LTK is powerful precisely because there's a continuity with what had been done before. There's even a direct reference to OHMSS when Felix tells Della about Bond's past married life. After all those missions, the character we've always known finally gets involved in a genuine personal vendetta and resigns from SIS ! I think making this one the second movie of a reboot wouldn't have had the same impact on the audience.
And given LTK is a masterpiece, I'm very glad they didn't decide to go that way...
I think the only way this could happen is as a TV spinoff.