Killing Bond is a stupid idea. Sensationalist and gimmicky. In fact, the early films used to play on it (FRWL, TB,YOLT) because the idea of killing Bond is so ridiculous. Everybody in the world knows that if you kill Bond, there will still always be another Bond film, so there's absolutely no point. It would be for shock value plain and simple. And it would be a hollow shock indeed. A waste of celluloid. Bond is not killable, hence why the character has been going in one form or another for 64 years. EON please Spare everyone this and get on with it -{
Killing Bond is a stupid idea. Sensationalist and gimmicky. In fact, the early films used to play on it (FRWL, TB,YOLT) because the idea of killing Bond is so ridiculous. Everybody in the world knows that if you kill Bond, there will still always be another Bond film, so there's absolutely no point. It would be for shock value plain and simple. And it would be a hollow shock indeed. A waste of celluloid. Bond is not killable, hence why the character has been going in one form or another for 64 years. EON please Spare everyone this and get on with it -{
But what IF Eon don't want to "get on with it"...what IF they've had enough...?...wouldn't it be a nice coda for Eon to round off their ownership before selling it on...?
I wonder if EON has considered simply sending Bond on a new mission to some exotic locations, let him meet some pretty ladies and kill Blofeld in the end? It might work :v
Killing Bond is a stupid idea. Sensationalist and gimmicky. In fact, the early films used to play on it (FRWL, TB,YOLT) because the idea of killing Bond is so ridiculous. Everybody in the world knows that if you kill Bond, there will still always be another Bond film, so there's absolutely no point. It would be for shock value plain and simple. And it would be a hollow shock indeed. A waste of celluloid. Bond is not killable, hence why the character has been going in one form or another for 64 years. EON please Spare everyone this and get on with it -{
But what IF Eon don't want to "get on with it"...what IF they've had enough...?...wouldn't it be a nice coda for Eon to round off their ownership before selling it on...?
Yes what a triumphant ending to EONS 57 year reign... Killing James Bond. I couldn't think of a more morose, downbeat way to end the EON Bond franchise...
They should kill "Bond" without killing the man. In other words, use the ending of Fleming's YOLT!! That, to me, would be an appropriate ending to Both EON's Bond and Craig's. The idea would be that, as long as the man has his wits about him, his first loyalty will always be to his duty (why he didn't "stay dead" in SF). But if he has no memory of his prior life, he can live in peace. I could get behind that ending. The audience would also buy this given how many times Craig's Bond has tried to quit the service, only to come back again (which, presumably, will happen once more in B25).
Killing Bond is a stupid idea. Sensationalist and gimmicky. In fact, the early films used to play on it (FRWL, TB,YOLT) because the idea of killing Bond is so ridiculous. Everybody in the world knows that if you kill Bond, there will still always be another Bond film, so there's absolutely no point. It would be for shock value plain and simple. And it would be a hollow shock indeed. A waste of celluloid. Bond is not killable, hence why the character has been going in one form or another for 64 years. EON please Spare everyone this and get on with it -{
But what IF Eon don't want to "get on with it"...what IF they've had enough...?...wouldn't it be a nice coda for Eon to round off their ownership before selling it on...?
Yes what a triumphant ending to EONS 57 year reign... Killing James Bond. I couldn't think of a more morose, downbeat way to end the EON Bond franchise...
Killing Bond is a stupid idea. Sensationalist and gimmicky. In fact, the early films used to play on it (FRWL, TB,YOLT) because the idea of killing Bond is so ridiculous. Everybody in the world knows that if you kill Bond, there will still always be another Bond film, so there's absolutely no point. It would be for shock value plain and simple. And it would be a hollow shock indeed. A waste of celluloid. Bond is not killable, hence why the character has been going in one form or another for 64 years. EON please Spare everyone this and get on with it -{
But what IF Eon don't want to "get on with it"...what IF they've had enough...?...wouldn't it be a nice coda for Eon to round off their ownership before selling it on...?
Because it serves no purpose....even if EON was selling out and moving on, killing off Craig's Bond would put the new producers at a disadvantage even with a new Bond actor. They might be forced into another hard reboot. The new producers wouldn't want to be painted into a corner.
Killing Bond is a stupid idea. Sensationalist and gimmicky. In fact, the early films used to play on it (FRWL, TB,YOLT) because the idea of killing Bond is so ridiculous. Everybody in the world knows that if you kill Bond, there will still always be another Bond film, so there's absolutely no point. It would be for shock value plain and simple. And it would be a hollow shock indeed. A waste of celluloid. Bond is not killable, hence why the character has been going in one form or another for 64 years. EON please Spare everyone this and get on with it -{
But what IF Eon don't want to "get on with it"...what IF they've had enough...?...wouldn't it be a nice coda for Eon to round off their ownership before selling it on...?
Because it serves no purpose....even if EON was selling out and moving on, killing off Craig's Bond would put the new producers at a disadvantage even with a new Bond actor. They might be forced into another hard reboot. The new producers wouldn't want to be painted into a corner.
It serves the purpose of any new producers having a 'clean slate' to start from...so it's an actual advantage -{
Why would you have to start with a 'hard reboot' ? ?:) I apologise up front, but I find that stance ridiculous...everyone knows Bond and we haven't had a 'hard reboot' for every change of actor, have we?
