Campbell NOT returning to direct Bond 22!

[Catman]

Yeah, exactly, right, i haven't been paying attention to a franchise i grew up on...

I think your the one who hasn't been paying attention. Didn't you get the memo where the studio and film makers specifically stated that the new Bond will be grounded in reality, moreso than ever before? And that the whole fantasy thing is a thing of the past? Why do you think they are talking about not even including 'Q' in the next one? The days of OVER-the TOP fantasy and gadgets are a thing of the past.

Yeah...we've only heard that a million times during the past 40 years.

More importantly, your forgetting one major factor my friend; the fact that Bond 22 is a direct sequel to Casino Royale.

Casino Royale will be the 2nd direct sequel. Unless you wanna count Moonraker. From Russia With Love was the first and, yeah, it wasn't THAT different from Dr. No. But...the next Bond film was Goldfinger. Yes, Goldfinger IS the greatest Bond film of all-time, but it was over-the-top and fantasy oriented. So, just cause the next Bond film may be grounded in reality doesn't mean the fantasy over-the-top days are over.

they know what works for Craig, and they'll be anxious to stick with it.

Connery's first Bond was Dr. No and his final official one was Diamonds Are Forever. Those two films are SO completely different that its not even funny. Expect the unexpected. Thats all I'm saying.

 

[Josh Bond]

Casino Royale will be the 2nd direct sequel. Unless you wanna count Moonraker.

I would count moonraker, so it's really going to be the 3rd direct sequel. All of the Pierce Brosnan movies were alike as well, so you could possibly even count them.

 

[Catman]

All of the Pierce Brosnan movies were alike as well, so you could possibly even count them.

They weren't direct sequels. You could make the same arguments about the Sean Connery and Roger Moore films, but the ONLY direct sequel so far is From Russia With Love. Why? Because many characters in the film say it takes place 6 months after Dr. No. If I'm not mistake Bond's g/f, Blofeld, and M all say that Bond battled Dr. No 6 months earlier.

 

[Fried Gold]

They weren't direct sequels. You could make the same arguments about the Sean Connery and Roger Moore films, but the ONLY direct sequel so far is From Russia With Love. Why? Because many characters in the film say it takes place 6 months after Dr. No. If I'm not mistake Bond's g/f, Blofeld, and M all say that Bond battled Dr. No 6 months earlier.

Yeah, but by that logic, For Your Eyes Only is the sequel to OHMSS, as he visits Tracy's grave at the start.

 

[Catman]

Yeah, but by that logic, For Your Eyes Only is the sequel to OHMSS, as he visits Tracy's grave at the start.

Tracy has been mentioned in other Bond films. She was mentioned in The Spy Who Loved Me and in License to Kill. Some (including myself) think that the opening of Diamonds Are Forever is Bond seeking revenge for Tracy's death. HOWEVER, that does not make it a direct sequel. For something to be a direct sequel it has to be proven within the film that it takes place after another movie. Like, From Russia With Love for example. It is stated in the film that it takes place 6 months after Dr. No. There's no other Bond film that does that. Not even Moonraker, I think. What most Bond films have done is have very subtle references to the other films.

 

[Gonking]

J. J. Abrams would be a great choice

 

[Agentsands77]

Yeah...we've only heard that a million times during the past 40 years.

Only because the "gritty Bond" kept failing or performing less than the bigger Bond. They did try with Timothy Dalton, though - for his era, it was gritty and grittier. They've wanted this dark Bond for ages. It's finally a massive success and you think they're ready to chuck it out the window? Nah.

Casino Royale will be the 2nd direct sequel.

Yes, but CASINO ROYALE will be more of a direct sequel than has ever been seen before. Loads of returning characters, same plot threads... FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE was something of a direct sequel, but not to the capacity BOND 22 will be.

Yes, Goldfinger IS the greatest Bond film of all-time, but it was over-the-top and fantasy oriented.

Correction. FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE is the best of the Connery Bonds.

Connery's first Bond was Dr. No and his final official one was Diamonds Are Forever. Those two films are SO completely different that its not even funny.

And...? Daniel Craig is not Sean Connery.

Management, intentions, and things have changed since the period of 1962-1971. Bond is not being made in the same way and the producers want to do something different. This isn't Cubby Broccoli's franchise anymore - it's Michael W. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli's, and they've finally put their stamp on the character. Using history to try and say what might happen at this point is tenuous at best.

