Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
Movies MOBILE
Byrne Robotics | Movies Page of 2 Next >>
Topic: BOND 25 coming in 2019 Post Reply | Post New Topic
Author
Message
Petter Myhr Ness
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 02 July 2009
Location: Norway
Posts: 2944
Posted: 16 March 2018 at 2:13am | IP Logged | 1 post reply

November 8 2019, to be precise. 

Daniel Craig returns.
Danny Boyle confirmed as director.
John Hodge confirmed as writer.

Thoughts?
Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12187
Posted: 16 March 2018 at 4:20am | IP Logged | 2 post reply

My enthusiasm has waned for Bond in recent years.

Decades ago, he was one of a kind. Sure, there were "contenders" but Bond was Bond. Nowadays, there are so many spy movies, serious and light, that rival Bond. Bond no longer stands out. 

That's sad. Just my opinion, of course.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 11157
Posted: 16 March 2018 at 5:15am | IP Logged | 3 post reply

I think it's an excellent choice for both writer and director and I am quite enthused about the prospect. All of Craig's efforts save Casino Royale have disappointed me, but hopefully they'll be able to get the series back on track. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12187
Posted: 16 March 2018 at 5:48am | IP Logged | 4 post reply

They should cast Michael Shannon as Jaws. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Ted Downum
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 21 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2057
Posted: 16 March 2018 at 7:34am | IP Logged | 5 post reply

I've found the Craig movies to be hit-or-miss, and Spectre was a particular disappointment...but the prospect of Danny Boyle and John Hodge on board is pretty exciting. 

If 25 is Craig's sendoff--and I'm fine if it is and fine if it isn't; I've also found him to be hit-or-miss--this means it's more likely to be an entertaining/bravura Bond picture.

Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne

Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 113298
Posted: 16 March 2018 at 7:55am | IP Logged | 6 post reply

Craig lost me with his light brown hair. He could dye it for that Truman Capote movie, but not for Bond?
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 11157
Posted: 16 March 2018 at 9:04am | IP Logged | 7 post reply

And as Ted Hughes in Sylvia...


For me the wrong hair colour is a false note but not a deal-breaker.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12187
Posted: 16 March 2018 at 10:15am | IP Logged | 8 post reply

In my view, although the modern movies always give me my "quota" of action and intrigue, I feel they lack a certain charm. They're very Bourne-like in many ways.

Dalton's two movies were (mostly) devoid of humour, but it worked for me, given Dalton's performance - and the fact that his Bond was so credible. 

But I'd like to see more charm and humour. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 11157
Posted: 16 March 2018 at 1:28pm | IP Logged | 9 post reply

I would certainly agree with you in the Bourne comparison for Quantum of Solace (a film I totally disliked), but I thought there was quite a lot of stylish charm to Casino Royale.

Skyfall was an overlong dud, but I wouldn't say it felt Bourne-like. It was more measured than a Bourne film... and far too dour for its own good.

No argument that the Craig films would benefit in general from an injection of charm, humour and wit.

It's always been a danger for Bond films to get too big and lose plot cohesion. It's not enough to throw in a bunch of exotic locales, a colourful villain, some beautiful girls and some big action set pieces.  From Russia With Love and Goldfinger had tight narratives which set them apart from the meandering plots of Bond's lesser adventures.   


Edited by Peter Martin on 16 March 2018 at 1:29pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12187
Posted: 16 March 2018 at 1:55pm | IP Logged | 10 post reply

Look at this:

Back to Top profile | search
 
Trevor Smith
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 21 September 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 3008
Posted: 16 March 2018 at 2:01pm | IP Logged | 11 post reply

Let me guess. He'll have a crisis of conscience and/or
go rogue?
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Brian Floyd
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 07 July 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 6114
Posted: 16 March 2018 at 5:47pm | IP Logged | 12 post reply

Daniel Craig needs to go. Hopefully the next movie will be his swan song.

