Have not of course 'done the math' but it seems that few are thrilled about the news re Swann being in 25. Of course we need to reserve judgement until we see the film. I'm one of those who share that early reaction but will hope that the powers that be have assimilated where SP went wrong (apart from Box office) and are canny enough to avoid the pitfalls.
Here's to hope.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
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.
I don't think Camille should return because:
A. Camille's story is complete.
B. She had no relationship with Bond.
She and Bond crossed paths under certain circumstances, and it wouldn't make sense for them to cross paths again. Camille was a female ally, not a Bond girl, so she couldn't take the place of Madeleine.
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.
In the last scene between Bond and Camille, in the Ford hydrogen SUV, Bond says: "The dam we saw will have to come down and there will be others too. Someone who worked for Greene might be able to help." And Camille says that's a good idea.
So, it seems she was set on a course to right the wrongs of Dominic Greene, which would bring her into conflict with Quantum, which must have been a front for Spectre as Mr White worked for it. So, maybe Quantum/Spectre killed her years ago or maybe she can help Bond along the way in Bond25?
Personally, I think we have too many characters for Bond25 already. I can't see how you can crowbar Camille into a Bond25 story unless it's a Spectre interrogation video tape.
BTW as for lairs and no furniture in the Venice building; Bond films typically end with a climatic battle with the double jeopardy of the location crashing around their ears, whether it's a space station, island solar power complex, airship, volcano, oil rig, etc. The point is, it's a location that blows up.
Ironically I was the one most negative to the casting of Lea Seydoux in SPECTRE. To be honest this wasn't because I disliked her, it was because I like Synnøve Macody Macody Lund so much. Now I'm ironically in the minority who is in the "wait and and see" camp. Or are we in a silent minority?
I wasn't hoping for her casting in Bond25, but today I'm hopeful and worried at the same time. If she isn't given good material for her performance her casting can do much harm. I'm thinking of the lines, direction and situations she will be good enough to show off what a good actress she is. I'm also thinking of the role her character has in the movie. If Madeline is murdered in the PTS and her job is basically to motivate Bond for QoS II, I'll be disapointed. I also worry that Madeline and Bond will be in a relationship all the movie, robbing Bond of his womanizer persona. But I belive there is a good posibility Lea Seydoux will be given an interesting arch and the tools to perform well. I say we should be hopeful at the thought of the positive potential of her presence in Bond25 instead of fearing the worst.
I don’t think you bring back an actress of Seydoux’s caliber to simply kill her in the first ten minutes. It’s the same reason M has been so overused during the past 20 years.
My guess is her role will at least be more interesting than a PTS death. It still doesn’t make it a good idea for her to return, but the ending of Spectre combined with the continuity that flows throughout the Craig Bond-verse made her return inevitable once we learned that Craig was coming back.
What if they actually follow the theory that everything that happens after the torture dream is in Bond's mind? The film can pick up either in the chair or Bond is captured by Oberhauser. They can have another actor play Blofeld because Hans is really Hans and maybe Bond in his delusional state heard a henchman mention the name Blofeld. MI6 never blows up, Bond never drives away with Madeline.
Well....we will all be able to pass judgement come February 2020. I choose to hold out hope for something good. While SPECTRE IMO was ok and more of a missed opportunity than a disaster; EON has a track record of coming back strong from a mediocrity.
And to James Boldman.........please no, no, no, no. That's getting into James Bond is a code name territory for me. )
Personally I hope this rumour is wrong. I also question if they are debating such a major shift 12 weeks before shooting starts.
I wouldn't call that reporting, just an opinion piece on a rumour. And is it just an idea that some fan has come up with that has blown up into something bigger? That's how the whole Idris Elba thing started.
Personally I hope this rumour is wrong. I also question if they are debating such a major shift 12 weeks before shooting starts.
That's not even a rumour. That's the writer basically putting out a hypothetical and looking for reaction and discussion.
There's also a couple of facts that are lost in this also: If I am not mistaken, didn't SPECTRE out gross MI: Fallout?
Sometimes I get the feeling that there is some sort of James Bond inferiority complex these days. The MI films are decent but they also benefit from a lot of hype primarily regarding Cruise doing his own stunts.
