News Daniel Craig signs up for Bond 25, Christopher Nolan in talks to direct

[MakeshiftPython]

And let’s face it, Bernard Lee, Lois Maxwell and Desmond Llewelyn didn’t have the kind of prolific careers that Fiennes, Harris, and Whishaw have. I don’t expect any of them to actually keep those roles until they literally die/retire. I’m inclined to think this is the last we’ll see of them.

 

[Damian]

I’ll miss Craig obviously but I’ll also be sad to see Fiennes, Harris, Kinnear and Wishaw go. I suppose it’s possible that they’ll keep them on like Dench remained after Brosnan went, but I’m inclined to think they won’t.

Yeah, as much as I enjoy Craig, I enjoy the supporting cast (Wright, too!) a lot more and will miss them even more than Craig.

Do we know for sure that they're going to replace the supporting cast for Bond 26?

Whishaw, for his part, has said that he signed a three-picture deal with Skyfall and doesn't expect to do another.

And let’s face it, Bernard Lee, Lois Maxwell and Desmond Llewelyn didn’t have the kind of prolific careers that Fiennes, Harris, and Whishaw have. I don’t expect any of them to actually keep those roles until they literally die/retire. I’m inclined to think this is the last we’ll see of them.

I actually wouldn't be surprised to see 1 or 2 of them to remain for the next film. Whishaw seems to think this will be it for him, though I'm not entirely clear if he'd return to play Q if he was asked to.

But the producers usually seem to like to retain one or two cast members who worked with the prior Bond, much like they did with Dench when Craig started. While true they all have good careers, the 007 franchise is till a lucrative franchise for actors and I don't think any of the 3 would reject continuing on out of hand if asked.

At the same time, I don't think all 3 will stay on. But I might be willing to bet at least one of them will remain for the next 007.

As an aside, while I liked Whishaw as Q, I had kind of hoped Cleese would have returned as Q. Seeing him 1 1/2 times (basically) and only once as Q was disappointing. His with and humor I thought were perfect for the role. He does have one of my all time favorite come-back lines when Bond tell him "you're smarter than you look" and Q quips "that's better than looking smarter than you are." I still remember that got quite a laugh in the theater, and part of that was Cleese's deadpan delivery of the line. I would have loved to have seen Craig and Cleese together for a few scenes in the films.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

Yeah, it's a shame we didn't get more of Cleese...and what we little we did get were in two terrible movies.

But, yes, I love that comeback, too.

 

[STEPhon IT]

All indications is that this mission is more connected to Swann's past rather than Bond's.

As for what I look forward to in NTTD, one is definitely the main titles. I've loved all of Kleinman's work, especially since CR.

According to the director, he mentioned NTTD will be the final chapter of James Bond's story. For some reason the Craig era had to be connected, even when some parts didn't*. I think the merry go round will happen again in some odd turn, the mission is connected to Dr. Madeleine Swann on the surface but as the movie unfolds it will be connected to everything we know about Daniel Craig's run as OO7.

Altho Casino Royale connected to Quantum, I thought SkyFall as terrible as it were was an isolated tale. When Spectre came along the story was struggling to tie everything together and I thought failed. I understand Mr. White was connected to Blofeld but hard to connect Dominic with him because his motivations were different. The same goes for Silva where his motivations were deeply personal, but in Spectre for some odd reason during the climax Bond journeys through a maze looking at photos of his previous foes where I thought those two villains were part of the equation with Blofeld.

I’ll miss Craig obviously but I’ll also be sad to see Fiennes, Harris, Kinnear and Wishaw go. I suppose it’s possible that they’ll keep them on like Dench remained after Brosnan went, but I’m inclined to think they won’t.

That's interesting thought. Why?

 

[Captaindemotion]

That's interesting thought. Why?

See my earlier reply; as I say, basically just a hunch on my part

 

[STEPhon IT]

Going through the thread to find it and still haven't found it but I did happen to see this:

I liked, if that’s the right word, how they were pretty much prepared to summarily execute Bond there for quitting. Pretty shocking (try not saying that to yourself in a Connery-in-Goldfinger-voice).

