Probably right. I told my dad about the impending release of Bond 25 in February and his answer was -- "Wow, Purvis and Wade has finally done it." I couldn't stop laughing.
News Daniel Craig signs up for Bond 25, Christopher Nolan in talks to direct
- Thread starter Mach5
- Start date
I’ve been hearing that Bond is on the way out since the tail end of the Moore era. It really did look like it was on its way out after Licence to Kill underperformed & legal issues halted the franchise for 6 years. Then we were told it was on its way out because Pierce Brosnan was a TV actor and Bond wouldn’t be relevant after the end of the Cold War. And we were told that Bond couldn’t compete with the way hipper xXx (xXx, FFS!!!). Or with Bourne etc.
Honestly, I think the series will flag occasionally and need a revival and change in direction but it’s still making money and that’s the bottom line.
The difference here is that chopping Broccolis seem unwilling to do that. Like others implied up thread, the current director situation suggests they want someone to put the same product on screen.
This is more problematic for them since Craig is rooted in the most 'primal' (for lack of a better term) aspects of the character. That can only fly in a post-metoo world for so long.
The Broccolis went from Die Another Day to Casino Royale. That was despite DAD making a ton of money; despite that, they knew it was time to totally shake up the franchise. I claim no knowledge of what’s happening behind the scenes but it looks to me like they’re willing to take risks and when it’s time to do that.
Uh, ... "Skyfall" made more than a billion dollars, and even though "Spectre" wasn't as well-received as that at the time, it still made 880 millions. Of course, Bond is $$$.
Even if one wouldn't turn a profit, they'd still keep making them (tweeking the formula, lowering the budget). It'd need two or three financial failures in a row for them to even consider not making any further Bonds.
Wow. I had to look it up. I'm surprised Skyfall made over a billion. I knew it was successful, but, wow... Not bad for a franchise that's how many decades old.
The thing is... Bond changes over time. There are some things that remain the same, and there are things some people demand don't change, but, the franchise adapts. it takes from what movies are chomping at its heels (like Bourne) and it moves on.
Notice, Bond is still going, but, Bourne? Nope. I guess there's Mission Impossible... and Fallout is GREAT, but, it hasn't cracked a billion dollars. No Mission Impossible has.
Bond is still a brand that brings in the cash. But, times change, and so does Bond. I think Skyfall should've been Craig's exit... but, what a terrible movie to go out on...
Well, the difference being Bourne was trying to tell a distinct story about a mysterious man with missing memories while James Bond was broader in scope and, aside from forced moments in Sceptre, was more about the action and adventure than the nuanced story. Hell, I didn't even want any more Bourne movies after Ultimatum because the story was complete as far as I concerned. Legacy wasn't bad but it didn't live up to the heights of the trilogy despite an excellent cast, while Jason Bourne was a let down and filled with missed opportunities (particularly with Nicky). So, again, that series only needed a trilogy and that was it.
The main reason why I love the series as a trilogy (and why the fifth film was disappointing) was how with each progressive movie, the story peeled back Jason's history. His last mission. His first mission. His initiation. The fifth film tried to do that, too, by showing why he joined in the first place, but I felt like things got too convoluted at that point.
It would have been but I thought Spectre should've been Craig's last because of the clues in the film; desperately trying to fit all of the Craig films together, Craig not killing Blofeld* and throws his gun over the Thames, and finally Bond getting the girl... which he's never done in any of his installments. Seemed like a fitting end to his OO7.
*What is the mental malfunction with Craig's OO7 not killing the villain when he has the chance??? He forgot about what happened in SkyFall on that island when he arrested Javier Bardem instead of putting a bullet in his head? He might regret not killing Blofeld when he had the chance.
How many times has the death knell been sounded for Bond? When Connery left, when Lazenby underwhelmed, when Roge left, when the Dalton films underperformed at the box office, when XXX and True Lies showed the way forward (supposedly) and then when Bourne came out...
And 007's still here. I think the problem is that the Broccolis are in the same place they were before Moore left. They know they need to reinvigorate the franchise, but they also know Criag has been insanely good for business so they want to keep him going as long as possible.