I was unsure if I should call it a report, but the man ho rote the article is a real reporter. I very much doubt he just made it up, but I also doubt he has very good sources. My guess would be industry sources, but not anyone who is in the room when decisions are being made. I doubt the "Team Bond" model will happen, but I think it's a very bad idea. First of all Bond is a lone wolf and the movie should reflect that. Second, the best reaction to MI-Fallout is focusing on what makes Bond be Bond and make sure this is different from the competitors. The only thing EON should take from MI are standout action scenes that have energy.
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.
I don't think Camille should return because:
A. Camille's story is complete.
B. She had no relationship with Bond.
She and Bond crossed paths under certain circumstances, and it wouldn't make sense for them to cross paths again. Camille was a female ally, not a Bond girl, so she couldn't take the place of Madeleine.
Great points, I would also add that does your average movie goer even remember Quantum of Solace now? let alone Camille?
If (big if) any Bond girl from the other Craig movies should be in Bond25, Madline is the obvious choice. Vesper is the most memorable of them, but she is of cource dead. QoS is ten years ago, and I don't think Camille made any deeper mark on the audience than most Bond girls. Madeline is from the latest movie and she is actually unique because she's the only one who "rides into the sunset" with Craig's Bond.
If (big if) any Bond girl from the other Craig movies should be in Bond25, Madline is the obvious choice. Vesper is the most memorable of them, but she is of cource dead. QoS is ten years ago, and I don't think Camille made any deeper mark on the audience than most Bond girls. Madeline is from the latest movie and she is actually unique because she's the only one who "rides into the sunset" with Craig's Bond.
It makes the most sense to bring back Madeleine. I would have been very surprised if she didn't return. I'm not entirely thrilled with her return, like everyone else here, but nobody should be shocked at this news.
I was initially expecting a direct sequel to Spectre based on the way it ended, but with 4+ years since the last film, some time will have passed.
To be truly meaningful those figures need to link to total costs to yield a profitability number. Personally surprised that Fallout did that well. I saw it two weeks into its run in a virtually empty CInema. The manager told me that it had been moved to a smaller screen due to poor numbers. I saw Spectre the second time in the same circumstances to a very full house. The same Manager (a Bond fan) said that anecdotal feedback had been 'middling' and that the next instalment would probably suffer as a consequence unless initial feedback was very strong. Again not science.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
To be truly meaningful those figures need to link to total costs to yield a profitability number. Personally surprised that Fallout did that well. I saw it two weeks into its run in a virtually empty CInema. The manager told me that it had been moved to a smaller screen due to poor numbers. I saw Spectre the second time in the same circumstances to a very full house. The same Manager (a Bond fan) said that anecdotal feedback had been 'middling' and that the next instalment would probably suffer as a consequence unless initial feedback was very strong. Again not science.
Like I said probably ad nauseum at this point Spectre is the only film I've been to that people walked out of. Whereas during a showing of Fallout the lady next to me was watching the finale through her fingers. Those two vastly different theater experiences more or less define how I view each film beyond my own personal feelings. Spectre as "the Bond movie so boring people actually left" and Fallout as "the movie so exciting the lady next to me could barely watch". I just hope the reactions Bond 25 evokes from its audience are more Fallout and less Spectre.
Wow, never have seen anyone ever walk out of a Bond film. I do recall a very sparse audience when I saw TMWGG many years ago.
When I saw SPECTRE the IMAX theater was close to full both times. MI6: Fallout in the same IMAX theater was about half full (and less seats to fill due to the installation of large recliners which reduced the capacity from around 575 to 300). Of course this is all very unscientific. The bottom line is, a mediocre Bond film that was not well reviewed still out grossed a hugely hyped and generally well reviewed MI6 film.
To be truly meaningful those figures need to link to total costs to yield a profitability number.
If what you’re trying to gauge is profitability, then yes. But if you’re just trying to gauge public interest by how much was spent on tickets, then the film’s cost wouldn’t matter.
