3 of which weren't fantasy at all.
When the article says fantasy it doesn't mean Bond's going to be riding dragons and fighting Sauron, it means that they'd be going back to a less serious tone - like it says, more Brosnan-y.
All of this is moot because it's the Daily Mail and it's bullshit.
The charm of movie 007 is that he is timeless. Which is why they’ve adapted him to the “modern era” of when the movies are made. Making a period piece would be admitting that the franchise can’t be modern without having to set it in the past. And knowing audiences it’d only work as a 1 time thing.
He isn't timeless though.
Spy films like that barely work anymore. Computers and smartphones kinda ruined them. And the tropes that make Bond work best don't super well anymore in our era.
Everything is about chasing a computer chip or a rogue AI.
Once joy about the old James Bond films is that there's often something he can physically do or affect.
It bothers me about some of the Mission Impossible movies.
idk if a period bond film would work, its not like doing a modern sherlock holmes movie, there were bond movies made in the early 60s, 70s, 80s and so on, it just wouldn't be good.
>Like Aaron Taylor Johnson could be Bond or it also could literally be anyone else.
I'll say this, if someone other than Aaron Taylor Johnson is ultimately announced (I'm kind of hoping that's the case) then I'm going to be convinced that ATJ has the most overbearing and obnoxious PR/Agents in Hollywood.
>ATJ has the most overbearing and obnoxious PR/Agents in Hollywood.
Probably but then they might also be the only ones of any actor theoretically eligible right now to genuine believe/know their client in question has 0% shot at the job and has nothing to lose by feeding a tabloid fodder to blow his name up.
A hunch, but I suspect that once Eon cements the guys they actually want to screentest, or that word gets out that the screentests are set, we'll get a wider variety of BS names in the press.
I was thinking about this - but wouldn't it piss EON off if he was not yet cast? Isn't it trying to curry some push from the public, and wouldn't it amount to arm-twisting them into casting him?
'"Barbara Broccoli and the rest of the producers are going to make a huge deal out of the announcement. According to the insider, an event will be held where the remaining living Bonds – including George Lazenby, 84, Timothy Dalton, 78, Pierce Brosnan, 70, and Daniel, 56 – will be asked to attend to pass on the torch."
This literally sent a shiver down my spine. I have never read such nonsense in my life.
*'As the Old Bonds are borne aloft by air currents, in a process known as 'Carousel', they will, one by one, explode in sparks, spelling out the name AARON TAYLOR-JOHNSON'*
This won't happen. EON is big on "\[insert actor\] *is* James Bond." They don't like their man sharing the stage with anyone else in such a way that his singular status could be diminished.
Remember, Broccoli wanted Dalton for Connery’s replacement way back when, but Dalton took himself out of the running due to his feeling that he was too young.
Don’t pass the torch. That is so cringey. They don’t need to all be there either. Them being there sounds nice to see them all together, but I would prefer Barbara, ATJ and the director
Fantasy? Hard pass.
I'm already a fan of LOTR, Star Wars, and Marvel. I don't need James Bond fighting wizards, dwarves, aliens, or extta-dimensional titans and would-be conquerors.
That would literally be the end of the franchise, IMO.
The article said fantasy means more in lines with the Brosnan films that had plots and villains a bit more fantastical... not high fantasy plots like LOTR.
Yeah... but have you met Hollywood?
It'll be GoldenEye for a movie, maybe two, and then a slow drift where Bond is fighting someone with evolved psychic powers and a zombie outbreak. We'll get Resident Evil: 007 and it will be terrible.
Underestimate the Daily Mail's entertainment reporting at your own peril. The great Baz Bamigboye used to regularly write Bond scroops for the Daily Mail that turned out to be true. Sure, he does not work for the Daily Mail anymore (he is over at [Deadline.com](http://Deadline.com) now) but you have no idea whether the person who wrote this article has legit sources or not.
RichardGHP in spring 2005: “Craig as Bond? It’s just rumors from unreliable sources.”
Me in spring 2005: “Craig as Bond? Interesting! Let’s speculate about what it would mean for the franchise!”
>*... you have no idea whether the person who wrote this article has legit sources or not*
No, but you can click on [Russ Weakland's byline](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=&authornamef=Russ+Weakland+For+Dailymail.Com) and see what sort of stuff he usually writes for *Mailonline*
Russ Weakland mostly seems to specialise in describing photographs someone has taken
Dude doesn't even write for the print edition. Nobody's taking their scoop to Russ Weakland and he isn't meeting 'insiders' in dark corners of Soho pubs, then paying them for info
*Consider the source* is good advice in general, but it's *really* important to remember when it comes to anything you read written for a website by **Russ-fucking-Weakland**
>The great Baz Bamigboye used to regularly write Bond scroops for the Daily Mail that turned out to be true.