While I really like the Craig films, it does irk me a little that he’s quit or been suspended in basically all of them. I think it’s happened more in his 4 (released) films to date than all the others put together. It kinda loses the impact that it had when Lazenby or Dalton did it.

It was one of the elements I hated about Craig's entire outing as OO7, he quit. At the time I thought it was one of the spin where he was the "Bond in Training" and because he was young it was one of the stumbling blocks of the character where he would eventually man up and be James Bond. The emo complex remained and I feel this version of OO7 fell short, I don't care anymore about Craig's Bond, but I wish he blossomed in becoming the character. I can only hope the next actor will embrace the character of James Bond, OO7.

 

[Captaindemotion]

The multi quote has put them in the wrong order* but this is what I meant

*the fact that I am several glasses of wine in is doubtless totally unrelated

No, I’m just speculating; I mean, if it’s a sort of soft reboot, they could keep them in place around a new 007, just like Bernard Lee, Lois Maxwell, Desmond Llewelyn etc. And even in a clear reboot, they could come back a la Dench (though the Tanner of the Brosnan era was replaced).

But if NTTD is set to mark a definite ending to the Craig-Bond’s arc, my best guess is that these supporting characters, whose respective first encounters and ensuing relationships with this Bond we’ve seen, are likely to be recast with a new supporting cast. Happy to be proven wrong, of course.

Going through the thread to find it and still haven't found it but I did happen to see this:

 

[STEPhon IT]

Tanner was replaced by Charles Robinson (Colin Salmon) as Deputy Chief of Staff to his Chief of staff. I found it interesting once Robinson was set in he appeared to have more screen time than Tanner.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

The only time I found Craig to be "emo" was in QUANTUM OF SOLACE (which was understandable given his bitter feelings over Vesper) and during third of SKYFALL before he shaved for his appearance at the casino in Macau.

Weirdly, despite his confrontation with Blofeld, he's very carefree throughout SPECTRE. Even when learning that his once foster brother killed his once appointed guardian, he doesn't seem that emotionally bothered by the revelation. The only time he ever does is when he sees Blofeld's face for the first time as if he just saw a ghost.

 

[Captaindemotion]

Tanner was replaced by Charles Robinson (Colin Salmon) as Deputy Chief of Staff to his Chief of staff. I found it interesting once Robinson was set in he appeared to have more screen time than Tanner.

I’m not sure that’s quite correct (about the replacement, anyway; I think you’re probably right about screen time ). Tanner, as played by Michael Kitchen, is in Goldeneye, then Robinson is in TND (but no Tanner), they’re both in TWINE & then it’s only Robinson in DAD.

 

[Starkers]

According to the director, he mentioned NTTD will be the final chapter of James Bond's story. For some reason the Craig era had to be connected, even when some parts didn't*. I think the merry go round will happen again in some odd turn, the mission is connected to Dr. Madeleine Swann on the surface but as the movie unfolds it will be connected to everything we know about Daniel Craig's run as OO7.

Altho Casino Royale connected to Quantum, I thought SkyFall as terrible as it were was an isolated tale. When Spectre came along the story was struggling to tie everything together and I thought failed. I understand Mr. White was connected to Blofeld but hard to connect Dominic with him because his motivations were different. The same goes for Silva where his motivations were deeply personal, but in Spectre for some odd reason during the climax Bond journeys through a maze looking at photos of his previous foes where I thought those two villains were part of the equation with Blofeld.

Skyfall isn't terrible, quite the reverse but tomayto, tomahto. It is the one with definitely no connection, short of the one they shoehorned into Spectre. I have no problem connecting Green with Blofeld. Either Quantum was a separate organisation that Spectre absorbed, or it was Spectre all along, perhaps undergoing an eventually unsuccessful rebrand ala Consignia Silva though they should have left well enough alone. Stupid small universe. I don't object to the films being interconnected, I do object to them making it up as they go. They should have had at least a vague idea what they wanted to with the overall arc and I don't think they ever did.

