PDA

View Full Version : James Bond 23/3 is back on!



DigiFluid
November 5th, 2010, 12:03 AM
First off....I wasn't really sure whether I should put this under OT or under SF/F. I opted for the latter because let's be honest: James Bond is the male fantasy. He gets to be the hero who saves the world over and over, shoots the bad guys, takes only minor injuries himself, and sleeps with only the most gorgeous women in the world. How could that NOT be considered male fantasy? :p

Anyway, having loved Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, I was rather upset when the next Bond film was put on indefinite hold because of MGM's problems.

But it looks like now that MGM's got a future again, so does the world's greatest spy!

http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2010/11/bond-23-has-a-release-date-still-broke

So there you have it, GW. James Bond will be back in November 2012 :D

Replicator Todd
November 5th, 2010, 12:32 AM
Oh yes, I love the Bond films and I was dying to see Craig as Bond again(then again their technically is Blood Stone and the GoldenEye remake to play)! Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace are two of my favorites! But my favorite Bond film is definitely GoldenEye. I think alot of the gadgets in past films made Bond feel very sci-fi...ish? But I'm very glad to see something good on Bond 23!

Legionnaire
November 5th, 2010, 01:14 AM
Amen to Bond being the ultimate male fantasy. Craig has been an excellent Bond, though I wasn't as satisfied with Quantum of Solace as I was with Casino Royale. While I appreciate the grittier, more realistic approach they've taken with Craig, I wouldn't mind a few more Bond-esque gadgets. I know they wanted to take things in a Bourne sort of direction, but there is a distinction between Bourne and Bond. I don't need a silly invisible car, but can a man get a fancy bomb pen again?

Cold Fuzz
November 5th, 2010, 01:19 AM
First off....I wasn't really sure whether I should put this under OT or under SF/F. I opted for the latter because let's be honest: James Bond is the male fantasy. He gets to be the hero who saves the world over and over, shoots the bad guys, takes only minor injuries himself, and sleeps with only the most gorgeous women in the world. How could that NOT be considered male fantasy? :p

Anyway, having loved Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, I was rather upset when the next Bond film was put on indefinite hold because of MGM's problems.

But it looks like now that MGM's got a future again, so does the world's greatest spy!

http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2010/11/bond-23-has-a-release-date-still-broke

So there you have it, GW. James Bond will be back in November 2012 :D

I'd been wondering whether or not the next Bond film would be resurrected from development hell. This is definitely good news. The Pierce Brosnan films weren't to my liking. However, the Craig films were what a Bond film should be like in my opinion and I'm greatly looking forward to this one. Hopefully, there will be an opening song as good as Chris Cornell's "You Know My Name."

RJLCyberPunk
November 5th, 2010, 05:27 AM
Amen to Bond being the ultimate male fantasy. Craig has been an excellent Bond, though I wasn't as satisfied with Quantum of Solace as I was with Casino Royale. While I appreciate the grittier, more realistic approach they've taken with Craig, I wouldn't mind a few more Bond-esque gadgets. I know they wanted to take things in a Bourne sort of direction, but there is a distinction between Bourne and Bond. I don't need a silly invisible car, but can a man get a fancy bomb pen again?

I totally agree the one thing I don't like about the current Bond films is the total lack of gadgets. The invisible car in the last Bond film of the the type we all used to grow with may have a bit much but is no excuse to to totally get rid of the gadgets as they have done.

SaberBlade
November 5th, 2010, 06:15 AM
Even though Q did appear in the first and second movie Bond movies (back in the 60s), it really wasn't until movie 3 (Goldfinger) that Bond started to get all the bizarre gadgets. If you watch Dr. No and From Russia With Love, you'll see small stuff here and there but it's Goldfinger that you get all the cool stuff like the Aston Martin with all the trimmings, then each movie just gets more and more after that.