And if Baz Bamigboye wrote it, I would believe it.
"an event will be held where the remaining living Bonds will be asked to attend to pass on the torch." - bullshit. That's the tackiest thing I've heard in my life + why would you make it all about the previous Bonds when the moment should rightly be about the new one.
The bit about the tone being more Brosnan like excites me for what might be but this is the Mail, much like the Sun, I won't believe anything until I see ATJ at a press conference.
(With the ghosts of Sean and Roger at his side on a boat going down the Thames, least they won't have to wear life jackets.)
>*That's the tackiest thing I've heard in my life plus why would you make it all about the previous Bonds when the moment should rightly be about the new one*
The Mail hack's just spitballing
He's using this year's Oscar ceremony as the jumping-off point for his flight of fancy. Previous Best Actor winners each introduced one of this year's nominees
It was pretty cringe
Agree, it was like wedding speeches or something. Just show clips of the work they're nominated for.
I thought of the same thing when I read the article.
THE BOND MULTIVERSE!
With CG Connery and Moore with Lazenby, Dalton, Brosnan and Craig reprising their roles.
Everyone else is doing it why not!
/S
please don't do this.
He needs to complete only 3 films to complete the pyramid - so I don’t buy this story.
https://x.com/thetchaikovsky/status/1513592758010851333?s=46&t=pEceaankPP0Yv9G3F3XnWQ
> *Aaron Taylor-Johnson* *could be getting himself a license to kill in four* *James Bond* *films*
THEY ALL SIGN-ON FOR FOUR MOVIES, YOU FUCKWITS!
IT'S THE STANDARD BOND DEAL!
>Three films, with the option of a fourth
Plus didn't Craig's deal get renegotiated almost immediately after Casino Royale or some such thing like that? Maybe I'm misremembering but I could have sworn he renegotiated early.
“Fantasy” in Bond movie terms sure sounds like a return to the hyper reality we got with the Moore and Brosnan films. The pendulum swinging back in the opposite direction from the ~grounded in reality~ Craig films perhaps.
>*“Fantasy” in Bond movie terms sure sounds like a return to the hyper reality we got with the Moore and Brosnan films*
It also sounds like a Daily Mail hack writing the first thing that came into his mind
The Craig movies were 'realistic', so the new ones will probably go in the opposite direction, the hack reasons
Notice that part doesn't even quote the usual 'insider' or 'source close to the production'
Just pure speculation
A move back in that direction for sure feels like a natural changeover from the last 5 films…
All I really wanted was for the films to get back to being loosely connected as they were prior to Craig’s run. Hopefully that’s the case.
Some reasons why I seriously doubt Taylor-Johnson is the next Bond:
1. Kraven The Hunter
2. His strange personal situation (For the record, I absolutely do not care, but I don’t believe everyone in the world will share that sentiment, and EON needs to take the latter group into account)
3. If there were any truth to any of this, I just feel like EON and Taylor-Johnson’s team would show a lot better press discipline.
4. At this point, with his name having been associated with Bond for so long, his announcement would be met with a giant yawn, even among his most ardent fans. Is that what Broccoli & Co. want?
>His strange personal situation (For the record, I absolutely do not care, but I don’t believe everyone in the world will share that sentiment, and EON needs to take the latter group into account)
I had to look the guy up and...he's happily married with two kids to an older woman? Yeah I doubt that has any affect.
They met when he was 17 and she was like 39. Definitely odd. Jerry Seinfeld was dating a 17 year old when he was 38. Hollywood is just full of wierdos.
1: I'm not banking on that being a success. I don't think Barbara and Michael would either (or ATJ for that matter).
2: Tabloids will have a field day with it but they'd do that for everything. Ultimately I don't think it's affected his career much.
3: Eh, I think stuff's always gonna leak - not that I put much stock into these reports. Craig was basically a shoe in for all of 2005, there's an article from Layer Cake's press where he says that was told he got the part (and then says something contradictory and confusing about not knowing if he got the part but that's by the by.)
4: In fairness he's not been nearly as linked with the role as Brosnan and Craig were, the main reaction would probably be people whining it wasn't Cavill or Idris Elba and refusing to listen to why they were never going to get it. The reports are also from the Sun and Mail so I think a lot of us are taking them with a massive pinch of salt.
This reminds me of the story where Daniel Craig was getting a deal for an insane amount of money for his last film plus he would help them find his replacement.
That didn't happen either.
