|
In response to
"depends. do they just want it to be an M.I. clone with the new Bond instead of Ethan Hunt? Bourne-ing it up with DCRAI ran out of steam pretty quick"
by
hollywood big shot
|
It loses relevance as a franchise if it's stuck in the past.
Posted by
Roger More (aka RogerMore)
Sep 26 '23, 11:53
|
And you cast the actor to be Bond for (hopefully) five films. I'm not sure that making two period films then returning to the current day would work.
I think the Bourne-style action in Bond is still popular - people are more tired of the soapy stuff "Oh, here's Bond going rogue again", and were jarred by the shift of two movies where Bond is just starting out, followed by three where he's too old and thinking about his legacy. If you ask Bond fans, they want a return to the traditional formula of "Bond is given a mission, flirts with Moneypenny, visits Q in the lab, goes on an adventure and gets with the girl in the end". But I'm not sure how appealing that would be to new audiences.
Reading the actual article, if Nolan wants to focus on the Fleming books, that's not a 100% great idea.
Casino Royale = was recently done
Live and Let Die = hella racist, using the source material is not recommended
Moonraker = would actually be great (but it's set entirely in England)
Diamonds are Forever = exceedingly small scale
From Russia With Love = the original movie is very close and a remake would add nearly nothing
Dr No = Bond fights a giant squid! and the villain dies when Bond buries him in guano!
Goldfinger = see FRWL, but also it's without the nuclear weapon
Thunderball + OHMSS = see FRWL. Plus Thunderball has already been remade once.
You Only Live Twice = the ending was basically remade into the end of No Time to Die. In the book Bond kills Blofeld in his garden of death and then gets amnesia.
Man with the Golden Gun = the original movie, while not great, was still an improvement on the book
My personal view is that Nolan is the wrong choice, because it immediately becomes a Nolan film, not a Bond film. Ideally I'd like to see the new Bond actor get well established and then see Nolan direct in his 3rd film. But I completely get the reasoning. Who wouldn't snag Nolan if they can get him?
|
Responses:
|
