What do you want to see in Bond 25?

I hadn't thought about the age difference but that makes sense.

This is why there should have been an ice cream stand for a gentleman to leave her at and then an actual plot to then unfold.

Ironically her performance was the only thing I believed in the entire thing and even that was woefully underwritten.

Makeshift Python wrote:

They should have cast a more mature actress. From what I read he wasn't too comfortable with being paired with Seydoux, who is the youngest leading actress in Craig's run so far.

Whilst the age difference was big, it wasn't close to the biggest age discrepancy in the Bond era. Yet I can't recall any other Bond actor so visibly uncomfortable with it.
I mean, the man is an actor, successfully pretending on camera sort of comes with the territory?

x

Salomé wrote:

Makeshift Python wrote:

They should have cast a more mature actress. From what I read he wasn't too comfortable with being paired with Seydoux, who is the youngest leading actress in Craig's run so far.

Whilst the age difference was big, it wasn't close to the biggest age discrepancy in the Bond era. Yet I can't recall any other Bond actor so visibly uncomfortable with it.
I mean, the man is an actor, successfully pretending on camera sort of comes with the territory?

I wouldn't think you'd have to pretend to be attracted to Seydoux, let alone any girl 20 years younger than you when you're in 40s.

It's interesting that even the "extreme" age difference of "Spectre" would have appeared quaint to Sir Rog.

x

Erica Ambler wrote:

FieldsMan wrote:

I wouldn't think you'd have to pretend to be attracted to Seydoux, let alone any girl 20 years younger than you when you're in 40s.

Ah, that’s because you’re still young, Fields - you won’t feel that way when you reach 40. For most young Western women, I feel only sadness and pity; they're so angry and confused.

Thank God for Asia.

In an instance of activism Ouroborus, it seems like #MeToo has devoured Asia Argento too.

If anything it explains why the casting call for leading actresses were looking only for those aged between 30 and 45. Seems Craig doesn't want to be paired with someone in their 20s anymore.

x

Sir Rogering's presence is missed more than ever.

Sir Roger's tenure does not coincidence with my favorite era of Bond, but I will say this: at least Sir Rog always seemed to enjoy playing Bond. He never gave a performance that made me think he didn't perceive the whole undertaking as a whole lot of fun.

"Mumble grumble slit my wrists mumble grumble" - not Sir Roger Moore

I think the only real dissent I heard on Rog's part was that he thought AVTAK was too violent; he paticularly disliked Zorin gunning down the fleeing miners.

Salomé wrote:

Sir Roger's tenure does not coincidence with my favorite era of Bond, but I will say this: at least Sir Rog always seemed to enjoy playing Bond. He never gave a performance that made me think he didn't perceive the whole undertaking as a whole lot of fun.

Plus he remained an Ambassador for the role until the very end.

On his scale of 1 to 10, Craig earns a well placed zero.

Blunt Instrument wrote:

I think the only real dissent I heard on Rog's part was that he thought AVTAK was too violent; he paticularly disliked Zorin gunning down the fleeing miners.

And he wasn't getting along with Grace Jones too well.

https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/811043/James-Bond-Roger-Moore-Grace-Jones-sex-scene-feud

I'm late....is Fukunaga going to kill Craig's Bond in Bond 25?

If it means there's no chance of his return for Bond 26 and beyond, then I bloody well hope so.

Bond hates his life, but loves his country. Craig hates Bond, but loves his money. It should be obvious by now that our only chance of a new Bond in 26 is if a 30-40 year old actor breaks out within the next couple of years (and if BB and Wilson deem him box office material). Fingers crossed.

Just don't make this about the old and the young clashing. It was almost pathetic in Skyfall as the movie before that was supposed to be a continuation of this Bond's first mission. Unfortunately I suspect the cards are stacked against me on this as the producers realize they have a very mixed audience and want to create some kind of match up to make the experience more exciting. As if there weren't enough within the scripts to focus on and edit the hell out of.

And don't send out M, Moneypenny, Tanner & Q to assist Bond this time. This isn't an MI6 picnic. I think the film would benefit greatly from going back to basics and actually being about a spy instead of an almost rogue soldier in an action movie. (Bond should not be Rambo) Both Skyfall and Spectre tried unnecessarily hard to educate us on Bond's family ties. Forget about all that. Show us the Spy. Agent 007. Let's have Bond investigate stuff, get drawn in to some local conflict where he discovers there are worse things brewing that could come to affect the world.

Bond 25 will most likely be Craigs finale. Let his Bond die on screen, after an epic fight where Bond sacrifices himself to save a child, a mother, a family. Malek's character should die too, but not until Bond and him both realize they are of the same mold yet with different motives. Bond's death should bring about a new era in public perception of whatever terrible industry the villains character was involved in (drugs)

I honestly feel after the chopped up, ever-changing decision making of how Craig's Bond was to evolve that the only way to redeem him is to take him out of his element (sexy ladies and fast cars), make him a saviour, not of the world as that is too hard to connect with on screen, but of a family that could be representative of many families brought down by the affliction of drugs and drug wars.

Basically I want Bond to be a hero, not a superhero, just this once. It's not like MI6's only objective is to prevent world destruction, leave that to the environmentalists this time and allow Bond the chance to save a family. By now we know he has none himself and so we understand he is dead set on not letting anyone deprive children of their parents.

Well, that would be Henry Cavill. I'm sure many would be curious to see Cavill as Bond, even non-Bond fans. I'm still holding onto Fassbender as Bond, but time will tell. Depends how much Bond 25 exhausts the producers. I'm also still holding out that Bond 25 is canned.

Skyfall did a great job at exploring Bond's inner self. I agree it was a bit of a jump from QOS to SF but if viewed as a standalone film, as intended, it's still a great flick.

You're absolutely right, however, in saying that redeeming Craig will occur by taking him out of his (mopey) element. But I don't think his era will age very well overall anyway. Too much damage done with QOS and SP and for this viewer, CR too.

Not being able to have Bond die is one of the reasons Danny Boyle left Bond 25, so that ain't gonna happen.

Good, because anything that damages this extremely irksome 'James Bond is just a codename given to MI6's current top agent' idea is fine by me. The franchise's continuity is admittedly kinda loose at times, but it IS there (whch was also why talk of Idris Elba's casting as the next Bond irritated me, too).