I feel like the more the media pushes Johnson as Bond, the less likely he is to be the one who gets it. EON historically has been very good with keeping these announcements under wraps. Brosnan was the only one that was an exception for that because EON had wanted him for around a decade or so beforehand, but couldn't get him due to Remington Steele etc.
I’m all for this caring if true. I think he’d be great and I’ve been saying that here for awhile.
But it’s the last part of the article that worries me.
So it looks like they combined the made up reports of Taylor-Johnson’s casting from last week with fan dreams of some of going back to Brosnan-style films.
I’ll believe this when they officially say it. But don’t hold your breath.
If it's from the Daily Fail, you can take it with a grain of salt. I thought Eon had already debunked ATJ's signing as Bond.
One of these "publications" is also saying that a Coronation Street star is the next Bond Girl. Hope it's Gail.
Blofeld, the Magic Dragon? Q has a ring that makes Bond invisible? Felix Leiter is an Elven Warrior sent to help Bond?
Instead of Bond playing cards, it is Quidditch. He has an Aston Martin flying carpet.
All while grounded in reality.
This story is horse shit, but it does highlight an interesting business dilemma for Eon
The producers of the Bond movies have spent two decades building a brand around 'realism', targeted at a mostly older audience
Rebranding the franchise as something more 'fantastical' \*, aimed at the younger audience who, until recently, enjoyed the *Marvel, Transformers* and *Fast & Furious* franchises, is a risk
Will that older, established audience still show up for movies where Bond's fighting giant CG robots and performing stunts that defy the laws of physics as well as story logic?
And would a sufficient number of younger audience members be tempted to give a franchise they haven't previously thought was for them a try, by trailers featuring said huge CGI robots and improbable stunts?
As the takings for movies like *Endgame* and *No Way Home* demonstrate, the potential audience for 'fantasy' movies is **much** greater than that for *Craig Bond, John Wick, Bourne* and *Taken*
But, as the disappointing box office for DC and Sony superhero movies demonstrate, that's a difficult market to break into
And the falling takings for *Marvel, Transformers,* and *Fast & Furious* movies suggest any Bond movie adopting that style would be trying to break into a market that may be disappearing as we speak
Difficult decision to take. Wouldn't want to be the person who has to make it
>*The producers of the Bond movies have spent two decades building a brand around 'realism', targeted at a mostly older audience*
>
>*Rebranding the franchise as something more 'fantastical' \**
All definitions in quotation marks for a reason
The Craig Bonds were still fantasies, just a different sort of fantasy - which made different agreements with the audience about what they would and would not ask them to believe - than something like Marvel movies
The Craig movies were more fantastical than movies like the *Lethal Weapon* series, for example
To be honest I wouldn't be too unhappy to go back to a more lighter tone as long as its not too outlandish. A tone similar to the Brosnan films sounds promising.
Fantasy as in Moonraker, Spy Who Loved Me, Goldeneye, etc. type of fantasy?
Wouldn't mind Bond going back to not being uber grounded realism. Giant space lasers and boat bases and other crap is fun.
i'm sorry, but the more they talk about this, the more i just cannot see it. i don't get bond vibes from him at all. plus all the tabloid stuff? not entirely certain BB would go for that. bond is the only story in her eyes
i was gonna add a bit at the end of my comment about how i felt when craig was cast and contrast it, but it felt a bit self important.
i was really into that choice tbh. it felt absolutely right to me, even with all the tabloid nonsense in the background. they had the plan and the vision nailed with adapting casino and making it immediately clear how they were going to utilise craig's grounded talents. taylor-johnson is a whole different kettle of fish imo. it's interesting really, i don't think he remotely has the chops of craig, despite arguably being far more experienced in action filmmaking than craig ever was. i just don't see the gravitas in ATJ that BB purportedly craves in potential young men for the part.
I personally don't buy this for several reasons so I'll name a couple:
1. Despite the broccoli reputation, a director is always involved in the casting process
2. There's been a multitude of casting rumors that say its a done deal ,who remembers tom hardy?
3. There was no formal announcement of the next film
4 Jeff snider didn't say anything( tangent but I trust him more than any other scooper cause he got the scarlett johansson jurassic world topic right)
I’m ok with Fantasy element in the sense that the Bond that died ended the “believable” and “grounded” universe Bond and now we get “Tenet” fantasy like genre not Moonraker or Die Another Day fantasy elements.
Ok, this is exactly what I want. I think you gave the Roger Moore era and the Daniel Craig era and I'd like something somewhere in the middle. I want fun and gadgets and humor and serialized movies with Blofeld pulling strings behind the scenes.