And even so, to get from DR. NO to DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER, it was a progression. BOND 22 may be bigger than CASINO ROYALE, but there's no way we'll be watching DIE ANOTHER DAY in 2008. And furthermore, it's arguable that Craig would never click as Bond in anything but the kind of Bond film he was in in CASINO ROYALE, so I doubt they're going to try and go and make GOLDFINGER with him in it, even if the scale of his films increases as things go along.

 

[Furious Styles]

I can see arguments from both sides of the fence. And it seems that EON (much like WB and the Batman fracnhise) have learned from their previous mistakes. I don't think they will make the same mistake they have continuosly made over the past 40 years AKA hamper good actors with atrocious scripts.

However, I think it's safe to say that after GE, Brosnan and company didn't exactly envision making DAD any time soon. However no one can truthfully say Craig won't be in a bad Bond film, but so far it looks like we will be getting more of CR, and less of DAD.

 

[Golgo-13]

Casino Royale will be the 2nd direct sequel. Unless you wanna count Moonraker. From Russia With Love was the first and, yeah, it wasn't THAT different from Dr. No. But...the next Bond film was Goldfinger. Yes, Goldfinger IS the greatest Bond film of all-time, but it was over-the-top and fantasy oriented. So, just cause the next Bond film may be grounded in reality doesn't mean the fantasy over-the-top days are over.

Well there's no official confirmation that Bond 22 will NOT be over-the-top, but like others have said, no other sequel in the entire Bond franchise will be as close knit to the previous pic like the one coming out in 2008.

Look at the facts we know so far:

1)The film makers have confirmed it'll be a direct sequel to CR
2)Vesper's Algerian Boyfriend will be the Villan
3)There will be deeper insight into Mr.Whites mysterious organization
4)Mathis will be returning.

.....And although it's not confirmed yet, i'm sure Felix Leiter will be back too.

With all we know now, it is almost a sure bet that the film will have the same feel to it as CR. Having an over-the-top sequel with so many returning elements from Casino Royale, will disconnect the audience and it won't feel like a sequel.

 

[Agentsands77]

However no one can truthfully say Craig won't be in a bad Bond film, but so far it looks like we will be getting more of CR, and less of DAD.

Quite right. BOND 22 may be terrible (let's hope not), but there's nothing indicating this film will be a big step in the fantasy direction. There is plenty indicating that it will keep along the track CASINO ROYALE set in place, though.

 

[DACrowe]

Didn't we know about this....months ago?

 

[Josh Bond]

I can see arguments from both sides of the fence. And it seems that EON (much like WB and the Batman fracnhise) have learned from their previous mistakes.

Mistakes? Ok, batman and robin was pretty bad, but there was nothing bad about the old bond! I love Daniel Craig's bond too, but don't you dare say that the old bond movies were bad and were mistakes, bacause that simply is wrong.
BTW- I actually enjoyed DAD, why dose everyone hate it so much?

 

[Josh Bond]

J. J. Abrams would be a great choice

Nah, he would not beable to resist making it into a gadgety Alias/Mission Impossible movie.

 

[Golgo-13]

^.Ditto.

 

[FVD]

Plus Abrams will also find a place for Greg Grunberg in the film. Not that it's a bad thing either. I've seen Grunberg in everything Abrams has been involved in. From Felicity and Alias to cameos in the Lost pilot and M:I:iii.

I like Abrams but I don't think he'd suit a Bond film. Don't even offer Bryan Singer the job either. God only knows what he'll do to a Bond film. I'd hate who he would decide to choose for a Bond girl.

 

[Josh Bond]

Plus Abrams will also find a place for Greg Grunberg in the film. Not that it's a bad thing either. I've seen Grunberg in everything Abrams has been involved in. From Felicity and Alias to cameos in the Lost pilot and M:I:iii.

I like Abrams but I don't think he'd suit a Bond film. Don't even offer Bryan Singer the job either. God only knows what he'll do to a Bond film. I'd hate who he would decide to choose for a Bond girl.

i actually like Brian Singer's films, but I don't think he'd make a good bond movie. He should stick to the comic movies.

 

[Darth Elektra]

I like Abrams and Singer both a whole lot however neither would do very good with a Bond film.

 

[StevieNicks1988]

Such a shame. Hope it doesn't take a turn for the worst.

