Future Bond movies set in the 1950's or 60's?
The youtuber The Bond geek posted a video on this subject, and also mentioned the possibility of Nolan directing several such movies: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPIkuzaF0Fs
This thread is based on The Bond Geek video. What do you think of 007 movies set around the time Fleming wrote about James Bond , but most likely with new stories? Is it likely? Is it something you's want? Does Nolan's possible involvement make it more likely and more to your liking?
Comments
yes please, re the period pieces. like Sherlock Holmes movies after a certain point needed the hansom cabs and gaslight to be capture the correct feel. I believe Bond is a period specific fantasy, rooted in postwar austerity and political tensions, and layered with a fantasy of conspicuous consumption that only makes sense when we remember the original audiences could only dream of such decadent lifestyle.
I think one reason the recent films have suffered is because we have got so far from those times. The conspicuous consumption angle has gotten less persuasive for example as younger generations take a freespending lifestyle for granted , Bond's life doesnt feel so special. Like BrosnanBond driving a BMW, the ubiquitous standard issue yuppie-mobile, how is that car an escapist fantasy?
as for the Nolan question, please gawd no, ever since his Batman films I've thought he is an incompetent storyteller. If we're going to get a BondDirector who specialises in nonlinear plot structures I'd rather have Tarantino.
One reason against a period Bond is the problems getting money from prosuct placements. But as the Bond Geek says, Amazon has a lot of money. If Nolan is the director it should be easier to get more financing too. I'm trying to think of large action francises that are set in the 50's or 60's. I can't think of any other than the two ltest Indiana Jones movies, but Harrison Ford won't make any more of those. a period Jame sbodn will set the franchise apart. Some bonuses of setting the movies in that time period is no mobile phones, ear pieces and internet. I want Bond to work alone and having fun gadgets!
It seems very unlikely considering everything has been done since 1995 to have Bond evolving with the times. The sexist, misogynist dinosaur fighting against Smersh has come and gone.
BB seems quite sure a spy fiction taking place almost 70 years ago wouldn't work for the audience. No matter the director, this person will have to play by the rules, otherwise EON will hire someone else (it wouldn't be the first time).
Nevertheless, the "old days" are not completely over. Among the seven post-Benson books (I don't take into account Young Bond and the Kim Sherwood trilogy), only two of them take place in the modern era. To be honest, learning a new time period novel is about to be published makes me much more enthusiastic than any single Bond 26 announcement.
There's been a single Bond26 announcement???? Please share it!
I'd say the Bond movies have tried to handle current issues long before 1995. As the Bond Geek argues, some current issues can be handled in a period Bond movie. Threaths against national independence, the race for valuable materials and the (old and new) cold war springs to mind.
Bond26 ? What is that ? A new toothpast ?
Belligerent Russia run by an evil sociopath, genuine nuclear threat in October...1950s, 1962, 2023...it's unclear what the existential differences are...
The evil sosiopath died in 1953, but the point is still a good one.
But does BB really think like that ? Is she really interested in geopolitics ? Will she hire screenwriters able to build a genuine Cold War 2.0 spy thriller where Bond cannot afford to be focused on his feelings ?
In other words, is it typically the kind of topic she wants to deal with ? Not sure...
I'd say the Brosnan bonds hit a better balance between geopolitics and personal iddues than Craig's Bodn movies did.
In many ways, if they want to keep things in the present day, the Brosnan films (sans DAD) provide the blueprint. When compared to the Craig films—Casino Royale notwithstanding—it’s the Brosnan movies that had the more relevant and interesting plots and better characterizations of Bond. Not to mention better villains. Trevelyan and Elektra both had realistic motivations for their over-the-top antics. And Carver, who came off as the most far-fetched at the time, seems rather prescient these days.
Also, in fairness to the Brosnan BMWs, the 740 had some great gadgetry and fit Bond’s cover, for a change! And the Z8 is considered something of a grail car for automotive enthusiasts. And Bond still drove the DB5 as his personal car, but they managed not to overdo it like in the Craig films.
The Brosnan films still catch a lot of flack among a large number of Bond fans, and I’m always puzzled by it. Maybe it’s down to the woeful DAD juxtaposed against the excellent Casino Royale. But if you look at the whole body of work, I think you get a much different picture.
Goldeneye is on UK TV ITV4 tonight, followed by TND tomorrow. For me, those are the best two Bond films since TSWLM and MR and until Casino Royale. I agree with @Miles Messervy in his brief assessment of Brosnan and of the BMW.
Craig has some good villains too. But going back to the 50's wouldn't make it harder to create memorable villains, perhaps even the oposite.
Something I don't appreciate with the Brosnan movies is the lack of context.
In GE, the Cold War is over but they could have found something more original than having a former MI6 agent whose main goal is to avenge the death of his parents. Furthermore, using an electro-magnetic weapon in 1995 is not particularly significant considering it could have been done ten years ago (in AVTAK, Bond, Q, M, and Gray already discuss about this threat).
In TND, the handover of Hong-Kong is never mentioned and it's something I find disturbing for a 1997 spy movie involving England and China. It's funny to know Benson published two Bond books this year: the novel Zero Minus Ten and the TND novelization. And the first one has, IMHO, a far better story than the second one, precisely because the current context is used to build the plot.
In DAD, Bond is sent to North Korea but I guess the West didn't wait 2002 to keep an eye on this country after the Cold War (don't forget the 1994 nuclear crisis). Replace Moon by Orlov and North Korea by Soviet Russia and you get a poor remake of OP.
TWINE is, IMHO, the most interesting Brosnan movie plotwise, but it mainly focuses on the relationships between the characters (Bond, Elektra, Renard, M) while the geopolitical situation of the Caspian Sea countries after the dissolution of the Soviet Union is not clearly explained.
All due respect, this is exactly what I’m referring to when I say that the Brosnan films are subjected to undue criticism. The type of context you’re referring to is absent from 95% of the Bond film canon. As well it should be. That type of geopolitical framing is simply beyond the scope of what these films are about.
I totally disagree. I can quote you many movies of the Bond franchise where the context is used to build the plot and/or the villain's motivations: FRWL, GF, YOLT, TMWTGG, TSWLM, FYEO, OP, TLD, CR06, QoS.