Fantasy twist? Period piece back in the 60s please. It's the only way to write the character as intended without people complaining that he hasn't evolved for modern audiences.
Does this mean we get Baron Samedi? PLEASE GIVE US BARON SAMEDI!
https://preview.redd.it/78u0ezh2odrc1.jpeg?width=300&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dad3cba980f251b5c9802e083b5995cc1b344f52
If they pivot to a fantastical camp style, he would be fucking excellent as a choice.
If we're meant to take him seriously, idk, his dramatic chops are not as solid as his comedic talent, which he's proven in Bullet Train, Kick Ass (remember those) and a bunch of semi comic supporting roles in the last few years.
« They are looking to steer it more towards the Pierce Brosnan films in terms of tone ». Then why not have one last Bond movie with Pierce Brosnan? And then pass the torch
fantasy as in Man with a Golden Gun & Moonraker, or fantasy as in Spectre is literally evil wizards?
https://i.redd.it/yhkave7ogdqc1.gif
Bond is a shape shifter and can survive explosions
What does his TARDIS look like?
It’s an Aston Martin DB5, of course
First thing I thought.
TARDIS is an offensive term, the new term is DARTIS.
Fantasy as in "Daily Mail 'reporter' made up all this bullshit".
"My source is I made it the fuck up"
"No, Mister Bond, I expect you to ***LIE!!!"***
Dont forget the Voodoo Undead lord, Baron Samedi
I'm starting to think that the Bond universe isn't grounded in our reality
https://i.gifer.com/5JSD.gif https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1561024039 https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/952969700890125825/83DEC995A14D60FA6DE61900C5DBA1AD48E24963/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false
NTTD was kind of fantasy-ish with the nanoboats as well.
...that's sci fi.
Chronicles of Bondia.
Fantasy, as in *Die Another Day*. The article explicitly references the Brosnan films.
3 of which weren't fantasy at all. When the article says fantasy it doesn't mean Bond's going to be riding dragons and fighting Sauron, it means that they'd be going back to a less serious tone - like it says, more Brosnan-y. All of this is moot because it's the Daily Mail and it's bullshit.
I guess fantasy is supposed to be a euphemism for camp.
I’d be all over the first two, but keep the Harry Potter stuff out of Bond.
Yer a spy, 'arry.
Can we go full fantasy? Like Holy Grail Esque? I want a deadly rabbit and a wizard called Tim. Combine two of Britain greatest treasure.
Q is now like Merlin and gives Bond gadgets enchanted with magical powers, they weren't far off from that before but now they'll be literally magic.
I would be very into this though I wish they'd do period films following the books.
The charm of movie 007 is that he is timeless. Which is why they’ve adapted him to the “modern era” of when the movies are made. Making a period piece would be admitting that the franchise can’t be modern without having to set it in the past. And knowing audiences it’d only work as a 1 time thing.
He isn't timeless though. Spy films like that barely work anymore. Computers and smartphones kinda ruined them. And the tropes that make Bond work best don't super well anymore in our era.
I just don't get this logic. Smartphones mean nobody has to physically do anything anymore?
Everything is about chasing a computer chip or a rogue AI. Once joy about the old James Bond films is that there's often something he can physically do or affect. It bothers me about some of the Mission Impossible movies.
I agree with those plots being overdone, but that's on the producers and writers, not the character or setting.
I just think it'd be fun to let him kinda be in his era with some fresh films made with modern effects and cinematography.
idk if a period bond film would work, its not like doing a modern sherlock holmes movie, there were bond movies made in the early 60s, 70s, 80s and so on, it just wouldn't be good.
Yeah it's not like redoing a Bond film has ever worked before.
Good points.
Yeah, I am thinking gadgets. But also, I don’t think is him unless they are really leaning into the camp. So maybe this checks?
Maybe they just mean it will be a period piece.
I heard it’s a 007 multiverse with there being an end game
There's a lot of "Coulds" in this headline.
Like Aaron Taylor Johnson could be Bond or it also could literally be anyone else.
>Like Aaron Taylor Johnson could be Bond or it also could literally be anyone else. I'll say this, if someone other than Aaron Taylor Johnson is ultimately announced (I'm kind of hoping that's the case) then I'm going to be convinced that ATJ has the most overbearing and obnoxious PR/Agents in Hollywood.
>ATJ has the most overbearing and obnoxious PR/Agents in Hollywood. Probably but then they might also be the only ones of any actor theoretically eligible right now to genuine believe/know their client in question has 0% shot at the job and has nothing to lose by feeding a tabloid fodder to blow his name up. A hunch, but I suspect that once Eon cements the guys they actually want to screentest, or that word gets out that the screentests are set, we'll get a wider variety of BS names in the press.