Bond gets the girl in the majority of films, the only difference is the script tried (and failed) to convince us that Madeline was a true love rather than just another passing fancy. As for not shooting Blofeld, it all comes back to M's comment about knowing when to pull the trigger, or when not to pull it (also referenced in Bond's conversation with Q in Skyfall). Thematically I think the point of the film was to show that Bond had a choice, he could end up like Mr White, or he could choose not to. It was really badly handled but I think that's what they were going for.
I think what @STEPhon IT meant was this was the first time Craig's Bond got the girl in the end.
I think the problem with Skyfall is you can only do that sort of thing once. It was very unapologetically an ode to past Bonds, but it honestly struck me as a Bond movie directed by someone who didn't like Bond movies. After going back to an 'average' Bond movie, the series faltered.
I think part of the problem is that Bond's core appeal is: "men want to be him; women want to be with him". You might like the abilities of Jason Bourne, Liam Neesen from Taken, or whoever, but you don't actually want to be those characters.
Bond is charming, goes on adventures, and seems to kill and love without ever getting entangled. It's the escapist appeal of the character. Having Bond depressed, weak, or forming some weird mother/son thing with M just seems to miss the point entirely. I think what they need to do is pick a more charming, lighthearted Bond. Honestly, my top pick would be Matt Smith.
Also, I don't know why they haven't gone back to the books. Casino Royale had a great story that was largely lifted from the book. Plenty of movies took the name of the book without taking much of the story - why not use them? Moonraker is generally regarded as the best Bond book, and the previous movie didn't really use its plot at all!
I think part of the problem is that Bond's core appeal is: "men want to be him; women want to be with him". You might like the abilities of Jason Bourne, Liam Neesen from Taken, or whoever, but you don't actually want to be those characters.
Bond is charming, goes on adventures, and seems to kill and love without ever getting entangled. It's the escapist appeal of the character. Having Bond depressed, weak, or forming some weird mother/son thing with M just seems to miss the point entirely. I think what they need to do is pick a more charming, lighthearted Bond. Honestly, my top pick would be Matt Smith.
Also, I don't know why they haven't gone back to the books. Casino Royale had a great story that was largely lifted from the book. Plenty of movies took the name of the book without taking much of the story - why not use them? Moonraker is generally regarded as the best Bond book, and the previous movie didn't really use its plot at all!
Matt Smith as James Bond? Damn, that would unprecedented. I don't think the world is ready for an actor to play The Doctor and James Bond.
As much as I love Daniel Craig's Bond, I agree they should go for a light-hearted Bond next. And as much as I love Matt Smith (The Eleventh Doctor is one of my favorite incarnations), I'm not quite sure if he's Bond material.
As much as I love Daniel Craig's Bond, I agree they should go for a light-hearted Bond next. And as much as I love Matt Smith (The Eleventh Doctor is one of my favorite incarnations), I'm not quite sure if he's Bond material.
Yup, there's no way it would actually fly, but I think that sort of actor would be ideal.
For the record, Bond in the books is repeatedly said to resemble this dude:
I loved Craig's Bond in Casino Royale. I think that's the only time he really felt like Bond in the 'want to be him' sense. Even the torture worked in that regard. Getting painfully emasculated while making jokes and keeping a stiff upper lip? That's some serious cool right there.
There were flashes of it elsewhere. I loved the bit in Quantum where he changed to a fancy hotel ("We are teachers, and we have just won the lottery") and in Skyfall where he gives away the casino winnings ("Put it all on red"). Unfortunately, I think the makers decided that showing a gritty, realistic side to Bond was how to compete with newer movies, and that's largely what Craig's Bond turned into. You can't compete on that level without turning Bond into something he's not.
There's actually a bit in Casino Royale where this happens. The "shaken or stirred"/"Do I look like a give a damn?" moment. It's a real crowd-pleaser. A fun subversion of the character. Thing is, it comes at the price of Bond's character. The pebble that starts the landslide.
This sounds stupid, but I honestly kinda consider Austin Powers a better James Bond than the James Bond of Quantum, Skyfall, and Spectre.
Last edited:
Hmm. It would have been but I thought Spectre should've been Craig's last because of the clues in the film; desperately trying to fit all of the Craig films together, Craig not killing Blofeld* and throws his gun over the Thames, and finally Bond getting the girl... which he's never done in any of his installments. Seemed like a fitting end to his OO7.
I didn't think what I wrote was unclear. I mean, has that member ever saw any of the Craig films???