The future of James Bond

Ok. I'm in.

Not sure what Amazon will bring ….. other than a bigger franchise ….. there have been daft ideas doing the rounds for years with Bond …… e.g. female Bond ….. 007 movie without Bond …… I don't think this works and it is best to stay with the Bond character as invented by Fleming ….. just look at how Star Wars was ruined when all the main characters were killed off ….

Everyone will point to those early Bonds like From Russia With Love and Goldfinger ….. they certainly were among the best and stood the test of time …… but could that be done in a more modern Bond setting but adds a different dimension ?? …. well yes is the answer ….. The Living Daylights, Licence To Kill, Goldeneye, Casino Royale all did that imv ….. some more underrated than others here but all great films also among the best of Bond imv …. it is a great pity that Dalton didn't do more films and that Brosnan didn't get to do more ones like Goldeneye ….. or indeed Craig more ones like Casino Royale which was his masterpiece …..

The question remains front and centre for many ….. are Bond's best days behind us be that in 1963, 1964, 1969, 1987, 1989, 1995, 2006, etc. ….. another question comes ….. does the ultra modern IT orientated world make Bond less exciting ??? …. Bond v AI for instance sounds like some Terminator or Blade Runner rip off ….. which leads to yet another question …… would it be better to return to Bond's original settings of the 1950s-1960s in the books ??? ….

open secret here, but it's been confirmed..

Oh dear.

Cue Tabloid nonsense… Daniel Radcliffe as Bond … Emma Watson as Bond Girl…

Having said that, she'd make a great Moneypenny and he'd be a good fit for Q or a Bill Tanner type role.

Die Another Day is actually quite a decent Bond film ….. when you get past the invisible car ….. The Brosnan Bonds are shamefully underrated ….. for me they actually do all the things a Bond film should do especially the out and out villains that were often lacking during the Craig era ….. Yes Gustav Graves is absurd ….. an unlikely cross between Elon Musk and Kim Jong Un ….. but that is what makes him a great villain …… compare him to the last Blofeld who was clearly written as another character first but the writers were clearly too lazy to rewrite the character after the KMC thing was settled during the production …..

After years of being pushed as the perfect James Bond, the Brosnan era turned out to be the worst of the series. It boasts a run of movies that are consistently the least entertaining to watch and some of them are outright awful. 'The World is Not Enough', 'Tomorrow Never Dies' and 'Die Another Day' are all very poor films even in their own right, never mind as entries in the James Bond series where they're going to be inevitably compared to other movies that occupy the same space.

It's not really Brosnan's fault, he does what he can, but he'll always be looked at as a sort of Roger Moore lite (even if he wasn't the direct successor to Moore). But the writing, plotting, and acting are all a let down, even compared to an entire series of films that are an uneven set of productions in the first place, to put it mildly. But the Brosnan movies all suffer from that late 90's empty gloss that a lot of films from that period do. They look nice, but they're extremely bland and forgettable. The same can be said for Dalton's tenure, even if I liked his more serious take on the character.

As far as I would be concerned the best Bond character would be Daniel Craig, even if the run of films he was in went off the rails with some needless additions, like backstories. The whole thing ended up becoming like a TV show with some unnecessary family drama thrown into the mix.

The best run of James Bond films, though, has to be Connery's. Even the worst of Connery's output, 'Diamonds Are Forever' is still an entertaining watch.

In fairness, each actor has their zenith movie and one that's worth a watch. Of course there's not much choice with Lazenby as he only did one. But if I were to tell someone to sit down to just one movie from each guy, it would be 'Goldfinger', 'On Her Majesty's Secret Service', 'Live and Let Die', 'The Living Daylights', 'Goldeneye' and 'Casino Royale'.

Interestingly enough, five of those movies are the actor's opening effort.

I might also argue A view to a Kill was the best Moore movie

Ooof, that's a hot take.

But, sure, each to their own.

I made a similar point a few pages back. It's safe to say I am now Star Warsed out after all the new content that was added. I hope I don't feel the same about Bond in a couple of years time.

There have been just two items produced by Disney that can be considered great efforts. They're 'Rogue One' and 'Andor' (hopefully S02 isn't a fat disaster).

'The Mandalorian' started off so well and then ended up awful by S03. The reason being that it was dragged out beyond its natural ending, which should have been Mando handing off baby Yoda to Luke. There's your story right there. But now, there's rumours of a bloody movie in the works that will add absolutely nothing to the basic story, just like the entirety of S03.

Everything else Disney has done with Star Wars was poor to begin with or else ended up being poor, which is astonishing considering that Star Wars is, practically, impossible to screw up because it's such a simple premise. And yet, Disney managed to do it.

Looking at how TV is engineered these days (and in many ways it's much better than it was in the 70's/80's/90's) I cannot see Bond as anything else but being reduced down to "content", which is what saturates Netflix, Amazon, Apple and whatever you're having yourself.

I look at what Amazon did with Tolkien and…well…

:/

I really wish Bond was finished for good. The thing of killing him in the last Craig movie was the biggest gimmick of all time. That was the time to end the franchise, if ever there was one. Casino Royale and Skyfall were okay but all the other Craig movies were awful. Apart from Goldeneye all the Brosnan ones were abysmal. I just think this character has been flogged to death and there is genuinely nowhere interesting to go with it, no matter who they cast as the next Bond.

I threw on the first 25 mins of Goldeneye there, as it was mentioned a few times here. And its been so long since I saw it that I cannot remember any of it. It's fairly shlte. The opening scenes have Brosnan jump of a cliff and fly through the air faster than a falling plane, and manage to catch onto the plane, and take control if it. I know it is obviously fiction. But there needs to be some element of credibility - even the tiniest amount.

And some of the dialogue is like something you'd hear from a spoof movie (like Spy Hard, or Hot Shots) = "how do you take? (lady responds with) Straight up with a twist". Then a play of words on her surname - Onatopp. Few hours before that he was flirting with a lady driver, whilst getting an evaluation with some other lady. Few seconds later, he is making out with the evaluation lady.

Pure dross. I watched the Daniel Craig movies recently again. No comparison at al. The Brosnan ones are not near that quality. But I guess if one wants that sleazy Roger Moore/Brosnan type bond, then it will appeal. I just prefer an all round good entertaining movie.

Ha Ha. Doesn't upset me. When I was younger, I liked the Roger Moore bond movies. It was just that those particular examples at the beginning of Goldeneye sounded like they were from a parody or spoof type movie. Anyway, might watch the rest of Goldeneye later. It's not right to express a proper view without watching the entire movie.

Not to mention Jenny Flect and Plenty O'Toole 'named after your father no doubt' ☺️