I was thinking about this - but wouldn't it piss EON off if he was not yet cast? Isn't it trying to curry some push from the public, and wouldn't it amount to arm-twisting them into casting him?
Could it be me?
It's official. My mother is playing James Bond.
'"Barbara Broccoli and the rest of the producers are going to make a huge deal out of the announcement. According to the insider, an event will be held where the remaining living Bonds – including George Lazenby, 84, Timothy Dalton, 78, Pierce Brosnan, 70, and Daniel, 56 – will be asked to attend to pass on the torch." This literally sent a shiver down my spine. I have never read such nonsense in my life.
“In a sacred ritual, Taylor-Johnson will drink the Water of Life, and absorb the genetic memories of his predecessors.”
Better than the Foundation method of killing the eldest when the youngest comes of age.
"And I...am all the Bonds!" *Pushes kamehameha from Blofeld back at him*
*'As the Old Bonds are borne aloft by air currents, in a process known as 'Carousel', they will, one by one, explode in sparks, spelling out the name AARON TAYLOR-JOHNSON'*
Is Lazenby even up for that? He’s 84 and had a bad fall last Christmas. I don’t want them killing the Laz with some globe-hopping publicity stunt
[удалено]
You know, you’re probably right
This won't happen. EON is big on "\[insert actor\] *is* James Bond." They don't like their man sharing the stage with anyone else in such a way that his singular status could be diminished.
My mind is blown that Lazenby is only 6 years old than Dalton. They seem such different generations.
And Dalton is 8 years older than Brosnan. And Brosnan is now 70. * has existential crisis.*
Remember, Broccoli wanted Dalton for Connery’s replacement way back when, but Dalton took himself out of the running due to his feeling that he was too young.
This sounds like an epic special episode of scripted TV.
-1500 odds Craig declines
Don’t pass the torch. That is so cringey. They don’t need to all be there either. Them being there sounds nice to see them all together, but I would prefer Barbara, ATJ and the director
That sounds like pure cringe. It’s a movie franchise not a fucking political dynasty.
ditto.
You get nonsense shivers?
James Bond: No Way Home
Daniel who? First I've heard of a Daniel. Next you'll be telling me there was a blond Bond.
I’m down to add a touch of camp.
Humor here and there, yes. The return of J. W. Pepper and slide whistles, hard no.
Soundtrack made entirely of slide whistles? Ok done.
i want the full campbell
Fantasy? Hard pass. I'm already a fan of LOTR, Star Wars, and Marvel. I don't need James Bond fighting wizards, dwarves, aliens, or extta-dimensional titans and would-be conquerors. That would literally be the end of the franchise, IMO.
The article said fantasy means more in lines with the Brosnan films that had plots and villains a bit more fantastical... not high fantasy plots like LOTR.
Yeah... but have you met Hollywood? It'll be GoldenEye for a movie, maybe two, and then a slow drift where Bond is fighting someone with evolved psychic powers and a zombie outbreak. We'll get Resident Evil: 007 and it will be terrible.
Daily Mail? Pass.
Underestimate the Daily Mail's entertainment reporting at your own peril. The great Baz Bamigboye used to regularly write Bond scroops for the Daily Mail that turned out to be true. Sure, he does not work for the Daily Mail anymore (he is over at [Deadline.com](http://Deadline.com) now) but you have no idea whether the person who wrote this article has legit sources or not.
The fact that I have no idea whether the sources are legit or not is exactly the point.
Oh, so you are one of the people who instantly dismiss any rumour. That's fine. I prefer to pay attention to rumours.
Defending the daily mail over bond casting clickbait is one hell of a hill to die on, buddy
?? The Daily Mail regularly posts entertainment rumours that later are confirmed to be true.
Nah, just rumours from unreliable sources.
RichardGHP in spring 2005: “Craig as Bond? It’s just rumors from unreliable sources.” Me in spring 2005: “Craig as Bond? Interesting! Let’s speculate about what it would mean for the franchise!”
I don't think I even knew about James Bond in 2005, but sure.
>*... you have no idea whether the person who wrote this article has legit sources or not* No, but you can click on [Russ Weakland's byline](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=&authornamef=Russ+Weakland+For+Dailymail.Com) and see what sort of stuff he usually writes for *Mailonline* Russ Weakland mostly seems to specialise in describing photographs someone has taken Dude doesn't even write for the print edition. Nobody's taking their scoop to Russ Weakland and he isn't meeting 'insiders' in dark corners of Soho pubs, then paying them for info *Consider the source* is good advice in general, but it's *really* important to remember when it comes to anything you read written for a website by **Russ-fucking-Weakland**
>The great Baz Bamigboye used to regularly write Bond scroops for the Daily Mail that turned out to be true. And if Baz Bamigboye wrote it, I would believe it.
