James Bond 24

[Marvolo]

Then why use them just for a name check. If you want two crime bosses who are brothers you can come up with two. They were created by Ian as a send up of Vegas mobsters with all the tropes intact. Use the Spang Brothers and their Spangled Mob toothless and it's disrespectful and uses them wrong. The name wasnt just their name, but everything they stood fore, "everything around them spangled," they got Bond's attention because of the diamonds, then the race horses, then the casinos, theirs is everything that was overwrought with Vegas at the time.

Cause the idea behind them is good, but that idea is not dependant on either vegas or diamonds. As for using the name, most Bond fans aren't slaves to the material, and would appreciate their inclusion in any capacity. Call it an homage to Flemings material. Repurposing is healthy when adapting a property over 50+ years.

As for them "spangling", Vegas today isn't the Vegas of then so bringing Vegas into it would make less sense. And they can spangle without literally spangling with shiny expensive ****. They can grab his attention in other ways. Ways Fleming couldn't have known about or thought about back then. Fleming wasn't a time lord. His books are from a different time, and the material in them can be repurposed to better fit our times.

 

[ChickenScratch]

If you want to think of it that way but I disagree. They are part and parcel of the novel, Fleming's genius is in his travelogue feel while taking what is important about the setting and making it apart of the characterizations. They are apart of the environment because they are it and they created it. The Spang Brothers and the Spangled gang are just not that without the diamond smuggling, Vegas and all the glitz (er spangle) that goes with it.

 

[Marvolo]

If you want to think of it that way but I disagree. They are part and parcel of the novel, Fleming's genius is in his travelogue feel while taking what is important about the setting and making it apart of the characterizations. They are apart of the environment because they are it and they created it. The Spang Brothers and the Spangled gang are just not that without the diamond smuggling, Vegas and all the glitz (er spangle) that goes with it.

We aren't talking about the novel here. We are talking about including them in a film. A film that isn't an adaption of Diamonds are Forever so what they did in that novel is irrelevent. They can be made to spangle in other ways in other locations. And anyways the book and those characters were written in the 50s. Times were different 50 years ago. The characters as they were written and the Vegas they existed with doesn't exist today. So unless you want a period Bond piece you can forget that book ever being adapted faithfully. It like all Fleming material will be used and repurposed for our times at some point or another.

I like repurposing cause it gives us Fleming's ideas and materiala in new ways.

I've always taken the approach of James Cain:

Near the end of his life, and long after his greatest novels were written, James M. Cain agreed to be interviewed by a student reporter who covered culture and the arts for his college newspaper. This young man began his time with Cain by bemoaning how Hollywood had changed books such as The Postman Always Rings Twice and Double Indemnity. Before he could properly get into his rant, the old man interrupted him by pointing to a shelf of books behind his desk. “The movies didn’t change them a bit, son,” he said. “They’re all right up there. Every word is the same as when I wrote them.”

 

[ChickenScratch]

And I disagree. If you want to go so far afield from what Ian wrote then don't use them. Make new characters. "They can be made to spangle in other ways" and make it even more awkward, not like spangle is an oft used term now.

"We aren't talking about the novel here. We are talking about including them in a film. A film that isn't an adaption of Diamonds are Forever so what they did in that novel is irrelevent (sp. irrelevant)." So it's just a name that tickles your pickle and you would like to see used for no other reason. Maybe have Superman and The Joker show up too if you just wanna throw stuff in there that sounds cool.

I'm gonna go ahead and continue disagreeing with it. Using them just for the sake of a name is cheap, may as well not.

 

[Airwings]

Using them for the sake of the name will still be a homage to the books, and it will also make us feel we're in Bond's world. Both different characters and different names will come off as it's a new Bourne or M:I.
The name Gala Brand will give us that Bond feeling as well.

Spang can sparkle in other ways. Have them be flamboyant arms dealers, or draw inspiration from The Great Gatsby (party brothers who hide something).

 

[Hunter Rider]

 

[ChickenScratch]

Using them for the same of the name will still be a homage to the books, and it will also make us feel we're in Bond's world. Both different characters and different names will come off as it's a new Bourne or M:I.
The name Gala Brand will give us that Bond feeling as well.

Spang can sparkle in other ways. Have them be flamboyant arms dealers, or draw inspiration from The Great Gatsby (party brothers who hide something).

You make a point. But new characters are not going to make it any less Bond and any more generic spy fiction.

 

[Hyde]

 

[TheIrishAvenger]

Sam Mendes CONFIRMED to direct Bond 24!

https://twitter.com/007/status/355355811842760705

 

[747]

Awesome news all around. Sam Mendes returning is a great thing. And 2015 is fitting with all the other giant releases that year.