I'm not as enthusiastic about Bond movies as I used to be. Still have not seen SPECTRE, and am not in any hurry to. And Craig isn't the only reason. The writing has gone downhill, and the new Q being young doesn't help.


Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Petter Myhr Ness
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 02 July 2009
Location: Norway
Posts: 2944
Posted: 19 March 2018 at 5:32am | IP Logged | 13 post reply

I enjoyed SPECTRE more than I thought I would, but I hoped it would be Craig's last outing.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Eric Sofer
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 31 January 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 2615
Posted: 19 March 2018 at 6:38am | IP Logged | 14 post reply

I believe a segment of the Bond appeal was Q's wonderful toys. These were a look into a near future in espionage technology - usually advanced, but not unobtainable technology.

What can they do today that's not either just around the corner, or so far-fetched as to defy any suspension of disbelief?
Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12187
Posted: 19 March 2018 at 7:11am | IP Logged | 15 post reply

Important point, Mr Sofer.

There's often talk of a KNIGHT RIDER reboot/adaptation. Back in 1982, when the series started, the features that KITT had were cutting edge. SatNav abilities, sensors, etc, etc. It did blow us away.

Nowadays, cars are very much hi-tech. I had sensors on my previous cars when parking in tight spots. A minicab driver I know told me he has a device that can prevent him exceeding a certain speed. SatNavs are routine for 99% of us, it would seem.

So, I agree about Bond. Plus, things are compact now. How impressive can a scene be when Q hands a small digital device to Bond? How impressive does Q's workshop look with all those mobile phone-style devices and little chips be? Back in the day, there were ghetto blasters and the likes of "Little Nellie". 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 11157
Posted: 19 March 2018 at 7:15am | IP Logged | 16 post reply

Q's gadgets were a tiny slice of what made Bond enjoyable and tended to be crafty rather than technologically cutting-edge.

To wit, bullets, a knife and 50 gold sovereigns stored in a briefcase in From Russia With Love and a magnetised tear-gas grenade disguised as talcum powder. Not a glimpse of future technology in any way; just a sneaky use of existing technology.

When they did try and show future tech -- such as with the cloaked car in Die Another Die -- it failed miserably.

The entertainment comes not from the gadgets being particularly advanced, but from them being so cleverly implemented that Bond and the audience know about it, but the opponents do not. There's still plenty of ways for them to show gadgets utilised in sneaky ways that will be entertaining for the viewer.


Edited by Peter Martin on 19 March 2018 at 7:16am
Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12187
Posted: 19 March 2018 at 7:24am | IP Logged | 17 post reply

 Peter Martin wrote:
When they did try and show future tech -- such as with the cloaked car in Die Another Die -- it failed miserably.

Oh, I quite liked that, it reminded me of Nick Fury's invisible car!

 Peter Martin wrote:
There's still plenty of ways for them to show gadgets utilised in sneaky ways that will be entertaining for the viewer.

That is true. I know we never got to see some gadgets used, but I seem to recall an exploding alarm clock in one film. Be a bit hard to explain why Bond is carrying an alarm clock around, but I'd like to see it used.

Oh, and that stun gas in THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS, which was supposed to last 30 seconds, lasted no more than 5-10 seconds by my calculations...
Back to Top profile | search
 
Eric Sofer
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 31 January 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 2615
Posted: 19 March 2018 at 12:29pm | IP Logged | 18 post reply

Peter M. - I disagree with you that Q's devices were a tiny slice. Not only were they devices that could be a deus ex machina - which I was perfectly content with for the movies of the 60s and 70s eras - but they were a fantastic acting opportunity for Connery, Moore etc. It was always the light moment in a Bond movie when Bond and Q fiddled about with the devices. "...That's my lunch!"

I'm not so certain that FRWL can be compared to DAD. That's a lot of time under the bridge...

As for Q's devices, I think they'll adapt... but they have to go even more futuristic. "Now pay attention, Bond. These earrings are a transmitter and receiver back to MI6 here, but they'll only work out of doors."
"Earrings, Q?"
"In your case, 007, they can't hurt. Now, these contact lenses are powered by your body heat, and have information access. Heat signatures, directions, weather systems... even a limited capacity to see through solid walls if their composition is light enough."
"You know, Q, I've always said I could see right though you."
"Really, 007!"

