Speculating is fun. God I miss it.
Ghost Protocol aims for the best of both worlds, make the audience think they killed her off screen so they can have Ethan and Brandt grapple over it, then bring her back at the end to have the character available for future use, thus not technically fridging her.
However given who plays one of the villains, they should avoid similarities to Ghost Protocol with a ten foot poleā¦
1 Like
Thatās an interesting idea, if they do it right.
After the pre-title sequence featuring the kidnapping of the scientist and his (her?) daughter, Felix shows up in Jamaica to recruit Bond and Madeline says if he goes, she wonāt be there when he gets back. At the end of the film Bond returns to Jamaica, and finds Madeline still there - end of the Craig era.
Unless, of course, Bond is alone in Jamaica and Felix tells him that the kidnapped scientist is Madeline?
Iād rather something like that than Bond telling Madeline āwe have all the time in the worldā with predictable results.
1 Like
Interesting, yes, of course, if 007 has gone, then there would be another 007, and so we kind of get our first female 007!
I think itās all herself. I donāt actually think BB understands or āgetsā Bond all that much, to be honest.
Explain, please.
Brilliant! 
If anyoneās interested - here are most of the interview clips edited together:
2 Likes
As for the pre-title sequence, Iām warming to the idea of a Bond-less, villain centric approach. Something that sets the tone of the coming storm, similar to TMWTGG. The PTS could end with a small scene with M reacting to the incident. āGood God. Iāll put 007 on the case immediately.ā
And itās not Craig who walks through the door, but his replacement. Seems like that would be a decent shock for the audience. After the title sequence we could transition to Jamaica, with a montage sequence showing Bondās daily routine.
A question I have is if Bond ever becomes 007 again. Right now, my hunch is I donāt think he will. If anything, the lack of an official 007 moniker could be a nostalgic reference to Craigās real world departure from the role. Imagine a phone call from Fiennes M near the end, something along the lines of āAnd Bondā¦you may be retired, but youāll always be 007 to me.ā Or something along those lines.
Bondās entry into the story could be under the basis of helping out a friend, and nothing more. And the situation escalates from there. I wouldnāt have a problem with a NSNA type ending, with Bond returning to his lover and re-embracing retirement, as per AMC_Hornetās idea.
Seems like it could be a nice compromise. Because as Bond 25 could show, Bond may be retired (a five year gap since SPECTRE), but as long as heās still out there in the world, heās always a live option and capable of holding his own. Which also allows Bond #7 to walk through the door in Bond 26 and continue without skipping a beat.
Yeah; Iāve been thinking about how best it is to end the film, considering that theyāll want Bond to return in the next one, reboot or not. If you end his story finally it might feel a bit odd to simply start it again next time. Much better, as you say, to leave it hanging in some way; as they did with Spectre even.
And the exclusive Australian interviewā¦ which again goes to show how it must feel to get asked the same lame questions again and again and again.
I donĀ“t know whether I like the idea of Bond not being 007 for the whole film (or fighting to become 007 again in the end). And if he again is out of the job at the end it would be very strange for the next guy to be James Bond 007 - unless one really has to revert to the code name theory.
So, for me, it would be great to have him stay 007, even in retirement. I donāt know whether the āsurpriseā moment of getting a female 007 at the beginning really works. It certainly would bring on all the unnecessary headlines, and BB already stated, thankfully, that a woman should not become 007.
If it were done in BOND 25 Bond would wrestle with wishing to become 007 again the whole film, having to prove that he is better than the female 007 - which also would be odd.
Why not retiring the 007 number at the beginning with Bond being inactive, and then just give him the number again when he decides he needs to go back?
Sure, with the idea of Craig leaving after this one BOND 25 will hardly avoid the āone last missionā-approach. So, in the end, Bond might hang up his license for good after all. But I would rather have him stay on. He is James Bond 007 - and this is no country club, dammit.
I know I wouldnāt have the patience
Yup, I can sympathise with the whole wrist slashing commentary when faced with five films times 12 months of thatā¦
The Australian chap didnāt look as though he was actually interviewing them. Rather, like his sandwiched in questions to the pre-recorded Malek, he just seemed to be blurting his questions out to a wall.
5 does feel like a good number to end on, and given heās 50, I donāt see him being physically up to a 6th, but Craig has given three different answers the three times heās been asked about Bond 25 being his last;
āyesā - GMA
āmaybeā¦ā - Nine news Australia
āNo idea, people have been telling me on iām on my last film since Casino Royaleā - BBC
Heās already sick of that question isnāt he?
EDIT: I imagine something like Stephen Colbert is more enjoyable. Having a joke must be a nice break from the same 2 questions over and over;
The British right wing press are back to pre Casino Royale levels of sniping and vitriolic commentary on Craig, his PC leanings, his age (canāt call him ugly this time around) bodes very well for the final film. Stars are aligning and all that.
1 Like
to be fair RIchard Wilkins (or āDIckieā as heās known) - is a really poor excuse for a journalist - from his budget tan to hair plugs etcā¦ he is desperate to be famous and friends with famous people so he asks the most inane questions and constantly sucks up - not really a good interviewer if you want insight
Sounds like many breakfast TV people around the world
Certainly oursā¦
To those outside UK and Australia; yours the same?
1 Like