Okay, I'm taking your bait. You're saying Eon is determined to sell up after Bond 25? Sell its share to MGM or another studio? This could result in an American playing Bond.
It’s been mentioned that Eon are interested in selling up - not sure I’d use the word ‘determined’...that’s why it was interesting to find out how long their latest distribution deal was/is...If it’s only a one film deal...
New owners could do whatever they wanted...but would they want to mess too much...?
It’s just something I heard over a year ago...
It would also make sense how they got DC back on board (other than a shed load of money) if he has so much creative input as recent articles suggest.
'Come back, we kill off Bond and you've completed the arc '
I would have put money on it being Boyle who wanted to kill Bond off not the other way round.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,749Chief of Staff
Do you think this alleged plot idea - Bond dies - will still make it into the film or do you think it's been scrapped?
More likely than not at present...as it wasn’t anything new that Hodge came up with...it was something DC wanted...and, as Lady Rose said, it was the probably the ‘hook’ that finally persuaded DC back - that and a shed load of cash )
If they do chose to kill Bond it will be the peak (or nadir) of the Craig-era obsession with James Bond "personal arc". Don't they understand people go to cinemas to see Bond on a mission?
If you're going to have Bond die, it's going to have to be something special. This is the guy who has defied death a thousand times, so why does he die this time? And it'll have to be something moving, otherwise, why do it?
I think killing off Bond would just seem like a cheap gimmick to me. As if they're competing with Infinity War's shock value or something.
I shouldn't worry too much about all those characters in Infinity War. In real comic books, the characters never really die, especially not ones who just had a hit movie last summer and are due a sequel.
The death of a major character in comics is done for shock value, that is true, or rather very cynical but effective marketing. The stunt gains attention from mainstream media and non-fans run to buy the "Death of..." issues assuming they'll be collectors items, while all the old jaded readers are well aware the character will be revived, with equal hype, within the year.
If they do chose to kill Bond it will be the peak (or nadir) of the Craig-era obsession with "personal arches". Don't they understand people go to cinemas to see Bond on a mission?
You can have both. In every film, Craig's Bond has had a mission.
I see that the latest MI film is doing comparatively poorly at the box office. The reason is that Ethan Hunt is a complete cipher without even the thinnest layer of character development. Audiences today want more than seeing basically the same film with the same unchanging character.
There was an extensive character arc in the Fleming novels. Young spy who gets rejected or betrayed by the women he meets. He's very conflicted--he wants more in his life than just being a hired gun. He meets the love of his life who promptly gets murdered. He falls to pieces.
I agree up to a point. Ethan Hunt is a man nearly without a personality. There has been a mission in every Craig Bond movie. But the main story in all of them can be seen as personal:
CR- Vesper is killed
QoS - Bond gets his revenge
SF - M(other) is killed
SPECTRE - his main enemy is his brother
I think many will remember those story lines over gambling over terrorist money, getting control of the water supply, hacking the world and digital surveilance of the world.
I think many will remember those story lines over gambling over terrorist money, getting control of the water supply, hacking the world and digital surveilance of the world.
yeh that's what I remember most clearly from those films, The villains plots in all those films are rather difficult to explain, and its more like they are just the B-plot while the personal issues are the A-plot in the foreground.
And those mission based B-plots are undermined by the incoherent storytelling and the absence of traditional Bond story structures like the final showdown in the villains headquarters. Like the mission is just hinted at but never really focussed on aside from the action sequences, then whatever exposition is needed to link the action sequences together is either obscure or not even there.
If you're going to have Bond die, it's going to have to be something special. This is the guy who has defied death a thousand times, so why does he die this time? And it'll have to be something moving, otherwise, why do it?
It's not as easy as it sounds.
Far more radical and shocking would be for a casual almost incidental death, a stray bullet or a car accident.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
If they do chose to kill Bond it will be the peak (or nadir) of the Craig-era obsession with James Bond "personal arc". Don't they understand people go to cinemas to see Bond on a mission?
That seems to be lacking in Bond these days. I still enjoy the movies but there has been a little too much personal stuff.
One thing to bare in mind is, eon is a family business, if both babs and Mike g want to retire, what stops them killing off Bond, making a clean break and ending Cubbys legacy.?
I thought about killing off the current Bond. But he could be reborn at any time in the future if James Bond was a cover name and his agent number reassigned. It’s a smart way for DC to leave and a replacement to come in. Babs and Michael could sell the franchise on and leave the rest to the next generation. Kind of clean all round.
Just my thoughts
Cheers :007)
My name is Bond, Basildon Bond - I have letters after my name!