Craig's movies being a reboot seems to be following that trend, limited gadgets (bulletproof car, built in medical station, phone with special features) and focusing on the man, but I think the next Bond could see the reintroduction of Q and getting more gadgets. Hopefully not an invisible car, as that was a bit much.

Replicator Todd
November 5th, 2010, 12:31 PM
Craig's movies being a reboot seems to be following that trend, limited gadgets (bulletproof car, built in medical station, phone with special features) and focusing on the man, but I think the next Bond could see the reintroduction of Q and getting more gadgets. Hopefully not an invisible car, as that was a bit much.

I have been hoping to see the reintroduction of Q, I think it would be awesome to see Craig's Bond using gadgets. Despite the invisible car....I still enjoyed Die Another Day. :p

DigiFluid
November 5th, 2010, 12:33 PM
I rather like this 'stripped down' version of James Bond. Yes the gadgets were a lot of fun, but a lot of them were also kind of goofy and gimmicky. Staying away from them seems to result in a more 'pure' spy action movie.

Replicator Todd
November 5th, 2010, 12:46 PM
I rather like this 'stripped down' version of James Bond. Yes the gadgets were a lot of fun, but a lot of them were also kind of goofy and gimmicky. Staying away from them seems to result in a more 'pure' spy action movie.

Perhaps, I would like to see the gadgets again though...eventually. I love this version of Bond too though and hope it is like this for a while.

Janus
November 5th, 2010, 02:05 PM
Nice ! And to add my two cents...I like the gadget-less Bond a lot better. It's much truer to Ian Fleming's creation.

jmoz
November 5th, 2010, 02:14 PM
Hells yeah!

Col.Foley
November 5th, 2010, 06:38 PM
Great news. I guess...sure like seeing the Bond movies back and I will go consume them like a ravenous shark but as long as this does not put MGM in even more of a precarious financial situation.

DigiFluid
November 5th, 2010, 08:56 PM
Great news. I guess...sure like seeing the Bond movies back and I will go consume them like a ravenous shark but as long as this does not put MGM in even more of a precarious financial situation.
Well as the old saying goes, you've gotta spend money to make money; and I don't think a financially-troubled film studio is any exception. They released what, 3 movies in 2009? And AFAIK only one this year. They're certainly not going to recoup their losses by sitting on an interest-collecting debt, and not releasing any moneymakers.

With any luck, Bond 23/3 in November and The Hobbit in December will go a long way to digging them out of their current predicament!

SaberBlade
November 5th, 2010, 09:18 PM
I rather like this 'stripped down' version of James Bond. Yes the gadgets were a lot of fun, but a lot of them were also kind of goofy and gimmicky. Staying away from them seems to result in a more 'pure' spy action movie.

I like it too. I remember when Bourne Identity came out, it and it's eventually sequels were often called "America's James Bond" but I tend to find these Bond movies the British version of Bourne. I like seeing James Bond taking a beating, rather than walking around in a fine suit, wearing a character shield so powerful not even herpes can get to him.

When Q first appeared in movie one, I only remember him giving Bond a new gun, the Walther PPK but when Desmond Llewelyn first played Q (which was in the second movie), he showed up and pretty much just gave Bond a briefcase with a rifle, special ammo and a few other bits and pieces. Q (hopefully played by John Cleese) could do the same thing, show up and give Bond a cache of weapons, ammo and a few bits and bobs to help him out rather than turning him into Inspector Gadget.

I hope they get Samantha Bond to return as Moneypenny.

Akamaimom
November 5th, 2010, 09:57 PM
I love the idea of John Cleese as Q. That would be divine!

And I like Daniel Craig as Bond. I never really cared for all the gadgetry--I really like this new gritty nature that he has. And the only Bond that I really can't watch is Timothy Dalton. But I like Craig the best.

Here's hoping that the movie gets made and that it's worth it.

