Reboot? Remake? Retro? Which direction should the series take next?

“No, don’t trouble yourself. The blended Scotch is fine.” Said 003…Never. :thinking:


It’s the Daily Mail. Although it stated Christoph Waltz was Blofeld when every one else denied it.

That’s a low bar to clear…


Good idea.

Not for Bond.

1 Like

I was talking Star Wars. My mistake. Bond needs a bit of breathing room, with movies.

No, no mistake. I just made a personal comment that I don´t think Bond needs that long pauses.


Yes, we’ve been overflooded with SW films/series all these pat years so I can understand they now want to pause this hectic frenzied trend and make it a bit more exclusive.

But indeed the same cannot be said about Bond. Ideally it’d be great to have 1 new movie every 3 years for instance, with some regularity to it. We don’t need/want too long pauses…


Definitely. I agree with the general gist of what Charlie Higson said recently:

The problem with Bond in the film world is it takes so long now and poor old Eon are constantly having to switch studios and deal with a whole bunch of new executives who think they know what Bond should do. Really, you just want to say, 'Keep it simple, don’t overthink it.’


Not sure if it was already shared but Quentin Tarantino offered a lot more information behind the prospect of him filming CR years back and where he thinks the future of the series should go (adapting the books in a way more faithful manner):

I’d also include the continuation novels with his comments if EON decides to adapt them.


Having read this, I’m not so sure if QT is as Bond-savvy as people think he is. And I’m glad that it didn’t happen.

Final word on the QT CR has been spoken, anyway. See the bonus material of this one:



He really is still too full of himself, „allright?“

And he has no idea how much of the novels has been filmed, and how a close adaptation would not work at all.

Once again, kudos to EON, for not allowing him near their films.


I’d say there’s good reason that the films diverged greatly in all but 4.


I like Quentin’s films a lot, but I have no desire to see the novels being adapted again albeit more faithfully, and that’s coming from someone whose appreciation for the literary side of things has increased dramatically over the years. I feel like it’s going over old territory and it’s now better to utilise unused concepts in new storylines, as they’ve been doing for a while now.


Agree with all the previous posts about QT. It’s a very good thing we never got a QT Bond movie. It wouldn’t have been a Bond movie, it would have been a QT movie, as always, with him force-feeding us his usual rhetoric of “look how good I am and how well I know everything”… When actually what the interview shows is that he hasn’t done his homework and talks nonsense about the novel material not being in the films.

Glad that never happened and will never happen!

1 Like

I have come to the opinion that the best Bond films are made by metteurs en scene–not auteurs, but a rung or two above journeymen directors. Guy Hamilton may be the best example of this kind of director in the Bond universe. Lewis Gilbert almost gets there (MR is his most sustained bid), and Sam Mendes arrives, once he abandons his auteur quest.