The gadgets were always science fiction, Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon. They just need to continue along with that trend. Is it easy? No, but after a 24 movie franchise, maybe it's worth a little hard work.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12187
Posted: 19 March 2018 at 1:33pm | IP Logged | 19 post reply

Look at this:

Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 11157
Posted: 19 March 2018 at 2:05pm | IP Logged | 20 post reply

I'm not so certain that FRWL can be compared to DAD
-----------------------------
The comparison between the two is not particularly the point. From Russia With Love is cited as an example of how Q's gadgets are not, by definition, futuristic. Yes, 1963 was a long time ago, but knives and gold coins were already in play back then :)

Yes, the scenes with Q were amusing, yes, they were always the lightest part of the movie. This does not make them a substantial part of the movie, nor does the level of technology on display mean you can't still have amusing interplay between Q and Bond.

Casino Royale, Dr No and Live and Let Die. I think they're all pretty good entries on the series, but none of them feature any special gadgets from Q.

Goldfinger is one of the best entries in the series and, yes, Q's gadgets play a fairly substantial and fun part in the film. But Goldfinger is the exception, rather than the rule. The series has often suffered from trying to emulate the Goldfinger blue-print and, even then, the technology on display in Goldfinger was either not really ahead of its time (revolving number-plates and bulletproof glass) or just a kind of ramped-up movie version of then-current tech (radio-signal tracking devices).

I like Q; I like his gadgets. But a cameo that is a few minutes long per film is not a core part of what makes the films work.

(and sorry to disagree on every count, but I don't think they really count as being an example of deus ex machina. When they are set-up early in the film, their usage later on is merely a pay-off for what we have been primed to expect. Furthermore, Q's devices rarely, if ever, resolved the prime danger in the movie. Usually they would provide a convenient escape mid-movie from a deathtrap or as a means to dispatch a henchman). 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security

Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 32771
Posted: 20 March 2018 at 2:22am | IP Logged | 21 post reply

The Craig films have been hit-or-miss based on order.  His 1 & 3 have been fantastic, but his 2 & 4 have been bores.  In other words, while I loved CASINO ROYALE and SKYFALL, I didn't care for SPECTRE and actively hate QUANTUM OF SOLACE.  But I'm not one to judge considering that I'm not a huge Bond fan at all.  After Connery, I tend not to care about any of the films although I've inexplicably seen all of them.  Probably more to do with their ubiquitous nature on television and cable growing up than with me seeking them out.  I just generally don't get the appeal outside the novels. YMMV.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 11157
Posted: 20 March 2018 at 8:14am | IP Logged | 22 post reply

Quantum of Solace seems to be the one film we can all rally round... in that we all hate it!
Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12187
Posted: 20 March 2018 at 8:47am | IP Logged | 23 post reply

I was about to compare QUANTUM OF SOLACE to CITIZEN KANE. Never mind...
Back to Top profile | search
 
Rick Senger
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 8161
Posted: 20 March 2018 at 10:10am | IP Logged | 24 post reply

Boyle and Hodge have teamed up on a number of projects, most famously the two TRAINSPOTTING movies.  I tend to like Boyle but Hodge has been strictly hit or miss and I'm not sure anyone can easily steer the Bond franchise and the baggage / barnacles it has acquired over the decades in a really fresh and new direction as long as Craig continues in the role. 