 

[TheIrishAvenger]

November 6th is the same day Ant-Man and Peanuts are released!

 

[A Necessary Evil]

 

[Two-Face]

Link? I wonder who will be the villain? I didn't like Javier Bardem's character. He was boring for me.

 

[747]

I hope Deakins is confirmed back soon too! Skyfall was shamefully great looking.

 

[Dr. Evil]

He wasn't, then he was... maybe. Now Sony have made it official: Sam Mendes will be back behind the camera for Bond 24. The director, so assured on Skyfall but initially hesitant to commit to another 00-instalment, will thrill the Bond faithful with the announcement.

"I am very pleased that by giving me the time I need to honour all my theatre commitments", Mendes said in a statement, "the producers have made it possible for me to direct Bond 24. I very much look forward to taking up the reins again, and to working with Daniel Craig, Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli for a second time.”

Wilson and Broccoli added: "Following the extraordinary success of Skyfall, we're really excited to be working once again with Daniel Craig, Sam Mendes and John Logan.”

We've rearranged the Bond 24 press release, scanned it for anomalies, dyed it blue, held it to the sunlight, but still haven't spotted a single clue about whether or not Blofeld will be in it. What it does reveal is that we Brits will see it ahead of Felix Leiter's mob. The UK release is October 23, 2015, while it has a US release scheduled for November 6.

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=38056

When is Mendes done with his theater commitments anyways?

 

[StarLord]

Link? I wonder who will be the villain? I didn't like Javier Bardem's character. He was boring for me.

I liked Silva, but he wasn't in it much.

 

[Two-Face]

I love to see Blofeld as the main villain, just go back with Bond dealing with him getting to know his arch enemy. 2015 will be a long wait!

 

[mclay18]

November 6th is the same day Ant-Man and Peanuts are released!

I will bet money Marvel and Disney will move Ant-Man away from 007... overlapping demographics here. They'd cannibalize each other.

 

[Hunter Rider]

Not particularly pleased over the Mendes announcement but it was expected given how much money Skyfall made, hopefully he'll do better second time around.

 

[Bruce Malone]

Not particularly pleased over the Mendes announcement but it was expected given how much money Skyfall made, hopefully he'll do better second time around.

I agree. I just felt his action set-pieces underwhelming for what we would expect for Bond, as action is not his strong suit.

Martin Campbell is still my preferred modern Bond director.

 

[marvelrobbins]

Skyfall has been only film since reboot that feels like a real bond film but they
have chance to blow It out of park by building on
1:Bond should be at top of his game
2:Time has come for Bond to have a main love Intrest that has sleeps with during mission or at end after completing mission.Bond bedded fields In qoS
and 2 woman In Skyfall but there hasn't been a main love Intrest In rebooted
series since Vesper
3:Silva was too mundane a villain.SImple revenge Is too mundane for a bond
villain.
4:Keep M,MoneyPenny,and Q's roles limited.Skyfall did good job of Introducing the new team of rebooted series.Time to once again Bond gets assignment at
HQ after flirting with Moneypenny,and gets equipment from Q and then you don't see much of them again except myabe at end of film.
5:Skyfall proved Danial Craig can also play tradional Bond and have some fun build on that.You could even outgross Skyfall by having him play tradional bond who gets to sleep with multiple woman during course of film and none of the over the hill stuff from Skyfall.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Mendes saved Bond after that awful follow up to Royale so I'm happy. Hopefully the movie isn't as much like TDK as the last one was. I really, really enjoyed the film but he should give the Nolan worship a rest. Has the same director ever come back for back to back Bond movies before? I'm thinking no.

 

[chamber-music]

I will bet money Marvel and Disney will move Ant-Man away from 007... overlapping demographics here. They'd cannibalize each other.

Yeah I can see Marvel moving Ant-Man's release date.

 

[marvelrobbins]

In original Bond series yes

Terence young followed Dr No with From Russia with love

Guy Hamilton followed Diamonds are forever with Live and let die and the man with the golden Gun

Lewis Gilbert followed The Spy who loved me with Moonraker

John Glen folowered For Your eyes Only with Octopussy,A View to a Kill,The Living Daylights,and Licence to Kill

 

[Hunter Rider]

Mendes saved Bond after that awful follow up to Royale so I'm happy. Hopefully the movie isn't as much like TDK as the last one was. I really, really enjoyed the film but he should give the Nolan worship a rest. Has the same director ever come back for back to back Bond movies before? I'm thinking no.

Terence Young did the first two films, Guy Hamilton did three back to back, Lewis Gilbert did two back to back and John Glen did Five back to back.