Next Bond Will Be "Reinvention," Couple of Years Away From Shooting

[AndyDursin]

Can only hope it's a tonal change -- I want nothing more of the gloomy, joyless Daniel Craig era.

EXCLUSIVE: James Bond producer Barbara Broccoli has revealed that it will be “at least two years“ before the next 007 movie begins filming and that the task of finding an actor to replace Daniel Craig hasn’t begun “because it’s a reinvention of Bond.”

Speaking to us at a star-studded private event in central London to honor Broccoli and her brother Michael G. Wilson for their BFI Fellowships, Broccoli wouldn’t be drawn on who would play Bond next but did offer an update on the decision-making process.

“Nobody’s in the running,” she disclosed. “We’re working out where to go with him, we’re talking that through. There isn’t a script and we can’t come up with one until we decide how we’re going to approach the next film because, really, it’s a reinvention of Bond. We’re reinventing who he is and that takes time. I’d say that filming is at least two years away.”

https://deadline.com/2022/06/james-bond ... 235053969/

[Monterey Jack]

Between 1971 and '89, there were TEN Bond movies released. Since Daniel Craig took over in '06, there have been FIVE.



And, for the love of GOD, no more serialization! Make the next one totally self-contained! Stop trying to ram the square peg of pre-PC 007 into today's round hole of long-form franchise storytelling and Woke posturing. Bond is WHITE, Bond is MALE, Bond is STRAIGHT, Bond is BRITISH. You don't like it? MAKE YOUR OWN GODDAMN SPY FRANCHISE.

[Paul MacLean]

And, for the love of GOD, no more serialization! Make the next one totally self-contained! Stop trying to ram the square peg of pre-PC 007 into today's round hole of long-form franchise storytelling and Woke posturing. Bond is WHITE, Bond is MALE, Bond is STRAIGHT, Bond is BRITISH.

Unfortunately, with Barbara Broccoli in charge, I don't have high hopes. She was the one enamored of Craig, and allowed Craig to steer the franchise in ridiculous directions. She's become the Kathleen Kennedy of Bond movies.

[Monterey Jack]

Unfortunately, with Barbara Broccoli in charge, I don't have high hopes. She was the one enamored of Craig, and allowed Craig to steer the franchise in ridiculous directions. She's become the Kathleen Kennedy of Bond movies.

Is it too late to get Brosnan back? At least he seemed to be having FUN with the role.

[Monterey Jack]

You know how, two years ago, at the height of BLM mob violence (uhhhhh, "peaceful protests" ), people were throwing statues of "cancelled" historical figures into rivers and lakes, and you saw the occasional videos of people armed with baseball bats standing around preventing them from being destroyed or defaced? That's the attitude I have about the Bond franchise, a series of films that is near and dear to my heart. You want to muck with what makes Bond Bond? You're gonna have to get through me.

[Paul MacLean]

You want to muck with what makes Bond Bond? You're gonna have to get through me.

My attitude is, I'll be disappointed if they ruin (or rather continue to ruin) the character -- but that won't affect the previous films for me. I'll always have the classic Bond films, and no one can take them away from me.

[mkaroly]

Right - unfortunately we all have to face up to the fact (I am guessing) that the Bond of the future will be less like the books and less like what we grew up on. The world has changed and so will Bond and there is nothing anyone can do about it. For me personally, the final Bond film I will acknowledge is SPECTRE which has Bond riding off into the sunset with his girl. Done - NO TIME TO DIE is an optional coda/ending (kind of like how Stephen King gave two endings to The Dark Tower series in the final book - take yer pick).

On the good news front, as Paul says we still have the films we all grew up on. And I would add we also still have Ian Fleming's original novels (which most people have not read) as well as James Gardner's take on the Bond character in his series of novels. I was thinking of going back and re-reading the Gardner novels on Kindle or something as it has been a long time. With all this stuff (and, of course, the classic scores) there is still much to enjoy (and re-enjoy) and (re)discover.

[Eric Paddon]

John Gardner, not James Garner actually. (Now you've got me with visions of Jim Rockford as Bond!) But for me the series ended with Brosnan. The Craig films were awful, dreary pieces of slog for me.

[mkaroly]

^^Lol...yeah, I just realized that and came back to the board to fix it!

[AndyDursin]

Right - unfortunately we all have to face up to the fact (I am guessing) that the Bond of the future will be less like the books and less like what we grew up on. The world has changed and so will Bond and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

But their problem is if they turn their back on the character, then this franchise really will just be another run of the mill IP like everything else. They straddled uneasy ground with this last movie, turning Craig's hardened 007 into a Dad, romantic lead (he's a one-woman man now!) and sacrificial hero who blows himself up at the end. That was a long way from the gritty and (actually gratuitous) torture scenes of Casino Royale! Not to mention broke from decades of tradition story telling wise.

They would be wise to make something more fun that would appeal to both older viewers who might miss the "old Bond movies" AND kids, who would probably like that approach better than the Craig films. The deadly serious Bond era is over -- move onto something upbeat and exciting that would appeal to younger viewers...not like FAST AND THE FURIOUS with spies (not THAT dumb) but something more exciting than the morose tone and drab Mendes visuals that looked like they were filmed through sunglass lenses.

Going back to self-contained stories also would be the first thing I'd do. Don't start biting off more than you can chew, start with something simple and exciting. Makes it easier going forward. The "connectiveness" of the Craig movies was a total failure -- it could have worked, but it didn't.

[mkaroly]

I am not as optimistic...hopefully they will figure something good out.

[Paul MacLean]

Right - unfortunately we all have to face up to the fact (I am guessing) that the Bond of the future will be less like the books and less like what we grew up on. The world has changed and so will Bond and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

And it's silly, because James Bond has already weathered nearly half a century of cultural changes -- and remained a relatively consistent persona.

Yeah, there were variations on the character depending on the actor, and Bond's foes tended to reflect the zeitgeist. But the producers never said "We're now in the age of women's lib, we need to change how Bond treats women!" Even the "strong, independent" Bond girls of later movies (like Anya Amasova, or Natalya Simonova) ultimately melted in Bond's arms.

They never said "We're in the midst of an AIDS epidemic, we need to reduce Bond's promiscuity!"; Moore and Dalton still dallied with the ladies. In 1987, long after smoking was proven to be deadly, Dalton happily puffed his cigarettes. Even in Casino Royale (oh, the good old days when Craig had no influence) Bond seduces Dimitrios' wife for information, which results in her death -- by torture.

Much of Bond's allure as a character is that he routinely engages in the kind of edgy behavior which none of us would ever dare. That's why he's always appealed to men and women. I don't personally even like a lot of James Bond's habits -- I hate smoking, I disapprove of promiscuity and excessive drinking, etc., but those habits are part of what make the character interesting.