Babs to reinvent Bond

She says shooting is at least 2 years away, which suggests to me that they are taking offers for a possible approach (as in, they haven't a clue, but what else is new?) https://www.gamesradar.com/new-james-bond-movie-reinvented-producer/

God, but I'd kill for a period approach. I'd even settle for the 80s as opposed to the 50s, just so long as we have some cold war aspect (which I guess we'll be getting for real again now that things have heated up all over the globe.)

At least she said 'him'.

My expectations are quite low nowadays. Having returned from the cinema not too long ago, I yearn for the old days of fairly frequent films and a speedy (I say speedy) decision on a new Bond. The last two Bonds notwithstanding, 1968, 1972 and 1986 (could even argue 1970) managed to rustle up a new Bond and get going.

I wish I could somehow sneak into EON just to be the dissenting voice of reason.
If I could I'd direct the next film with a clapperboard that clearly read Bond 21.

TG: M is the biggest movie in the world because it didn’t reinvent what worked, but focused on making it even better.

Sadly, Babs is intent on being an activist not a film producer carrying on a proud legacy.

I am not overly bothered by the use of the word “reinvent” here. Partly because it was expected. It could be loaded...or simply in line with the same language used around the transition to GE. TBD.

There is little info here. I am skeptical about the two years thing. She’s saying it’s going to take “at least” two years to figure out what this reinvention is going to look like...but they’ve been done with the last one for over two years now. It’ll take four years for them to reinvent him? OK. But it also took them four years to start on NTTD, so I don’t buy her implying that more time is to be expected considering the circumstances.

And even at that, what did the 'reinvention' in GE amount to? An acknowledgement of the end of the Cold War and a female M giving Bond a bit of a dressing-down about his 'swordsman' ways, which seems to mostly amuse him. Rest of it was Bond as you'd expect it to be.

I'd really like to see what they are taking away from viewing past films, because from where I sit, they are utterly missing a lot of what makes one of these a Bond movie. Especially in the use of music and cutting a sequence into a mini-opera (not referencing QoS here, though that may be the last -- if extreme -- example.)

A great Bond action sequence usually has various notes, some humorous, and so there is more than just spectacle (or machinegunfire.) In the place of that, they now have oddities like 'world's biggest explosion' -- which when presented in the context of the film, added nothing, especially since getting to that point was nothing of interest.

It's like they have a checklist, but don't include any spaces for the 'how' or the 'context' or 'oh yeah, that TOO' that makes a good sequence memorable and Bond like. Now she might be shying away from doing anything particularly Bond-like for feeling that it would come off as parody these days, but if so, then she doubly needs to not be doing these things, because she is throwing the baby out with the bathwater and replacing it with something not even the nutty doctors in Stepford would sign off on.

Somerset wrote:

I am not overly bothered by the use of the word “reinvent” here. Partly because it was expected. It could be loaded...or simply in line with the same language used around the transition to GE. TBD.

There is little info here. I am skeptical about the two years thing. She’s saying it’s going to take “at least” two years to figure out what this reinvention is going to look like...but they’ve been done with the last one for over two years now. It’ll take four years for them to reinvent him? OK. But it also took them four years to start on NTTD, so I don’t buy her implying that more time is to be expected considering the circumstances.

I think she's in no hurry simply because she's not really interested in Bond anymore. She sees making Bond films as drudgery rather than exciting adventures. And personally, I consider this a blessing in disguise. I'd rather there be no more Bond films than numerous, perverse pseudo-Bond films.

Blunt, I think that’s right. The reinvention for Brosnan was more about going back into the Bondmania days and pulling them forward to a 90s context. Whereas I’d say the Craig era was a complete overhaul.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

I think she's in no hurry simply because she's not really interested in Bond anymore. She sees making Bond films as drudgery rather than exciting adventures.

After thinking through what else it could possibly be during the wait between SP and NTTD I’ve reached the same conclusion myself.

I’m not sure how much more we should expect she has to “say” on Bond. She’s been in a producer’s role about as long as even longer (depending on if you start from TLD) than Cubby was (say ‘61-‘92 vs. ‘87-‘22 or ‘93-‘22).

She keeps trying to branch Eon out to other films but with no luck.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

I'd rather there be no more Bond films than numerous, perverse pseudo-Bond films.

TBH I felt this way after SPECTRE and only more-so after NTTD.

I'd rather Bond faded away while he at least still has his little finger, than degenerate into having his murderer wear him as a skin-suit.

CJB wrote:

TG: M is the biggest movie in the world because it didn’t reinvent what worked, but focused on making it even better.

Sadly, Babs is intent on being an activist not a film producer carrying on a proud legacy.

Well it was updated to a certain extent. Top Gun did not have a female pilot, to name just one thing.

In some way, I think it's easier to adapt a property which was a bit cheesy even at the time, like Top Gun.

Not that Bond has always side-stepped the cheese - obviously - but I'm pretty sure that Babs will not allow a return to some of the campy heights of the Sir Rog era.

Salomé wrote:

Well it was updated to a certain extent. Top Gun did not have a female pilot, to name just one thing.

Didn't really have much screentime and/or detract from the story though.

If Disney made it, they'd make her a Maverick Sue and push her to the forefront of the storyline and have her be instantly and effortlessly competent, showing up even haggard old Cruise.

Salomé wrote:

In some way, I think it's easier to adapt a property which was a bit cheesy even at the time, like Top Gun.

Not that Bond has always side-stepped the cheese - obviously - but I'm pretty sure that Babs will not allow a return to some of the campy heights of the Sir Rog era.

70's camp was its own beast, but they did just fine (commercially) with the Brosnan Bonds which, even in their most soap operatic moments, never devolved into a self-loathing mire or reinvent the protagonist into something he fundamentally wasn't in 1962.