I could see them wanting to retain Finnes as M but won't be surprised if we get a new Q and Moneypenny (assuming they don't just drop the characters as they had in CR and QoS).

I do hope they return to a more standalone series, or if they do decide on an arc they put more thought into it. I don't have any problem with Bond wanting to quit. The psychological impact of that job must be insane unless you're a complete sociopath and nothing suggests that about Bond (well maybe when Connery played him). I do want to see a bloody end to 007 going rogue every other Tuesday...

 

[Paul Weaver]

it was Spectre all along

 

[STEPhon IT]

What I would like to see return is the separate adventure in the teaser; the deux machina where Bond is right in the climax of it taking off seedy villains right before the opening credit sequence. Not expecting this in a Craig movie because everything is interconnect in some forced way, but for the next OO7. Ever since "The Living Daylights" the Bond teasers were related to the plot of the tale at hand.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

What I would like to see return is the separate adventure in the teaser; the deux machina where Bond is right in the climax of it taking off seedy villains right before the opening credit sequence. Not expecting this in a Craig movie because everything is interconnect in some forced way, but for the next OO7. Ever since "The Living Daylights" the Bond teasers were related to the plot of the tale at hand.

It’s actually pretty rare that a pre-title sequence has no connection to the plot of the film. The only films that did that were GOLDFINGER, THUNDERBALL, MOONRAKER, FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, OCTOPUSSY, and CASINO ROYALE. That’s six films out of 25.

All other films teasers tie into the actual plots.

 

[STEPhon IT]

I would like to see more of those for next OO7 movie, I appreciated the originality of OO7 having an adventure prior to the new adventure. Bond live and die by its own tropes so I'm okay with that. I thought The World is not Enough teaser was quite engaging and really pumped me up for that movie which couldn't hold up after that.

 

[Damian]

What I would like to see return is the separate adventure in the teaser; the deux machina where Bond is right in the climax of it taking off seedy villains right before the opening credit sequence. Not expecting this in a Craig movie because everything is interconnect in some forced way, but for the next OO7. Ever since "The Living Daylights" the Bond teasers were related to the plot of the tale at hand.

It’s actually pretty rare that a pre-title sequence has no connection to the plot of the film. The only films that did that were GOLDFINGER, THUNDERBALL, MOONRAKER, FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, OCTOPUSSY, and CASINO ROYALE. That’s six films out of 25.

All other films teasers tie into the actual plots.

I'm just ready for an old fashioned stand-alone Bond film, with little or no connection to other films. The beauty of most of the Bond films through Die Another Day is they weren't interconnected. You could watch any 007 film you wanted and it didn't really matter if you saw the previous films because they weren't sequels.

Unfortunately, though, I think the trend is toward more serialized story telling. We see it on TV shows and more and more movies. It's not that I mind having that too. It's just that after 4 films that were tied together (sometimes not well) I'm ready for a basic Bond stops a meglomaniac from destroying the world and it has nothing to do with Bond or M or anyone else personally.

I loved 007 films like Goldfinger, On Her Majesty's Secret Service (my favorite 007 film ever--and today is George Lazenby's birthday I believe ), The Spy Who Loved Me, Moonraker and so on. Hell, I even liked 007 films that get lesser reviews like The Man With the Golden Gun and A View to a Kill (my favorite Bond theme BTW). Moore was definitely getting too old for the role, but I loved the movie still and who can do crazy better than Christopher Walken--I still can hear that maniacal laugh as he starts gunning down his own people.

Bond films seemed to have just lost a bit of a step after the 007 exile after License to Kill. I thought Pierce Brosnan was a good Bond (he was my ex-wife's favorite Bond) and I loved Tomorrow Never Dies, but they just started to feel different. Craig is fine as Bond too, Casino Royale I thought was great, and I enjoyed Skyfall and Spectre too (even though I don't care for the personal tie to Bond there) but it's a bit too gritty and real world for 007. The beauty of 007 is he was basically a caricature of the perfect spy. I don't think he was meant to be 'real world.'

