This one I didn’t explain very well. They’re not all James Bond, but none of them is yet 007, or any 00. It is, I am afraid, another origin story though, but we seem to have had a few already. Pre-credits is Bond’s first kill, and sets him up as James Bleedin’ Bond. Rest of the film is multiple nearly-00s on various missions around the World (or on one big mission together) getting bumped off until there are only 2 left, both of whom think the other the traitor (neither actually is, but they are not to know this), with their death to be the second kill. It’s a sort of massively extended and altered version of the start of The Living Daylights. It all ends up with Bond staying his hand against the other putative 00 - let’s call him “Alec” for ease of reference - and establishing that the traitor is actually, oh I don’t know, Q or someone of equivalent insignificance, who becomes his second kill. Film ends with whatever creature they do cast saying “The name’s Bond… James Bond. 007.”
I wouldn’t mind seeing it. Wouldn’t be my first choice of plot lines, but I like the idea of Bond working with his fellow colleagues out in the field. We haven’t seen it in a while and there have been a few missed opportunities along the way for something like this.
Okay–this made me laugh out loud at my desk.
Bravo!
I actually think that’s a great idea for a film. It’s not a conventional Bond film, but then I haven’t seen one of those in decades.
I like the idea of Bond being engaged in a running cat-and-mouse game with a like-skilled agent; we were kind of promised that in GE and in a way TMWTGG and neither really delivered in a big way. It also makes sense for them to end up on the same side at the end, and if it’s Bond who engineers that by figuring out the real enemy, then that becomes the real proof that he’s the “winner” because he’s got the brains and spycraft to go with the killing skills.
This would also be a clever way to establish a fellow double-0 character who could, if played by a likable enough performer, spin off into his or her own series, which would doubtless make the Amazon team happy. The problem with Jinx and characters like her is that they’re already supposedly Bond’s equal when they arrive, but we never really buy it. If we could spend more time with a rival who actually does match Bond on many levels, it could work, and if even Bond himself is still “learning the ropes,” it’d be easier to swallow.
The only thing that doesn’t really add up for me is the idea that MI-6 would assemble the double-0 by pitting all the candidates against each other. That seems kind of wasteful and twisted.
But not entirely unprecedented: Benson started Zero Minus Ten with a ‘training exercise’ pitting two ‘single 0’ agents against 007, and Bond ends up bedding the female one after they failed in their assignment. So much for a positive work climate in SIS…
It reminds me of one of those old Avengers episodes (Not the Marvel one, but the one with Steed!)
There is an episode that at the start a group of fighters had to fight one other guy, but later on it is revealed he cheated, because it are twins who survived it, or something like that. I can’t remember it exactly. Then a group of people is invited to go to an old house on an island and they are murdered one by one, ofcourse Steed and Emma are there too and will clear all things up.
June 3.
Given that they are decent actors and much in the vein of carrying through Judi Dench into the Craig mini-series, the current incumbents of M, Q and Moneypenny should be used in the Amazon series.
- Yes
- Mess
No question: mess. Decent actors will have to earn their living by decent acting.
In something else.
I would have been fine with Fiennes returning. Actually, I would have preferred it, but after what they did to the character in NTTD, that made it impossible.
As for Q and Moneypenny, I don’t really care who plays them in the next film. The characters either shouldn’t appear at all or should be borderline nameless characters that are just glorified cameos.
A new era demands new actors.
Yes, I already wasn’t a fan of Dench returning as a crankier M version.And I only loved the returning band during the previous eras because they stayed the same.
Now, everything is on the table. And if it stinks I don’t want them to as well.
Mess.
Give us a new office crew, and give them less to do. “James Bond” works better without “…and The Gang” tacked on.
As much as I believe Fiennes’ M would still be of worth, especially if introducing a younger lead, it’s probably best that we start over. But……I fear the creative allure of doing a SF rerun and “introducing” everyone all over again might prove too strong, especially with the Q character.
It’s one of the lesser-noted strengths of GE. Whatever one thinks of M’s introduction, it’s all over in about 7 minutes, and “oh look, that’s Moneypenny” to boot.
Honestly, I’m very much inline with Dalton and others in that I’d happily see the back of them. Didn’t seem to hurt CR and QoS too much.
I really liked the Craig era mi6 staff but if any time calls for a complete clean slate it’s now.
I think it actually helped those films. There weren’t any unnecessary office moments to speak of. All of Villiers’ time on screen is spent productively, either providing information for the audience about what is happening in Miami or silently serving as M’s sounding board as she has her great introductory moment leaving the hearing about Bond’s activities in Madagascar. The Q stand in does exactly what the character should do: show up, give Bond his technology, and exit stage left. The office scenes in both films have a fairly snappy pace. They do what they need to do and then they all go back into hiding until the story calls for them to reappear. That should be the template.
Nobody walked out of the theater threatening to boycott because there was no Moneypenny scene. They probably completely forgot about her until the “Every penny of it” line.
For me, it’s this, as much as the characters themselves. Cubby and Harry EON’s approach to assembly-line film-making meant that any single success was rapidly integrated into the list of parts that had to go in the next film. Q’s GF scene is well written and neatly played by both actors, but by the time we get to YOLT it’s outstayed its welcome.
Whether as a character she was worthy of much more than a quick flirty moment is a separate debate, but it took 5 films and a change of actor before there was anything interesting about Moneypenny’s appearances. And her initiative in saving Bond from his own impulses almost makes her an entirely different character in OHMSS than the one in the films before.
And yet because that film was seen as a failure, it meant that the most the assembly line would allow is for her to morph back into her prior incarnation, with predictable results. Her appearance in DAF the most egregious appearance by any “regular” in the entire series.
June 4.
Roger Moore. In Licence to Kill. As James Bond.
- Yes
- Mess
I’ve said it before, I can see it and Moore would be quite convincing, judging by his Shawn Fynn persona from that mercenary flick.
That said, it would likely be a disaster. Because LICENCE TO KILL is a disaster - Calley set it up to be a failure and while LTK’s fans can ignore this the general public didn’t. Putting Moore inside that mess - let’s say the 1979 Moore for argument’s sake - wouldn’t change the outcome at all. Audiences accepted Moore with a bit of an edge - the short dialogue in TSWLM, kicking the Merc off the cliff - but I doubt they were craving Moore in RamBond mode. In all his Bond films he rarely even engaged in the type of commando action using SMGs (I only remember the Liparus fight; did Moore use an AK in OCTOPUSSY? I forget…).
Having Moore avenging Hedison’s Leiter would have been the most meaningful adaption of that story possible. The concept of Moore going off the deep end to such a degree would take on even more power considering his usual demeanour. He had shown plenty of ability to play an aggressive Bond in previous films, so it’s not as absurd as one would think.
The post-AVTAK Moore would not have worked in LTK, especially because he would have had also been in TLD in between, and while a clearly aged Bond in his 60’s going on a revenge tour, finally quitting the service for that last personal hurrah, would have been interesting (even more so as a novel) MooreBond having to fight the young sadistic Sanchez would have ended badly.
The pre-AVTAK Moore, however, I could have imagined in another LTK version, maybe directly after TSWLM and with a much bigger budget.
Still, it happened the way it had to, and that was better.
Which does not necessarily mean that EON selling Bond after NTTD also was the better alternative.