Look, we can have a James Bond - Mission Impossible pissing contest all day. The point is, to go back to the posted article, is there is very little evidence that this 60 year old franchise needs to now chart a different course in order to be more like one of its competitors because they think that’s what the public prefers. Jimmy Bond is doing just fine.
Look, we can have a James Bond - Mission Impossible pissing contest all day. The point is, to go back to the posted article, is there is very little evidence that this 60 year old franchise needs to now chart a different course in order to be more like one of its competitors because they think that’s what the public prefers. Jimmy Bond is doing just fine.
Word! We don‘t need Bond copying the Mission-franchise.
Look, we can have a James Bond - Mission Impossible pissing contest all day. The point is, to go back to the posted article, is there is very little evidence that this 60 year old franchise needs to now chart a different course in order to be more like one of its competitors because they think that’s what the public prefers. Jimmy Bond is doing just fine.
Word! We don‘t need Bond copying the Mission-franchise.
It was pre-Craig that the MI films outperformed the Bond Films. MI1 (1996) did $457 million. MI2 (2000) did $549 million. In the same time frame GE (1995) did $356 million, TND (1997) did $359 million, TWINE (1999) did $361 million and DAD (2002) did $431 million.
It was starting with Casino Royale (2006) which did $594 million that Bond began leaving MI in the dust (MI3 released the same year did $397 million).
It was largely because of the challenges of the MI films and the Bourne films that EON did the Craig reboot (which has proven successful).
The noms were out for the Grammys on 7 December and many of you might be happy to hear that neither Sam Smith or Adele got nominated.
All of DC's films have had multiple Grammy award winners sing the song, Spectre, Sam Smith, Skyfall, Adele, Quantum, Alicia Keys and Jack White, Casino, the late Chris Cornell.
I am wondering, as Madeleine is back, and it's going to be a bit of coupledom for Bond, I was wondering if multiple Grammy award winners, Jay-Z and Beyonce, under their The Carters banner could be candidates for the Bond25 theme.
Looking at the nominees and who is a multiple winner, other candidates could be;
Toni Braxton
Taylor Swift
Lady Gaga
FYI Arctic Monkeys have also been nominated, but rarely do bands do Bond themes. I can only think of Wings, A-ha, Duran Duran and Garbage, four out of 24 films.
To be truly meaningful those figures need to link to total costs to yield a profitability number.
If what you’re trying to gauge is profitability, then yes. But if you’re just trying to gauge public interest by how much was spent on tickets, then the film’s cost wouldn’t matter.
Good point well made.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Comments
Here's to hope.
IG: @thebondarchives
Check it out, you won’t be disappointed
I don't think Camille should return because:
A. Camille's story is complete.
B. She had no relationship with Bond.
She and Bond crossed paths under certain circumstances, and it wouldn't make sense for them to cross paths again. Camille was a female ally, not a Bond girl, so she couldn't take the place of Madeleine.
Being confirmed by the director is good enough for me...
In the last scene between Bond and Camille, in the Ford hydrogen SUV, Bond says: "The dam we saw will have to come down and there will be others too. Someone who worked for Greene might be able to help." And Camille says that's a good idea.
So, it seems she was set on a course to right the wrongs of Dominic Greene, which would bring her into conflict with Quantum, which must have been a front for Spectre as Mr White worked for it. So, maybe Quantum/Spectre killed her years ago or maybe she can help Bond along the way in Bond25?
Personally, I think we have too many characters for Bond25 already. I can't see how you can crowbar Camille into a Bond25 story unless it's a Spectre interrogation video tape.
BTW as for lairs and no furniture in the Venice building; Bond films typically end with a climatic battle with the double jeopardy of the location crashing around their ears, whether it's a space station, island solar power complex, airship, volcano, oil rig, etc. The point is, it's a location that blows up.
I wasn't hoping for her casting in Bond25, but today I'm hopeful and worried at the same time. If she isn't given good material for her performance her casting can do much harm. I'm thinking of the lines, direction and situations she will be good enough to show off what a good actress she is. I'm also thinking of the role her character has in the movie. If Madeline is murdered in the PTS and her job is basically to motivate Bond for QoS II, I'll be disapointed. I also worry that Madeline and Bond will be in a relationship all the movie, robbing Bond of his womanizer persona. But I belive there is a good posibility Lea Seydoux will be given an interesting arch and the tools to perform well. I say we should be hopeful at the thought of the positive potential of her presence in Bond25 instead of fearing the worst.