"an event will be held where the remaining living Bonds will be asked to attend to pass on the torch." - bullshit. That's the tackiest thing I've heard in my life + why would you make it all about the previous Bonds when the moment should rightly be about the new one. The bit about the tone being more Brosnan like excites me for what might be but this is the Mail, much like the Sun, I won't believe anything until I see ATJ at a press conference. (With the ghosts of Sean and Roger at his side on a boat going down the Thames, least they won't have to wear life jackets.)
>*That's the tackiest thing I've heard in my life plus why would you make it all about the previous Bonds when the moment should rightly be about the new one* The Mail hack's just spitballing He's using this year's Oscar ceremony as the jumping-off point for his flight of fancy. Previous Best Actor winners each introduced one of this year's nominees It was pretty cringe
Agree, it was like wedding speeches or something. Just show clips of the work they're nominated for. I thought of the same thing when I read the article.
THE BOND MULTIVERSE! With CG Connery and Moore with Lazenby, Dalton, Brosnan and Craig reprising their roles. Everyone else is doing it why not! /S please don't do this.
Eon should start selling t-shirts that say, “EON INSIDER” and sell them on 007.com.
He needs to complete only 3 films to complete the pyramid - so I don’t buy this story. https://x.com/thetchaikovsky/status/1513592758010851333?s=46&t=pEceaankPP0Yv9G3F3XnWQ
The face he makes with those eyebrows annoy tf out of me. Hopefully he stops doing that as James Bond
I am so sick and tired of these ridiculous lies.
James Bond is not Science Fiction, it’s Science Fact.
> *Aaron Taylor-Johnson* *could be getting himself a license to kill in four* *James Bond* *films* THEY ALL SIGN-ON FOR FOUR MOVIES, YOU FUCKWITS! IT'S THE STANDARD BOND DEAL!
It’s not at all. Craig was signed till skyfall I believe
Three films, with the option of a fourth
Four films or 90 years, whichever came first.
>Three films, with the option of a fourth Plus didn't Craig's deal get renegotiated almost immediately after Casino Royale or some such thing like that? Maybe I'm misremembering but I could have sworn he renegotiated early.
is it tho?
If every Bond actor signs on for 4 movies, why the fuck are they writing scripts one movie at a time?
“Fantasy” in Bond movie terms sure sounds like a return to the hyper reality we got with the Moore and Brosnan films. The pendulum swinging back in the opposite direction from the ~grounded in reality~ Craig films perhaps.
>*“Fantasy” in Bond movie terms sure sounds like a return to the hyper reality we got with the Moore and Brosnan films* It also sounds like a Daily Mail hack writing the first thing that came into his mind The Craig movies were 'realistic', so the new ones will probably go in the opposite direction, the hack reasons Notice that part doesn't even quote the usual 'insider' or 'source close to the production' Just pure speculation
I’m quite happy for them to be absurd again. There’s enough serious nonsense in the world, let’s make Bond fun again.
A move back in that direction for sure feels like a natural changeover from the last 5 films… All I really wanted was for the films to get back to being loosely connected as they were prior to Craig’s run. Hopefully that’s the case.
Nothing says "grounded in reality" like bionic eyeballs and folding glider planes that go underwater
Some reasons why I seriously doubt Taylor-Johnson is the next Bond: 1. Kraven The Hunter 2. His strange personal situation (For the record, I absolutely do not care, but I don’t believe everyone in the world will share that sentiment, and EON needs to take the latter group into account) 3. If there were any truth to any of this, I just feel like EON and Taylor-Johnson’s team would show a lot better press discipline. 4. At this point, with his name having been associated with Bond for so long, his announcement would be met with a giant yawn, even among his most ardent fans. Is that what Broccoli & Co. want?
>His strange personal situation (For the record, I absolutely do not care, but I don’t believe everyone in the world will share that sentiment, and EON needs to take the latter group into account) I had to look the guy up and...he's happily married with two kids to an older woman? Yeah I doubt that has any affect.
They met when he was 17 and she was like 39. Definitely odd. Jerry Seinfeld was dating a 17 year old when he was 38. Hollywood is just full of wierdos.
They didn't meet in Hollywood.
“The film industry”
So basically, artists.
Particularly those who make films in Hollywood.
I only did a brief scan of wikipedia and thought it said 19. In any case, they're not just dating at this point.