I thought about killing off the current Bond. But he could be reborn at any time in the future if James Bond was a cover name and his agent number reassigned. It’s a smart way for DC to leave and a replacement to come in. Babs and Michael could sell the franchise on and leave the rest to the next generation. Kind of clean all round.
I thought about killing off the current Bond. But he could be reborn at any time in the future if James Bond was a cover name and his agent number reassigned. It’s a smart way for DC to leave and a replacement to come in. Babs and Michael could sell the franchise on and leave the rest to the next generation. Kind of clean all round.
Just my thoughts
Cheers :007)
Oh god! The codename theory
Well let’s face it reality with the franchise is taking over fiction these days
Cheers :007)
My name is Bond, Basildon Bond - I have letters after my name!
In flemmings books JAMES BOND is his real name with a family history to support it not to mention 50 years of films and books, you cant undo all that, its ridiculous, yes 007 pre fix can be re assigned but it would have to be a new character, but in the world we live in if Babs promised DC your Bond will die if you`ll make "bond25" then so it will be and tough on us THE FANS
maybe they can begin Bond26 with FiennesM knocking on Pierce Brosnan's door, requesting him to come out of retirement and save the world one more time.
Then BrosnanBond complains about this young antisocial bruiser who has stolen his name and ruined his reputation. FiennesM then gets blown up in a dramatic exit for his character, just like Dame Judi got, and BrosnanBond is promoted to be the new M, and has to recruit a new team of double-oh agents and come up with a clever scheme to fool SMERSH as to exactly who the real James Bond is.
Just saying every agent has a cover name and a back story, it’s just James Bond’s was captured in books and films
Let’s face it we are now so far from the stories of Fleming and have been for years if not decades would it really matter. What’s in the past is past a chance to write a new future.
There is plenty of the character that could be taken into the future (metrosexual male, Naval Commander, a physical agent with tech in support). As for story lines go back to Counter intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion themes all perfectly valid today vs 60 years ago.
Cheers :007)
My name is Bond, Basildon Bond - I have letters after my name!
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,749Chief of Staff
In flemmings books JAMES BOND is his real name with a family history to support it not to mention 50 years of films and books, you cant undo all that, its ridiculous, yes 007 pre fix can be re assigned but it would have to be a new character, but in the world we live in if Babs promised DC your Bond will die if you`ll make "bond25" then so it will be and tough on us THE FANS
But it’s already been ‘undone’...several times...each actors Bond has been same/similar but different...
Killing Bond is beyond stupid and I can’t imagine supporting it unless it is so well done as to be beyond objection.
But Sir Miles is right; every Bond other than Craig was a soft reboot of the character. Do you really believe that Brosnan’s Bond, living in the mid-90s, fought in the Second World War? Or married Tracy in 1969? If you do, your imagination is more lively than mine. No, they are each JAMES BOND, but they are not the same incarnation of James Bond. Re-imaginations of the same mythology, more like it.
maybe they can begin Bond26 with FiennesM knocking on Pierce Brosnan's door, requesting him to come out of retirement and save the world one more time.
Then BrosnanBond complains about this young antisocial bruiser who has stolen his name and ruined his reputation. FiennesM then gets blown up in a dramatic exit for his character, just like Dame Judi got, and BrosnanBond is promoted to be the new M, and has to recruit a new team of double-oh agents and come up with a clever scheme to fool SMERSH as to exactly who the real James Bond is.
All the clues are there... Bond drowns (have you seen the latest Omega campaign?) and is replaced by his brother Ernst who becomes the new 007... they've even introduced the scar on the right cheek... :v
I'm not sure what killing Bond will achieve for EON or Craig. I thought by killing off 007 it would make it more difficult to restart the franchise with something new. Would it not have made more sense to leave it at Spectre and see him bow out in a more dignified manner?
Many months before the speculation of who will be directing Bond 25 and before Boyle was announced a member posted the idea of back to back films which I thought would be plausible given the ending of Spectre. Now it just seems like a mess and the main concern is will Bond 25 turn into a film like Spectre where we had a great cast but poor script and under use of some great characters (this is why I'm hoping Mendes doesn't return)?
I am a big Craig fan btw but would hate to see him finish his Bond tenure with death of 007. I know that directors care less about continuity nowadays but I feel that EON could lose a lot of fans with this decision - but maybe they don't care as it would be someone elses problem.
If Bond were to die, it should be the common ambiguous end that superheroes often get. The kind of ending where most people think Bond has died but with the possibility of him coming back. The kind of thing Skyfall did.
