John Hamm is almost as charming
1 Like
I bloody was not. A travesty to a wealth of written and untapped material just ripe for some filmic translation.
The kid in the boarding school intro was the absolute epitome and definition of my erstwhile assessment of ‘padding’.
For me the moving image versions of the Saint, as a lover of the written source material, was at the beginning with Sanders, superb, and went steadily downhill thereafter. Sir Roger’s portrayal was hampered by the TV laws but it still contributed to the downward arc.
For me, an arc that is still digging, and has not yet seen the depths to which it has the potential to plummet. All contrary to the richness of aforesaid source material.
Anyway, to introduce the next Bond…
1 Like
Moore’s reveal was delayed with the cushion of the pre-title sequence, which he doesn’t appear in. After the musical chairs of Lazenby-Connery-Moore, I can see why they took the approach they did.
On the very very slim chance that Craig goes missing and amnesiac at the end of his last film, as in Fleming’s You Only Live Twice, the next Bond could be introduced by adapting the opening chapters of The Man With the Golden Gun.
Bond reappears in London to everyone’s astonishment, but everyone feels he isn’t the same man they knew. (Miss Moneypenny buried her face in her hands. “Oh, Bill!” she said desperately. “There’s something wrong with him. I’m frightened.”) With much trepidation MI6 allows him to have an interview with M. Bond says he is now fighting for peace and tells M “For most of my adult life you’ve used me as a tool. Fortunately that’s all over now” before trying to assassinate his boss. Foiled, he attempts suicide and is dragged out of the room, his life in the balance, right as the title song begins.
I think that scenario would constitute a very memorable pre-title sequence. And then the rest of the film would be about Bond having to become himself again, by proving himself in an impossible assignment. Two birds would be killed with one stone: an audience’s apprehensions about a new actor would be addressed and then the new actor would be shown turning “back” into the familiar Bond.
I very much doubt any of what I’ve described will happen, but I have long regarded it as a startlingly powerful way to introduce a new Bond.
4 Likes
I’d love this, but I’m not sure it’s the right time to do it after the Craig era of true issues. Maybe in 20-30 years… for Bond 8😱
3 Likes
I would prefer the next Bond not having to go through a crisis of identity again, becoming himself again.
4 Likes
A mature 007 will be better. Moo7re was 45 at his debut and it wasn’t a problem. 42 will be perfect.
That depends on your definition of ‘problem’. It wasn’t an issue for Live And Let Die but most people will agree that Moore was past his best by the end, and that includes Moore himself. Bond is a long term commitment so you need an actor who’ll still be be convincing a three to five films down the line and who knows how long that will take in this day and age. Not that Bond is a role for a fresh faced youngster either, he should always be a veteran when we meet him. For my money mid to late 30’s would be the ideal starting age for the next Bond.
2 Likes
Having given some thought to what you’ve suggested I’m sorry to say I’m not keen. In all comes down to the fact that I just don’t like amnesia as a plot device. It can work, the best way to deploy it is to introduce an amnesiac character and have them discover who they are along with the audience. The Bourne Identity springs to mind for this type of story, The Long Kiss Goodnight is also pretty fun if you’ve never seen it. But I really hate it when they take a character that we know, give them amnesia and then have them learn to be themselves again. I always feel like we’re just marking time before the character reverts the the version of themselves that we actually like. It’s a character arc that doesn’t actually achieve anything. Harry in Kingsmen the Golden Circle is a recent example I can think of although I’m sure this trope has been deployed a lot on TV too as filler episodes.
1 Like
It’s been on my bucket list for some time…
From that post, since the clipping’s a bit confusing…
So I’m with you, would love to see this played out and although it comes off the back of Craig’s “Who am I, what’s my motivation?” era I could live with a bit more if it means getting to see this great part of Bond’s story in my lifetime.
I guess Craig’s question is more accurately ‘why am I?’ So a more straight forward ‘Who am I’ wouldn’t necessarily be as repetitive. Easier said than done, though?
2 Likes
As the second film ever, no. For an actors 3rd film, yes.
2 Likes
Good point!
Might it now be an Interesting way to intro a new bond…
Have the whole first act pre titles, half hour or so set in SMERSH with our antagonist plus the honey trap learning about their target. We see the new actor from their POV. They head off to do the job and it’s not until now, still from their POV that we meet him in the flesh as they entrap/try to kill him.
He survives/escapes, cue MTS, after which we’re finally with Bond. Risky, but it’d be exciting in its novel approach.
1 Like
In theory, yes, but it would rely on none of marketing featuring Bond, something I dont see any studio going for - history demonstes they would regard you not knowing where the the lead had acne wasnt close enough.
