The future of James Bond

Openings?

Already there were being thrown out of a plane, shot from a submarine, garotted in a park, A funeral, various chases including sking off a cliff. I wonder what's left for a dramatic opener?

I watched the first Bourne movie and it was shaky camera rubbish, nonsense. Why anyone wanted to copy that is beyond me.

I reckon it was also harder to write old bond style villains when British society were dealing with real world attacks like the London suicide bombers in 2005. How does Bond fight that?

Maybe the entire genre, humour and serious was now overtaken by the real world. It might explain why attention escaped to fantasy stuff like Game of Thrones.

How about this as an opener? A high tech hospital setting underground- a body on a bed wrapped head to toe in bandages and various wires and machines connected to it beeping away. One doctor turns to his colleague and says 'he'll never make it, even after our experimental serum and gene treatments. Anyway he'd never be the same but it was worth a try.' Seconds later the eyes open - the machines go mad and the body rises and starts to pull off the face bandages revealing the new Bond.

no Bond isn't scifi..

continuity from No time to die doesn't need to happen.

the first time the secret agent had been shown dying in the franchise's six-decade history

Well, except You Only Live Twice where he not only dies but has a very formal burial at sea and everything.

Or not realising that the filmgoers have been perfectly happy to suspend belief with this franchise from the start, via multiple actors playing the same role from Bond to M, Q, Blofeld, Felix & Moneypenny, often changing skin colour and sex.

100%. Every bond movie ends with "James Bond will return". Did all the movie goers who went to No Time to Die come out scratching their heads going "How is he going to return if he just died". No. I'd wager pretty much no-one did.

Just slot in the new actor and show the movie. Bond movies never refer to the events of previous movies. They never explain why this bond looks different to the previous one. They never explain why he's no longer with the bond girl he was cuddling up to at the end of the last movie.

If a writer needs more than about 5 minutes scratching his or her head wondering how to make it work, they should not have been given the job in the first place.

When Lost ended, one of the US talkshows did a parody of how it should have ended, which was the plane landing in LA, and Jack waking up, rubbing his eyes and saying "Awww, it was aaaaall a dream". IMO that would have been a better finale than the one we got, but I dont want to derail the thread.

Short of doing something like the above, just continue on as normal. Timothy Dalton is 6'2 and Daniel Craig is 5'10, they never explained why Bond has suddenly shrunk by 4 inches.

I don't think the height was the issue jut that craig didn't fit the role that well.

I actually really like that.

the movies definitely refer to previous movies as i stated in response to another poster talking about the 'codename' theory - there is a definite link between at least lazenby, moore and dalton while it is accepted that connery and brosnan are still the same character/person - the overall timeline is not fully defined as it spanned almost 50 years in real-time but its the same Bond. Craig has always played a 'different' Bond to the others, there were allusions to the previous movies in Spectre &Y No Time to Die along with Dench being kept as M because she was great at the role, but CR - NTTD was a different 'universe'

the height difference is explained by them being in a different 'universe' as above

I had no idea wtf was happening in quantum of solace nor did I care....complete balderdash.

Interesting to read people like both Timothy Daltons bond films....I thought I was in a very definite minority ...

Craig in Casino Royale was excellent.that had a lot, good villain le chiffre, interesting bond girl, good story set up etc..didn't much care for the rest including skyfall but bardems villain silva was good in fairness...I wouldn't lay the blame at Craig's door for the quality drop off....the stories were a bit shite imo

Brosnan in Goldeneye...perhaps something to do with age I was and videogame tie ins....Great opening scene etc

More Connery films than other actors but ... Diamonds are forever if I had to pick

I like Roger Moore but tbh wasn't a huge fan of some of his bond films but moonraker, and view to a kill stand out for me

Will be interested to see if the new iteration can get me interested again

the movies definitely refer to previous movies as i stated in response to another poster talking about the 'codename' theory

Ive read many of the books, and no offence to that poster with the codename theory, but thats rubbish. James Bond is a person with a history, a back story.

I dont think of it as different universes just different incarnations. Lots of other movie characters have had different incarnations, and there was no need to explain why they are different.

Yes the movies refer to elements of his character or history, like in Licence to Kill Felix Lighter refers to the fact he was married once, a clear throwback to OHMSS, but its a very loose reference.

No Time to Die along with Dench being kept as M because she was great at the role, 

The only reference to M in No Time to Die was a portrait of her in Ralph Fiennes(M's) office. I dont know where you got that she was kept after being killed off in Skyfall.

I think its the first time really they really push the point of him dieing. M & Q are given to people who assume that role so it can be different people. Bloefelt and Spectre are in multiple movies

I wouldn't say Bond never refers to differnt movies.

The 1 major one is the death of his wife which was brought up. On her majesty's Secret Service (where they marry and she is killed) Diamonds are Forever (where he seeks revenge so a sequel) and a small one For Your Eyes Only he is seen but flowers on a grave which people think is his wife.

But yes they were really never sequels unlike the Craig and I think Brosnans one's had a bit of a tie in with a previous film or at least 2 had

I wouldn't say Bond never refers to differnt movies but if they do its normally the same actors. The 1 major one is the death of his wife which was brought up. But yes they were never sequels unlike the Craig and I think Brosnans one's had a bit of a tie in with a previous film or at least 2 had

OK, I take back the "Never refers to previous movies", but when it is done its very loosely. Equally, lots of things also get glossed over.

Like Joe Don Baker played one of the villains in The Living Daylights but appears again in Goldeneye playing a CIA agent.

And him changing colour!