I've also seen all the movies over time, though more out of rote habit / childhood nostalgia.  Quite disliked SPECTRE, despised QoS even more, the other Craigs were ok (CASINO ROYALE pretty decent.)  The opening sequences tend to still entertain (editing all 25 of them together might make for a fun if disjointed evening) but Bond just doesn't seem as relevant these days. If it gets great reviews I'll probably go but again it's more of a nod to the rush I got from Bonds as a teen / 20-something than much enthusiasm for what's been done in quite a while.  Otherwise, it'll be a netflix on my big screen, which means I really don't care since Bond movies always play much better for me in the theatre than the tv.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Mark Waldman
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 16 August 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1059
Posted: 23 March 2018 at 7:17pm | IP Logged | 25 post reply

It always amazes me... it can be any topic and most of the responses are negatives. The latest Marvel movie, the latest Marvel show, Bond, whatever it is, most of the responses are negative - "hated it", "will never watch", "not for me," and so on. Not sure why anyone would bother responding at all if they were against things, oftentimes without even watching. I guess it's why I can see a Huffington Post Instagram posting and see negative responses, or on Twitter, or Facebook. The Internet is a good forum for dislike - often folks following things they don't like, I suspect just to complain. Anyway, enough of that - on with the show...

Bond is a subject near and dear to me. Unlike many here, I grew up on the films, seeing them on network TV, edited, on Sunday evenings back when we had just a handful of channels. ANY Bond film was must-see TV, at least for myself and my friends. We'd discuss the "old ones" with Connery, happy to catch movies that pre-dated us. Roger Moore was Bond when I was growing up, but once I saw what Connery was doing, I appreciated that - although very different, of course. I didn't even know who Ian Fleming was, nor of course had read any of the novels.

Anyway, if you are a Bond fan (I don't see many here), I recommend a podcast called James Bond Radio. It's also available thru Facebook or the Stitcher site/app. Great stuff, very thorough, and a labor of love. All Bonds are discussed, including the books (old and new), music, etc.

As a huge fan, I am thrilled for Bond 25; I just wish it weren't so far off. I'd like to see Bond get back onto a more regular (used to be every other year) schedule, and perhaps a Netflix series of Bond adventures set during the Cold War (the original Cold War, not Trump's recreated one).

I, unlike many here, love Daniel Craig's Bond. I'd say as a person who has watched most of them many times (not Quantum, no one can watch that one many times), two are wonderful and one flawed, but with some of the best individual parts of Bond in any era.

I hope Boyle doesn't "cock it up" as new M would say. When Nolan was first mentioned, I was against that because Bond should not be about the celebrity director and making it about himself/herself (a female Bond director would be good), but the character and material. I expect Boyle will be a fine choice though and Mr. Craig can go out with a bang.

I don't want to bore everyone here but since it's a Bond thread I will say that I get much of the criticism, it especially makes sense if you are not a long-time Bond fan, or nut, like many are. Connery was the best, no doubt about it, Lazenby's film exceptional (most Bond diehards agree with this), Roger too jokey but had solid moments (The Spy Who Loved Me and For Your Eyes Only, in particular), Dalton was a good Fleming Bond but devoid of personality and came at a bad time in Bond's film history, Brosnan had weak material but grew into the role and Craig brought back the toughness, though lacks some of the gentlemanly characteristics.

I'll just end saying imo, the best Bond films are From Russia with Love, Casino Royale, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, Skyfall and Goldfinger. I'm also a big fan of You Only Live Twice. I think Spectre is a disappointment only in that it had so much potential - the 3rd act just falls apart a bit. To me though, the opening in Mexico City, the  stuff in Rome (Spectre meeting, car chase), and the train sequence with Mr. Hinx, are all fabulous. Odd, Christoph Waltz' Blofeld didn't really work out (except for the early parts where he was silent and ominous, the Spectre meeting, etc.). He admitted as much and said he wouldn't come back for another, which is ok with me since Blofeld always was played by a different actor anyway.

Bond is great and he's evolved over time as we've become more cynical, saturated with action films, technology, etc. Check out James Bond Radio if you are a fan, it's great stuff. And go back and read the original Fleming novels - a Vesper martini in hand. You'll be thankful that you did.
Back to Top profile | search
 

Page of 2 Next >>
  Post Reply | Post New Topic |

Forum Jump

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login

You are currently viewing the MOBILE version of the site.
CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE FULL SITE