1 Like
Either you’re misunderstanding me or I’m misunderstanding you. But to clarify; I wasn’t suggesting a story in which an amnesiac is revealed to be James Bond, I was talking about amnesia stories in a broader sense. It’s a trope I generally dislike with Bourne and Long Kiss Goodnight being exceptions where it works, not a template or inspiration for a future Bond film. Amnesiac Bond is just something I’m not interested in seeing.
1 Like
Combo of the two? I was replying to @odd_jobbies as to why the film version of FRWL didnt do that. Cool idea, but the 2nd outing isnt the time to do it.
I agree, no way anyone would go for keeping the actor secret; I’d certainly want to know!
Didn’t mean keeping his ID secret; we’d see/hear from the actor in all the usual press paraphernalia. Perhaps they could be a little cagey with the trailer…
In the movie he’d only feature via the dossier (probably including some obliquely shot video). Then only meeting him from the antagonists POV. Only after the MTS does the story, and the audience, stay with him.
In a franchise in which just about everything’s been done it would feel like a fresh take.
That is understandable, since most fictional treatments of amnesia have very little grounding in reality or medical fact.
Point taken, which might be why Fleming skipped over Bond’s recovery in TMWTGG (though his “electroshock therapy solved everything” answer is deeply unsatisfactory). But the reason for my original suggestion was that the audience would be watching a new and untried actor discover himself as Bond.
The new actor will be following in the steps of the phenomenally successful Craig and will probably face something of an uphill climb in gaining audience acceptance (unless NTTD is a flop, heaven forbid). So the new actor would become Bond during the film, instead of being simply declared Bond to a perhaps doubtful audience. At the beginning the film would acknowledge him as being “not the same” as the Bond we know (Craig). And then he would prove himself as Bond to the audience and the film’s characters. There would be a good deal of metafictional resonance in a new actor learning how to be Bond in his first film.
Further food for thought…Lazenby was “declared” Bond by OHMSS, and linked consistently with Connery’s Bond, but this approach was never taken again. Moore’s introduction was low-key and he was purposefully dissociated from Connery-era tropes.
Dalton came after the Moore-era exhausted itself and was introduced in a dashing, high-action pre-title sequence–the complete opposite of LALD’s approach.
Brosnan arrived after a long interregnum and followed a Bond who had been semi-forgotten by the public; he had it rather easy. After Bond’s long absence, GE purposefully loaded itself with Connery/Moore-era tropes.
Craig had to follow a very popular Bond, but one whose last film left bad taste and suggested creative exhaustion. His introduction exemplifies the novelty selling points of CR: the series’ reinvention into a grittier, more relevant form, the “Bond Begins” focus on origin story, the risk-taking of black-and-white (signifying artistic ambition), etc.
So the next Bond’s introduction will depend a great deal on the reception of NTTD, about which we can say nothing right now, thanks to Mr. Coronavirus. Other factors will also intrude, such as the length between the release time of NTTD and its successor. The crystal ball is too cloudy to see through.
3 Likes
Joseph L. Mankiewicz did this with his second film SOMEWHERE IN THE NIGHT–a combination of amnesia noir and daylight noir, and a unique contribution to the genre. At some points, the characters act as if they know they are in a film noir. Favorite moment: the standard noir female responds to some wit aimed at her: “So we’re going to have repartee are we?” An amazing film that shows Mankiewicz tweeking/queering texts/genres from the start of his career.
4 Likes
Great film indeed, and unjustly forgotten by too many.
Writers have rarely let facts get in the way of a good story.
The audience acceptance point is interesting though. We’re in a very different place that we were in '69 or even '05. For better or worse we’re in the age of the reboot and audiences are more accustomed than ever to see different actors in famous roles. How many other iconic roles have been recast since Craig first donned the tuxedo? Off the top of my head we’ve had 3 different Spider-Men, 2 Batmen (with a third on the way), 3 Jokers, and 2 Supermen (with a new actor actively being searched for). And Bond is really ground zero for that. Not to mention the endless media speculation about the ‘next Bond’ has more or less primed people for when it happen.
I do remember what it was like back in the 2002-2005 period when Brosnan was the ‘best Bond since Connery’ and some were insisting that no one could replace him (the less said about CriagnotBond the better). But no matter how popular Craig is there’s a certain inevitability to the next Bond. I don’t think many people will reject the next one purely because he’s not Criag and that he’ll stand and fall on his own merits or flaws. But the right first impression is key. That’s why I maintain that an enthusiastic embracing of the tropes is the best way forward.
It’s unprecedented how much the world will have changed in the time NTTD has been in production. It could end up being exactly what the public needs or the relic of a bygone era (2019 was a simpler time). But I have a suspicion that fantasy and escapism will be in demand when people can leave their homes and visit the cinema again.
2 Likes