YNWA 97
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 26,582Chief of Staff
No death of Bond, no setup for the next incumbent, no more history and anguish. Just concentrate on making a cracking stand alone film. After the mess that was Spectre that will do nicely
Good to see You've come to your senses, Bond44.
If the Blofeld/SPECTRE storyline won't continue with the next Bond it has to be delt with in Bond25. Wasting that character and organisation on just one ((mediocre) movie would be a shame, especially since Blofeld is still in prison.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,990Quartermasters
Killing Bond is a stupid idea. Sensationalist and gimmicky. In fact, the early films used to play on it (FRWL, TB,YOLT) because the idea of killing Bond is so ridiculous. Everybody in the world knows that if you kill Bond, there will still always be another Bond film, so there's absolutely no point. It would be for shock value plain and simple. And it would be a hollow shock indeed. A waste of celluloid. Bond is not killable, hence why the character has been going in one form or another for 64 years. EON please Spare everyone this and get on with it -{
But what IF Eon don't want to "get on with it"...what IF they've had enough...?...wouldn't it be a nice coda for Eon to round off their ownership before selling it on...?
IF they did it before selling, it would merely set the table for the ultimate 'hard reboot,' wouldn't it? The new owner would have carte blanche - as well as the theme song, logo, etc. Merely an academic discussion, mind you...
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
do we know for a fact they're looking to sell? or is this just another rumour?
and would the gunbarrel and the Barry music go with the filmrights? (I hope so)
you know the end to the You Only Live Twice book is very particular to Fleming. if you've read them all in order it is obvious the Japanese fishing village is his idea of paradise, it evokes the lengthy scuba diving sequences from Live and Let Die and Kissy is similar to the admirable Honey Rider character. The films haven't really dwelled on Fleming's obsessions, but rather have their own set of ideals, and the Craig films are themselves unique. So if we were to end Bond25, not literally with Fleming's idea of Paradise for Bond, but with CraigBond's specific idea of Paradise, what would that be?
It's not necessary to kill Bond off. All they really need to do is either choose an actor who physically resembles Craig if even in a vague way -- pale and light hair, a la Hiddleston -- or change the films tonally -- make them more comedic, a la Roger Moore -- to suggest to the viewer that this is the same character but not quite the same way. That's what they've done in the past.
But I don't think contemporary films are really all that concerned about this sort of continuity. The Batman films took a pretty sharp turn after Tim Burton and Michael Keaton left, for example, and by the time Craig is replaced, a new generation of young fans will be coming up who may not be invested in Craig's Bond interpretation.
Comments
Ah yes forgot about that one! Good call
But what IF Eon don't want to "get on with it"...what IF they've had enough...?...wouldn't it be a nice coda for Eon to round off their ownership before selling it on...?
Now I'm certain it's the right idea
Yes what a triumphant ending to EONS 57 year reign... Killing James Bond. I couldn't think of a more morose, downbeat way to end the EON Bond franchise...
No, probably not
Me neither...fantastic, isn't it -{
I can agree he's wrong - if that helps?
Acceptable
That's slanderous X-(
I think it's bloody wonderful :x
Because it serves no purpose....even if EON was selling out and moving on, killing off Craig's Bond would put the new producers at a disadvantage even with a new Bond actor. They might be forced into another hard reboot. The new producers wouldn't want to be painted into a corner.
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
It serves the purpose of any new producers having a 'clean slate' to start from...so it's an actual advantage -{
Why would you have to start with a 'hard reboot' ? ?:) I apologise up front, but I find that stance ridiculous...everyone knows Bond and we haven't had a 'hard reboot' for every change of actor, have we?
Ill health...and it's tough keep having to get the money together, eventually you just get too old to continue...
Maybe have Bond unconscious and when he awakes in next film he is Tom H - Simple
Do think there should be at least one shot of DC in a Commanders uniform at least once in his tenure.
Cheers :007)
If the Blofeld/SPECTRE storyline won't continue with the next Bond it has to be delt with in Bond25. Wasting that character and organisation on just one ((mediocre) movie would be a shame, especially since Blofeld is still in prison.
IF they did it before selling, it would merely set the table for the ultimate 'hard reboot,' wouldn't it? The new owner would have carte blanche - as well as the theme song, logo, etc. Merely an academic discussion, mind you...
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
and would the gunbarrel and the Barry music go with the filmrights? (I hope so)
you know the end to the You Only Live Twice book is very particular to Fleming. if you've read them all in order it is obvious the Japanese fishing village is his idea of paradise, it evokes the lengthy scuba diving sequences from Live and Let Die and Kissy is similar to the admirable Honey Rider character. The films haven't really dwelled on Fleming's obsessions, but rather have their own set of ideals, and the Craig films are themselves unique. So if we were to end Bond25, not literally with Fleming's idea of Paradise for Bond, but with CraigBond's specific idea of Paradise, what would that be?
But I don't think contemporary films are really all that concerned about this sort of continuity. The Batman films took a pretty sharp turn after Tim Burton and Michael Keaton left, for example, and by the time Craig is replaced, a new generation of young fans will be coming up who may not be invested in Craig's Bond interpretation.