I've said before I don't see any upside to killing Bond. To me, it just doesn't make sense creatively, financially or as a hook to keep the general audience interested in the character. IMHO, it reeks of desperation. Maybe I just lack imagination, but I can't conceive of a way that offing 007 will do anything except damage the brand.
I have no idea how true the Sun story is, but I'm taking it with a huge grain of salt.
Comments
It would also make sense how they got DC back on board (other than a shed load of money) if he has so much creative input as recent articles suggest.
'Come back, we kill off Bond and you've completed the arc '
I would have put money on it being Boyle who wanted to kill Bond off not the other way round.
No idea what you mean by this ?:) are you having a dig?
More likely than not at present...as it wasn’t anything new that Hodge came up with...it was something DC wanted...and, as Lady Rose said, it was the probably the ‘hook’ that finally persuaded DC back - that and a shed load of cash
It's not as easy as it sounds.
I shouldn't worry too much about all those characters in Infinity War. In real comic books, the characters never really die, especially not ones who just had a hit movie last summer and are due a sequel.
The death of a major character in comics is done for shock value, that is true, or rather very cynical but effective marketing. The stunt gains attention from mainstream media and non-fans run to buy the "Death of..." issues assuming they'll be collectors items, while all the old jaded readers are well aware the character will be revived, with equal hype, within the year.
You can have both. In every film, Craig's Bond has had a mission.
I see that the latest MI film is doing comparatively poorly at the box office. The reason is that Ethan Hunt is a complete cipher without even the thinnest layer of character development. Audiences today want more than seeing basically the same film with the same unchanging character.
There was an extensive character arc in the Fleming novels. Young spy who gets rejected or betrayed by the women he meets. He's very conflicted--he wants more in his life than just being a hired gun. He meets the love of his life who promptly gets murdered. He falls to pieces.
CR- Vesper is killed
QoS - Bond gets his revenge
SF - M(other) is killed
SPECTRE - his main enemy is his brother
I think many will remember those story lines over gambling over terrorist money, getting control of the water supply, hacking the world and digital surveilance of the world.
And those mission based B-plots are undermined by the incoherent storytelling and the absence of traditional Bond story structures like the final showdown in the villains headquarters. Like the mission is just hinted at but never really focussed on aside from the action sequences, then whatever exposition is needed to link the action sequences together is either obscure or not even there.
Far more radical and shocking would be for a casual almost incidental death, a stray bullet or a car accident.
We've had threads on that before.
I've always thought it should be ironic. That he gets hit by a bus or something crossing the road.
That seems to be lacking in Bond these days. I still enjoy the movies but there has been a little too much personal stuff.
Part of Bond's appeal is he is an enigma.
Just my thoughts
Cheers :007)
Cheers :007)
Then BrosnanBond complains about this young antisocial bruiser who has stolen his name and ruined his reputation. FiennesM then gets blown up in a dramatic exit for his character, just like Dame Judi got, and BrosnanBond is promoted to be the new M, and has to recruit a new team of double-oh agents and come up with a clever scheme to fool SMERSH as to exactly who the real James Bond is.
Let’s face it we are now so far from the stories of Fleming and have been for years if not decades would it really matter. What’s in the past is past a chance to write a new future.
There is plenty of the character that could be taken into the future (metrosexual male, Naval Commander, a physical agent with tech in support). As for story lines go back to Counter intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion themes all perfectly valid today vs 60 years ago.
Cheers :007)
But it’s already been ‘undone’...several times...each actors Bond has been same/similar but different...
But Sir Miles is right; every Bond other than Craig was a soft reboot of the character. Do you really believe that Brosnan’s Bond, living in the mid-90s, fought in the Second World War? Or married Tracy in 1969? If you do, your imagination is more lively than mine. No, they are each JAMES BOND, but they are not the same incarnation of James Bond. Re-imaginations of the same mythology, more like it.
Bond actually died in the PTS of Skyfall. everything after are Dreams, as his brain shuts down.
No, he died in Blofeld's dentist's chair. Everything after that was the dreams of a dying man.
Many months before the speculation of who will be directing Bond 25 and before Boyle was announced a member posted the idea of back to back films which I thought would be plausible given the ending of Spectre. Now it just seems like a mess and the main concern is will Bond 25 turn into a film like Spectre where we had a great cast but poor script and under use of some great characters (this is why I'm hoping Mendes doesn't return)?
I am a big Craig fan btw but would hate to see him finish his Bond tenure with death of 007. I know that directors care less about continuity nowadays but I feel that EON could lose a lot of fans with this decision - but maybe they don't care as it would be someone elses problem.
Yes, he can commit suicide by cutting his wrists
I have no idea how true the Sun story is, but I'm taking it with a huge grain of salt.
I don't have