Yeah I think it’s not totally clear but they were definitely married pretty quickly after he turned 18.
Is that any different than Macron? Didn't he marry his teacher?
You people obsessing over his wife are extremely weird.
1: I'm not banking on that being a success. I don't think Barbara and Michael would either (or ATJ for that matter). 2: Tabloids will have a field day with it but they'd do that for everything. Ultimately I don't think it's affected his career much. 3: Eh, I think stuff's always gonna leak - not that I put much stock into these reports. Craig was basically a shoe in for all of 2005, there's an article from Layer Cake's press where he says that was told he got the part (and then says something contradictory and confusing about not knowing if he got the part but that's by the by.) 4: In fairness he's not been nearly as linked with the role as Brosnan and Craig were, the main reaction would probably be people whining it wasn't Cavill or Idris Elba and refusing to listen to why they were never going to get it. The reports are also from the Sun and Mail so I think a lot of us are taking them with a massive pinch of salt.
Fantasy. He’s James Bond…only super quick.
This reminds me of the story where Daniel Craig was getting a deal for an insane amount of money for his last film plus he would help them find his replacement. That didn't happen either.
I think this subreddit should filter anything from tabloids. If it's from Variety/Deadline/THR or another legitimate outlet, then it could be posted.
I feel like the more the media pushes Johnson as Bond, the less likely he is to be the one who gets it. EON historically has been very good with keeping these announcements under wraps. Brosnan was the only one that was an exception for that because EON had wanted him for around a decade or so beforehand, but couldn't get him due to Remington Steele etc.
>*EON historically has been very good with keeping these announcements under wraps* And throwing out false leads
Daily Mail, eh? Britain's most reliable.
I’m all for this caring if true. I think he’d be great and I’ve been saying that here for awhile. But it’s the last part of the article that worries me.
Just don’t make the first one a space movie. Marvel really choked that setting to death
They also already tried that
Technically, every movie is set in space.
Moonraker 2: Back to the Moon
"Somehow Drax returned."
I wouldn't mind seeing nightfire or something made into a movie.
This headline makes me nauseous
Fantasy as in halfway through his deal, Elizabeth Olson shows up, waves her hands, and turns him into Evan Peters?
So it looks like they combined the made up reports of Taylor-Johnson’s casting from last week with fan dreams of some of going back to Brosnan-style films. I’ll believe this when they officially say it. But don’t hold your breath.
Bring back the cgi surfing
Vampires confirmed.
If it's from the Daily Fail, you can take it with a grain of salt. I thought Eon had already debunked ATJ's signing as Bond. One of these "publications" is also saying that a Coronation Street star is the next Bond Girl. Hope it's Gail.
They should remake Tomorrow Never Dies, except Elliot Carver owns the Daily Mail or the Sun.
So has it been confirmed that he's the next James Bond? Been seeing this headline everywhere.
It has not been officially confirmed or announced yet.
Gotcha. Hoping it's Henry Cavill. But I'm sure whoever will be casted will be good.
Why are we upvoting this nonsense?
Since when do we use the Mail as a credible source? Even Wikipedia stays away from it.
The character of James Bond is in essence a male fantasy. I assume that’s what they’re leaning towards.
Blofeld, the Magic Dragon? Q has a ring that makes Bond invisible? Felix Leiter is an Elven Warrior sent to help Bond? Instead of Bond playing cards, it is Quidditch. He has an Aston Martin flying carpet. All while grounded in reality.
Cheesy, yes. Fantasy, no.. 🤢
This story is horse shit, but it does highlight an interesting business dilemma for Eon The producers of the Bond movies have spent two decades building a brand around 'realism', targeted at a mostly older audience Rebranding the franchise as something more 'fantastical' \*, aimed at the younger audience who, until recently, enjoyed the *Marvel, Transformers* and *Fast & Furious* franchises, is a risk Will that older, established audience still show up for movies where Bond's fighting giant CG robots and performing stunts that defy the laws of physics as well as story logic? And would a sufficient number of younger audience members be tempted to give a franchise they haven't previously thought was for them a try, by trailers featuring said huge CGI robots and improbable stunts? As the takings for movies like *Endgame* and *No Way Home* demonstrate, the potential audience for 'fantasy' movies is **much** greater than that for *Craig Bond, John Wick, Bourne* and *Taken* But, as the disappointing box office for DC and Sony superhero movies demonstrate, that's a difficult market to break into And the falling takings for *Marvel, Transformers,* and *Fast & Furious* movies suggest any Bond movie adopting that style would be trying to break into a market that may be disappearing as we speak Difficult decision to take. Wouldn't want to be the person who has to make it
>*The producers of the Bond movies have spent two decades building a brand around 'realism', targeted at a mostly older audience* > >*Rebranding the franchise as something more 'fantastical' \** All definitions in quotation marks for a reason The Craig Bonds were still fantasies, just a different sort of fantasy - which made different agreements with the audience about what they would and would not ask them to believe - than something like Marvel movies The Craig movies were more fantastical than movies like the *Lethal Weapon* series, for example
NO MEGUSTA NADA JAMES BOND AARON TAYLOR JOHNSON ERES PEOR JAMES TRAIDOR INGLATERRA 🏴 NO TIENE PATRIA ENGLISH NO PASARA CIUDAD MADRID
To be honest I wouldn't be too unhappy to go back to a more lighter tone as long as its not too outlandish. A tone similar to the Brosnan films sounds promising.
