It’s funny you say that, because I remember sitting in the theatre in 1971 and thinking the producers copped out with Charles Gray. They couldn’t afford Telly Savalas or Donald Pleasance because they were paying Connery so much!! But I get your point. I too would like to see Waltz back!
1 Like
Just a reminder before all this is going down a completely different route:
according to reports the villain was supposed to be cast as “a Russian” - and supposedly that was even on the surface the cause for Boyle calling it a day. The only vague hint to Blofeld would be the unconfirmed title of “Shatterhand”. Whether that was supposed to be the title for P&W’s script, Boyle’s project, or both (or neither)…we have no idea yet.
2 Likes
Not to mention, that shatterhand rumor shows up at least 25 times during the production of every film.
1 Like
Yes, but the whole Shatterhand - Garden of Death scenario is a fan favorite!!
1 Like
That’s why we keep getting it served.
As is the infamous “Beyond the Ice”…
1 Like
You have inspired some new thoughts, so please forgive their haphazard nature. I do think the Bond audience questions his relevance–especially his relevance as to how they understand the world. I think they are looking for more than a spectacle and the Marvel films are responsible for this in part.
Marvel heroes are less rogues than misfits which is a huge change from previous generations of cinematic heroes. They are an emblem for all things queer and different and younger people can identify with that positionality. Of course, some of the misfits end up going rogue, but they are a different type of hero. I do not think that Bond can be played as a misfit–historically he has been either inside or outside of the establishment, and part of the enjoyment was watching how he navigated the space he inhabited in a particular film.
I think that would make great sense because then the situation is about what group he chooses to join and for what reasons and causes.
But the questions become: a) what evil; and b) in association with and in service to whom? People still suspend disbelief regarding the actions taken, but they do not suspend disbelief as easily regarding the cultural framework of the adventure. The want their fantasy world to be relevant (thank you Marvel).
Iron Man and the Guardians of the galaxy would fit more in the rogue category, but I think that’s the point, a range of character types so that everyone would connect with at least one of the ever increasing ensemble.
I apologize if this has been mentioned before, but one of the theories about Boyle’s walk-out deals with the supposed death of Bond at the end of one of the scripts. As much as that sounds ludicrous, I wonder if that would be the “only” way that fans would embrace a reboot to a 1960’s Bond directed by Christopher Nolan in Bond 26?
Don’t think so, no. If there was a 60s period piece people would go see it just as they swallowed the X-Men going there. It would be an odd one, like a shot-by-shot remake of a Connery Bond, but it wouldn’t keep audiences from watching it - if it’s good that is. The question would be how it would add to anything from the originals…and that’s really where the wheels start coming off. There are plenty of authentic 60s spy films already, in all flavours and spins and qualities. Doing Bond as a period piece would ultimately be seen as a gadget.
2 Likes
You get the feeling with that era that continuity didn’t even register as a concern. Each movie feels like a new entity designed to make cash by sheer entertainiment.
The random way they poached from the novels at will to form mutant versions of their various narratives to get the next script locked confirms for to my mind that they were totally different times.
The golden age of tv changed everything! Audiences now want the equivalent of a novel in their onscreen entertainment; fleshed out character with complex arcs and stories which twist and turn in intertextually plausible fashion before reaching their denouement.
Cinema has reacted with the ‘verse’ of marvel, as has Eon with the interrelated arcs of Craig’s Bond movies. Ironic since Fleming had written them that way in the 50’s. A shame it took Eon so long to appreciate the wisdom of their golden goose.
I hope they persevere in abiding by that wisdom and keep the threat going; hinted at by BBs doctor who regeneration comment (obviously a metaphor) if indeed she ever said it. IMO almost all of the Bond novels can be more faithfully adapted and updated to give us more of the Fleming bond we got in CR. YOLT is the obvious next step, thereafter TMWTGG sets up bond 7 with SMERSH as the new Big Bad and their assassin Scaramanga that film’s personification of the new Russian dirty tricks department. Then why not do LALD some Fleming justice - addressing the ever so inflammatory racism, of course 
Followed by the desperately needed adaptation of MR (no, DAD does not count) etc…
I always thought that DADs ice bound third act had used whatever that idea was and in doing so kite surfed it beyond the shark.
Thanks Onion. I am only a Marvel person by relationship. My ex taught me a great deal about the X-Men and my husband is a fan also. They are the reasons I have seen the films.
My husband (who is two decades younger) cannot understand how I love old movies that are complete inm and of themselves. He loves the stories that just keep on telling themselves which will eventually end once they jump the shark.
2 Likes
When I got into Bond novels and films in high school, I had a teacher who was a fan as well. We used to go into the city and shop for stills from the films. He used to say to me that once all the novels had been filmed, they could go back and film the novels as written and have a whole new crop of movies.
You win the internet 
That is what I get for typing without my glasses. Apologies Orion
1 Like
Obviously a very intelligent chap 
Good lord, well done to you!
‘Youth is no guarantee of innovation’…
1 Like
I know the perils of glasses + spellcheck all too well, I’m afrock… afreak… afraid - I’m afraid… got there in the end
It’s ok, you’re not the first…or indeed the first in this thread. The r bleeds into the i very easily.