Col.Foley
November 5th, 2010, 10:18 PM
Well as the old saying goes, you've gotta spend money to make money; and I don't think a financially-troubled film studio is any exception. They released what, 3 movies in 2009? And AFAIK only one this year. They're certainly not going to recoup their losses by sitting on an interest-collecting debt, and not releasing any moneymakers.

With any luck, Bond 23/3 in November and The Hobbit in December will go a long way to digging them out of their current predicament!I would say with the exception of debt ridden countries...oh sorry companies.

MGM is doing the Hobbit?

And in any event its all about spending money and not willy nilly and just throwing it at something, in these situations you have to be smart for your funding and where you put it and why. I wonder if they are going to try and go for something low budget so they can get more bang for their buck? But regardless my point was I would rather not have them make a movie now if it risks them being in a financially precarious situation then wait and make sure their in better fiances. That way the movie and future movies future can be secure.

But I really want to see Craig again and want to see this arc continue.


I love the idea of John Cleese as Q. That would be divine!

And I like Daniel Craig as Bond. I never really cared for all the gadgetry--I really like this new gritty nature that he has. And the only Bond that I really can't watch is Timothy Dalton. But I like Craig the best.

Here's hoping that the movie gets made and that it's worth it.

Dalton was awesome. :P

DigiFluid
November 5th, 2010, 10:43 PM
I would say with the exception of debt ridden countries...oh sorry companies.
Well that's a whole different animal for a whole different discussion :) In the case of corporations in debt, they can't really dig themselves out of that debt without doing something profitable. And uh....Hot Tub Time Machine as their only release this year isn't going to do it for them :S

Bond and The Hobbit sure won't be cheap productions, but I don't doubt that they'll more than make their money back. The two most recent Bond films made back 5x and over 2x their production costs respectively, while the Lord of the Rings trilogy made back 10x its $285m budget. Spend money to make money :)

Col.Foley
November 5th, 2010, 10:53 PM
Well that's a whole different animal for a whole different discussion :) In the case of corporations in debt, they can't really dig themselves out of that debt without doing something profitable. And uh....Hot Tub Time Machine as their only release this year isn't going to do it for them :S

Bond and The Hobbit sure won't be cheap productions, but I don't doubt that they'll more than make their money back. The two most recent Bond films made back 5x and over 2x their production costs respectively, while the Lord of the Rings trilogy made back 10x its $285m budget. Spend money to make money :)

:indeed:

I don't disagree with you but youa re really going to spend your money wisely, though with those two projects it probably would be a very wise investment...as you said. Go all in in other words. ;)

Angela V
November 8th, 2010, 07:42 AM
Don't forget us Girl Action Junkies! :D

It was so awesome to see Timothy Dalton on Chuck last week!

the fifth man
November 8th, 2010, 06:36 PM
It is very nice to see that another Bond film will be on the way.

DigiFluid
January 25th, 2011, 02:41 AM
Rumour time: word is that a possible title for the fim is Red Sky at Night

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/738883/new_bond_film_called_red_sky_at_night_rachel_weisz_back_on_board.html



That's a hell of a lot better of a title than Quantum of Solace :lol:

Replicator Todd
January 25th, 2011, 10:24 AM
Rumour time: word is that a possible title for the fim is Red Sky at Night

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/738883/new_bond_film_called_red_sky_at_night_rachel_weisz_back_on_board.html



That's a hell of a lot better of a title than Quantum of Solace :lol:

"Red Sky at Night" is pretty bad IMO. :p

SaberBlade
January 25th, 2011, 10:42 AM
"Red Sky at Night" is pretty bad IMO. :p

Still better than Quantum of Solace though. It's the meaning I am concerned about, because everything Bond did was giving him a quantum of solace (a small bit of comfort) after Vesper died in Bond 22, but Red Sky at Night... unless it has to do with shepherds or sailors being happen (and Bond is a sailor, or should be, not sure if he's been called Commander Bond yet) I just hope it's not that literal.