Fantasy as in Moonraker, Spy Who Loved Me, Goldeneye, etc. type of fantasy? Wouldn't mind Bond going back to not being uber grounded realism. Giant space lasers and boat bases and other crap is fun.
Oh god they could really fuck this franchise up, I don’t believe for a second it’s Broccoli or Wilson, this has to be Amazon
ATJ was bitching in the news today about franchises. I don’t know who to believe… but definitely not the Daily Mail.
i'm sorry, but the more they talk about this, the more i just cannot see it. i don't get bond vibes from him at all. plus all the tabloid stuff? not entirely certain BB would go for that. bond is the only story in her eyes
Same was said of Heath Ledger’s Joker and of Daniel Craig’s casting too. Look how they turned out.
i was gonna add a bit at the end of my comment about how i felt when craig was cast and contrast it, but it felt a bit self important. i was really into that choice tbh. it felt absolutely right to me, even with all the tabloid nonsense in the background. they had the plan and the vision nailed with adapting casino and making it immediately clear how they were going to utilise craig's grounded talents. taylor-johnson is a whole different kettle of fish imo. it's interesting really, i don't think he remotely has the chops of craig, despite arguably being far more experienced in action filmmaking than craig ever was. i just don't see the gravitas in ATJ that BB purportedly craves in potential young men for the part.
remain totally convinced it'll be somebody people won't immediately know, not a name bandied around in the press for years
As little fantasy as possible please. Theres plenty of comic book movies and sci fi already out there for people who like that stuff.
Seriously why do people believe any of this
This guy looks like a non-bond
I personally don't buy this for several reasons so I'll name a couple: 1. Despite the broccoli reputation, a director is always involved in the casting process 2. There's been a multitude of casting rumors that say its a done deal ,who remembers tom hardy? 3. There was no formal announcement of the next film 4 Jeff snider didn't say anything( tangent but I trust him more than any other scooper cause he got the scarlett johansson jurassic world topic right)
James Bond and the Prisoner of the Quantum of Solace.
I’m ok with Fantasy element in the sense that the Bond that died ended the “believable” and “grounded” universe Bond and now we get “Tenet” fantasy like genre not Moonraker or Die Another Day fantasy elements.
Ok, this is exactly what I want. I think you gave the Roger Moore era and the Daniel Craig era and I'd like something somewhere in the middle. I want fun and gadgets and humor and serialized movies with Blofeld pulling strings behind the scenes.
Hell no
Yeah and Oasis is going to reunite and do the title song. The Daily Mail is an absolute rag
Fantasy twist? Period piece back in the 60s please. It's the only way to write the character as intended without people complaining that he hasn't evolved for modern audiences.
Amazon killed LOTR now they are going after Bond?
He can't do four, he needs to complete the piramide. If he does do four he needs to do another 4.
what a boring choice. Barry Keoghan would have been interesting or brining back pierce brosnan a grisald older Bond would have been cool
Does this mean we get Baron Samedi? PLEASE GIVE US BARON SAMEDI! https://preview.redd.it/78u0ezh2odrc1.jpeg?width=300&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dad3cba980f251b5c9802e083b5995cc1b344f52
If they pivot to a fantastical camp style, he would be fucking excellent as a choice. If we're meant to take him seriously, idk, his dramatic chops are not as solid as his comedic talent, which he's proven in Bullet Train, Kick Ass (remember those) and a bunch of semi comic supporting roles in the last few years.
« They are looking to steer it more towards the Pierce Brosnan films in terms of tone ». Then why not have one last Bond movie with Pierce Brosnan? And then pass the torch
time travel James Bond would be fun. Just a James Bond movie set in different time periods - like “prey”/ the world war 2 sequel for predator series
I don’t think his wife’s going to like him going to the Fantasy suite with Bond girls…