My guess is her role will at least be more interesting than a PTS death. It still doesn’t make it a good idea for her to return, but the ending of Spectre combined with the continuity that flows throughout the Craig Bond-verse made her return inevitable once we learned that Craig was coming back.
And to James Boldman.........please no, no, no, no. That's getting into James Bond is a code name territory for me.
http://jamesbondradio.com/rumor-mill-team-bond-may-be-closer-than-we-think/
Personally I hope this rumour is wrong. I also question if they are debating such a major shift 12 weeks before shooting starts.
I wouldn't call that reporting, just an opinion piece on a rumour. And is it just an idea that some fan has come up with that has blown up into something bigger? That's how the whole Idris Elba thing started.
That's not even a rumour. That's the writer basically putting out a hypothetical and looking for reaction and discussion.
There's also a couple of facts that are lost in this also: If I am not mistaken, didn't SPECTRE out gross MI: Fallout?
Sometimes I get the feeling that there is some sort of James Bond inferiority complex these days. The MI films are decent but they also benefit from a lot of hype primarily regarding Cruise doing his own stunts.
Spectre - $880mil
MI: Fallout - $791mil
Re. Lax.
It makes the most sense to bring back Madeleine. I would have been very surprised if she didn't return. I'm not entirely thrilled with her return, like everyone else here, but nobody should be shocked at this news.
I was initially expecting a direct sequel to Spectre based on the way it ended, but with 4+ years since the last film, some time will have passed.
To be truly meaningful those figures need to link to total costs to yield a profitability number. Personally surprised that Fallout did that well. I saw it two weeks into its run in a virtually empty CInema. The manager told me that it had been moved to a smaller screen due to poor numbers. I saw Spectre the second time in the same circumstances to a very full house. The same Manager (a Bond fan) said that anecdotal feedback had been 'middling' and that the next instalment would probably suffer as a consequence unless initial feedback was very strong. Again not science.
When I saw SPECTRE the IMAX theater was close to full both times. MI6: Fallout in the same IMAX theater was about half full (and less seats to fill due to the installation of large recliners which reduced the capacity from around 575 to 300). Of course this is all very unscientific. The bottom line is, a mediocre Bond film that was not well reviewed still out grossed a hugely hyped and generally well reviewed MI6 film.
If what you’re trying to gauge is profitability, then yes. But if you’re just trying to gauge public interest by how much was spent on tickets, then the film’s cost wouldn’t matter.
SPECTRE on Rotten Tomatoes has a 63% Fresh score and a 61% Audience score.
(By comparison SKYFALL has a 92% Fresh score and a 86% Audience score.)
Word! We don‘t need Bond copying the Mission-franchise.
IG: @thebondarchives
Check it out, you won’t be disappointed
It was starting with Casino Royale (2006) which did $594 million that Bond began leaving MI in the dust (MI3 released the same year did $397 million).
It was largely because of the challenges of the MI films and the Bourne films that EON did the Craig reboot (which has proven successful).
The noms were out for the Grammys on 7 December and many of you might be happy to hear that neither Sam Smith or Adele got nominated.
All of DC's films have had multiple Grammy award winners sing the song, Spectre, Sam Smith, Skyfall, Adele, Quantum, Alicia Keys and Jack White, Casino, the late Chris Cornell.
Looking at this years nominees
https://www.vulture.com/2018/12/2019-grammy-nominations-complete-list.html
I am wondering, as Madeleine is back, and it's going to be a bit of coupledom for Bond, I was wondering if multiple Grammy award winners, Jay-Z and Beyonce, under their The Carters banner could be candidates for the Bond25 theme.
Looking at the nominees and who is a multiple winner, other candidates could be;
Toni Braxton
Taylor Swift
Lady Gaga
FYI Arctic Monkeys have also been nominated, but rarely do bands do Bond themes. I can only think of Wings, A-ha, Duran Duran and Garbage, four out of 24 films.
Good point well made.