 

[Chaos Bringer]

Yeah...we've only heard that a million times during the past 40 years.
So, just cause the next Bond film may be grounded in reality doesn't mean the fantasy over-the-top days are over.

well count me in as someone who wishes for those days to be gone.
I've never enjoyed a Bond film quite like CR. I despised the other Bond films (except Goldeneye which was a neat concept of 006 Vs. 007 but still dumb-on cheese...).

While I respect most opinions I will say the studio made a move to get as far away as possible from what we have known about Bond and I'm pleased as all heck about that.

Even the one liners in CR are far superior to anything prior...

 

[Chaos Bringer]

Yeah...we've only heard that a million times during the past 40 years.
So, just cause the next Bond film may be grounded in reality doesn't mean the fantasy over-the-top days are over.

well count me in as someone who wishes for those days to be gone.
I've never enjoyed a Bond film quite like CR. I despised the other Bond films (except Goldeneye which was a neat concept of 006 Vs. 007 but still dumb-on cheese...).

While I respect most opinions I will say the studio made a move to get as far away as possible from what we have known about Bond and I'm pleased as all heck about that.

Even the one liners in CR are far superior to anything prior...
kiss your old Bond goodbye.
for me, it's good ridance.

 

[Kritish]

The reboot is screwed.

 

[Furious Styles]

t

Mistakes? Ok, batman and robin was pretty bad, but there was nothing bad about the old bond! I love Daniel Craig's bond too, but don't you dare say that the old bond movies were bad and were mistakes, bacause that simply is wrong.
BTW- I actually enjoyed DAD, why dose everyone hate it so much?

I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say. Personally, I adore Craig but I also hold the previous films and actors close to my heart. However, when I was speaking of EON's "mistakes," I was alluding to the fact that I believe (on some occasions) EON has never been able to realize Bond's full potential.

I will always defend the first 1/3 of Die Another Day, because I think the story is cutting edge and reminiscent of Ian Fleming's original stories. Bond is betrayed by a double agent, captured and tortured while Mi6 refuse to negotiate his release until it serves them some use. It's obvious Brosan is ready to put his stamp on the character; but everyone else is in some other parallel dimension.

What entity or being forced Wade and Purvis to write such garbage, I can only guess. Why Tamahori, Michael G. and Barbara decided to sign off on such ludacrous concepts like an invisible car and the Jinx character, I don't know, but my point is the franchise always finds away to negate the positive by steamrolling ahead with the asanine.

It's a cycle we've seen on numerous occasions and many people have already alluded to. The series goes through certain stages, and Bond fans just accept it and gravitate towards whatever Bond they enjoy the most. I KNOW Daniel Craig won't let down the franchise, because none of the other actors did, but what I'm afraid of is the franchise letting down Daniel Craig. Much like it let down Brosnan and the rest.

 

[Darth Elektra]

well count me in as someone who wishes for those days to be gone.
I've never enjoyed a Bond film quite like CR. I despised the other Bond films (except Goldeneye which was a neat concept of 006 Vs. 007 but still dumb-on cheese...).

While I respect most opinions I will say the studio made a move to get as far away as possible from what we have known about Bond and I'm pleased as all heck about that.

Even the one liners in CR are far superior to anything prior...
kiss your old Bond goodbye.
for me, it's good ridance.

Agreed.

 

[Furious Styles]

well count me in as someone who wishes for those days to be gone.
I've never enjoyed a Bond film quite like CR. I despised the other Bond films (except Goldeneye which was a neat concept of 006 Vs. 007 but still dumb-on cheese...).

While I respect most opinions I will say the studio made a move to get as far away as possible from what we have known about Bond and I'm pleased as all heck about that.

Even the one liners in CR are far superior to anything prior...

LOL don't worry pal, the "old Bond" will be more than fine without you....

 

[Mr Jide]

well count me in as someone who wishes for those days to be gone.
I've never enjoyed a Bond film quite like CR. I despised the other Bond films (except Goldeneye which was a neat concept of 006 Vs. 007 but still dumb-on cheese...).

While I respect most opinions I will say the studio made a move to get as far away as possible from what we have known about Bond and I'm pleased as all heck about that.

Even the one liners in CR are far superior to anything prior...
kiss your old Bond goodbye.
for me, it's good ridance.

Films like GF and FRWL are superior to CR. Also, there have been better quips by previous Bonds than anything in CR. Dont get me wrong, I love CR and have supported Craig from the start but ignoring the previous movies and their value is ******ed if your a bond fan.