This One’s for the Impatient Bond Fans

[GreenScar]

Great commentary over at Rope of Silicon. Also some new info from Daniel Craig:

Steve over at Collider just sent over a nice little interview nugget he got out of Daniel Craig during this weekend’s Defiance junket of which I was invited to, but the fact it is held in a hotel room on the other side of the United States posed a problem. What can you do?

The conversation turned to the future of James Bond, natch, and Craig was asked if Quantum of Solace was a set-up for a trilogy of films with the next installment serving as Craig’s third and final film. Craig was quick to dismiss the idea saying, “No ****ing way. I’m done with that story. I want to lie on a beach for the first half an hour of the next movie drinking a cocktail.” An obviouse joke at the end there, but I, for one, am happy to hear Craig has no intention of leaving the character after the third film as he obviously seems comfortable in the super-spy’s shoes.

The conversation then diverts to the naysayers complaining of a lack of gadgets and screwball scenarios in Quantum, and issue I addressed at length about three weeks ago.

“We’ve finished this story as far as I’m concerned,” Craig said, leading me to believe he is satisfied that the origins of Bond as a character are firmly established allowing the filmmakers time to now dig into the history of MI6 and then some. “We’ve got a great set of bad guys. There is an organization that we can use whenever we want to. The relationship between Bond and M is secure and Felix is secure. Let’s try and find where Moneypenny came from and where Q comes from. Let’s do all that and have some fun with it.”

From what I gathered by so many of the folks complaining about Quantum of Solace is that it didn’t have much of a plot, there were no gadgets and Bond didn’t brazenly fornicate enough. As for the plot argument, hardly any Bond has much of plot outside of bad guy doing bad things and Bond needs to stop him. I guess the more cerebral approach to Bond’s emotions is what lost some people looking for dumb action, but that is actually what intrigued me more than anything.

As for the gadgets and the fornicating… Gadgets were a major complaint by many after Die Another Day as people wanted a more Bourne-like approach - they got it and complained, go figure. And to the ladies, Bond is always down for a good shag session, just hope you don’t get drowned in oil afterward.

If Quantum of Solace had included Bond screwing Camille (Olga Kurylenko) upon meeting here and then once at the end of the film as well as introduced Q and branded Bond with a bunch of goofy gadgets it would have lost the edge it deserved following the ending of Casino Royale. Now with Bond at relative peace with death of Vesper, back in M’s good graces and ready to womanize the Bond you know is coming. Tossing the kitchen sink at Quantum would have destroyed it entirely, but we can now get a taste of everything that led to Connery’s Bond, just imagine the possibilities.

Have patience Bond fans, if you get it all at once what is left for future adventures other than more of the same? That’s how we ended up with The World is Not Enough.

Source

[PS3-Playb3yond]

I think it's great he's willing to do more Bond movies.

[Darko]

I really liked Quantum, but I'm ready for a different story now as well. Craig was spot on in the interview.

[spolcyc]

I am all for a new story, but with some sort of "ties" to Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace.

[Darko]

Originally Posted by spolcyc

I am all for a new story, but with some sort of "ties" to Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace.

I doubt they would abandon the character work laid in CR and QOS. It just wouldn't focus around the story arc of the first two.

[LynxFX]

I just hope they give the camera men these next time.



No more James Bourne please.

[BStecke]

Originally Posted by LynxFX

No more James Bourne please.

My thought exactly. I found it hard to get into most of the action scenes because they looked like they were cut by a rabid monkey on crack.

[GreenScar]

I will be excited to find out if they decide to use a different director.

[Gremal]

First of all, I don't know why people think what Craig says matters. He's under contract and can't make choices about the direction of the saga or the scripts he is handed. He isn't the producer or even the director. Basically, he does what the script calls for and collects his paycheck and does the talk show and red carpet dog and pony show.

Based on the first two Craig 007 films, it's safe to say that the producers are looking to move in much different stylistic directions from one film to the next and take chances. I'm sure this will apply to "gadgets" too, but I hope they avoid cliches.