But that's just my take. I've happily gone to see ever Bond film since Goldeneye, and they were all fun rides to some extent. I just wish I got to see some of the earlier 007 films in the theater.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

I'm just ready for an old fashioned stand-alone Bond film, with little or no connection to other films. The beauty of most of the Bond films through Die Another Day is they weren't interconnected. You could watch any 007 film you wanted and it didn't really matter if you saw the previous films because they weren't sequels.

Unfortunately, though, I think the trend is toward more serialized story telling. We see it on TV shows and more and more movies. It's not that I mind having that too. It's just that after 4 films that were tied together (sometimes not well) I'm ready for a basic Bond stops a meglomaniac from destroying the world and it has nothing to do with Bond or M or anyone else personally.

I loved 007 films like Goldfinger, On Her Majesty's Secret Service (my favorite 007 film ever--and today is George Lazenby's birthday I believe ), The Spy Who Loved Me, Moonraker and so on. Hell, I even liked 007 films that get lesser reviews like The Man With the Golden Gun and A View to a Kill (my favorite Bond theme BTW). Moore was definitely getting too old for the role, but I loved the movie still and who can do crazy better than Christopher Walken--I still can hear that maniacal laugh as he starts gunning down his own people.

Bond films seemed to have just lost a bit of a step after the 007 exile after License to Kill. I thought Pierce Brosnan was a good Bond (he was my ex-wife's favorite Bond) and I loved Tomorrow Never Dies, but they just started to feel different. Craig is fine as Bond too, Casino Royale I thought was great, and I enjoyed Skyfall and Spectre too (even though I don't care for the personal tie to Bond there) but it's a bit too gritty and real world for 007. The beauty of 007 is he was basically a caricature of the perfect spy. I don't think he was meant to be 'real world.'

But that's just my take. I've happily gone to see ever Bond film since Goldeneye, and they were all fun rides to some extent. I just wish I got to see some of the earlier 007 films in the theater.

Not sure what this has to do with what you were quoting us.

 

[Damian]

Not sure what this has to do with what you were quoting us.

Yeah, sorry. I got derailed on a tangent and what I ended up typing had nothing to do with what you guys were talking about.

Worse part is I can't remember what I was originally going to say before I got lost in the wilderness

 

[STEPhon IT]

Yeah, sorry. I got derailed on a tangent and what I ended up typing had nothing to do with what you guys were talking about.

Worse part is I can't remember what I was originally going to say before I got lost in the wilderness

I like most of the OO7 movies, including the Roger Moore one which I didn't like very much when I was younger. From Russia With Love is my fav while Goldfinger is second, and then Thunderball, Dr. No. I loved On Her Majesty's Secret Service and I agree I would like to see some stand alone OO7 flick where its just a mission without all of the baggage from the previous movie. I don't know Madeleine's fate but I think it could be a huge blunder and repetitive if the movie winds up taking her life.

Teresa's killing was jaw dropping because of her mental state in the movie and with all that had happened I was rooting for her to be okay. In Craig's run, Bond for some reason loved that two bit liar Vesper and had some moment with her but as the novel before it she was killed, he had a redundant sequel concerning her and the movie and its result was not satisfying. I hope Madeleine doesn't get killed because I feel OO7 should have some happiness, and I pray this is not some sick joke where its implied Madeleine and Vesper were related. For some reason "The Dark Knight Returns" comes to mind where Batman took a nuclear bomb off the coast of New York City (Gotham) and ignited, and by the end of the movie he's spotted with a sociopathic woman drinking champagne in Paris. I just don't want a similar ending.

 

[cardinal biggles]

Teresa's killing was jaw dropping because of her mental state in the movie and with all that had happened I was rooting for her to be okay.

If Lazenby hadn't decided to walk away from Bond, Tracy's death would have been the opening scene of Diamonds Are Forever.