[PanasonicPlasmaMan]

Originally Posted by Gremal

First of all, I don't know why people think what Craig says matters. He's under contract and can't make choices about the direction of the saga or the scripts he is handed. He isn't the producer or even the director. Basically, he does what the script calls for and collects his paycheck and does the talk show and red carpet dog and pony show.

Based on the first two Craig 007 films, it's safe to say that the producers are looking to move in much different stylistic directions from one film to the next and take chances. I'm sure this will apply to "gadgets" too, but I hope they avoid cliches.

+1

[GreenScar]

Originally Posted by Gremal

First of all, I don't know why people think what Craig says matters. He's under contract and can't make choices about the direction of the saga or the scripts he is handed. He isn't the producer or even the director. Basically, he does what the script calls for and collects his paycheck and does the talk show and red carpet dog and pony show.

Based on the first two Craig 007 films, it's safe to say that the producers are looking to move in much different stylistic directions from one film to the next and take chances. I'm sure this will apply to "gadgets" too, but I hope they avoid cliches.

Craig has brought a lot to the table and has earned the respect of the filmmakers. When you are the star of a film franchise as successful as these (Bale, Damon, Ford) they tend to have more input than in normal situations. If you watch the behind the scenes stuff to Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace you'll see that Craig is very much involved in more aspects than just showing up and collecting a paycheck.

The tone will continue as is for now. As long as it's successful. The gadgets they come up with (if they indeed go that way) would most likely be in the scope set forth in the last two films (believable).

[Gremal]

He's involved in some physical stuff, a few minor stunts and hand-to-hand combat, suggesting a different way to phrase a line here or there, but it's not like the producers are turning to him for the direction of the saga. The reason he's resorting to hints and humor in his interviews is because he is not at liberty to say where the next films are headed--it's proprietary info. When he said in an earlier interview that he might not continue as Bond if the movie didn't do well, I don't see how that was interpreted as anything other than farce. Everyone knows that he's under contract and that Bond films are huge box office draws, especially when released during the holidays.

[GreenScar]

Originally Posted by Gremal

He's involved in some physical stuff, a few minor stunts and hand-to-hand combat, suggesting a different way to phrase a line here or there, but it's not like the producers are turning to him for the direction of the saga. The reason he's resorting to hints and humor in his interviews is because he is not at liberty to say where the next films are headed--it's proprietary info. When he said in an earlier interview that he might not continue as Bond if the movie didn't do well, I don't see how that was interpreted as anything other than farce. Everyone knows that he's under contract and that Bond films are huge box office draws, especially when released during the holidays.

Agreed. He was never going to leave. There was also no chance that QoS would fail either. The point I was making is that he would be privy to certain things as they develop. I don't think anyone was implying that he's writing the story or dictating the direction.

[JessR]

Bring Connery back, Bring Connery Back

[dvd_mazter]

Cool, my biggest complains of the new Bonds have been they lost some of the fun and humour of previous ones and it looks like they are solving it.

[JUDGEMENT 4400]

I am confident with Craig's direction with Bond. A new story could invigorate the Daniel Craig Bond movies.

Loved Casino Royale, loved QoS!

[JUDGEMENT 4400]

The back of my AP US History binder. It's awesome.

http://s93.photobucket.com/albums/l7...urrent=005.jpg

[Crim122]

As weird as it would be, I always think it would be sort of cool for Connery to make a cameo or play a bad guy

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by Crim122

As weird as it would be, I always think it would be sort of cool for Connery to make a cameo or play a bad guy

Unfortunatly it seem that he as now retired, I know the last time I saw him during an interview he did not look very well but it would be great to see him in a Bond film, as a vilain or maybe as Her Majesty's minister or something like that

[Ofcrlunchbox14]

I love the direction Bond is going now, I can't stand the way Brosnan's Bond had all the gadgets and absolutely no story. That last one with Halle was god awful