Peter Morgan's "central idea" "the big hook" remains in Bond 23 script

Shrublands wrote:

I think we can forget M being assassinated and Bond being brainwashed

It seems that when Morgan was first formulating his pitch and central idea, the question he kept asking himself was, “Do I think it’s still believable that a British secret agent is saving the world?” and the answer was “No”.

Therefore, I think it’s reasonable to assume that his big, clever idea involves a way of making this credible in his eyes.

That's sort of like doing STAR TREK over while dismissing the notion of boldly going someplace.

Now if it were a question of how to make it seem more real ... THEN I could see a departure, sort of like Meyer reinterpretting the TREK characters by putting an actual book in Kirk's hands, and letting the themes of that book resonate out into the film. That's putting extra stuff in for those who care to look for it, while still delivering the requisite goods for everyone else. But rethinking Bond ... well, I hated when they did it in CR, and this sounds really troubling to me.

dalton wrote:

I would actually welcome them going completely in the direction that they seem to want to go in, which is to make a critically acclaimed Bond film that is actually award-worthy. I'm not saying it should be a permanent direction for the franchise, but since it's something that they appear to be interested in doing at the moment. Such a thing will never happen, though, until the checklist is abandoned. What I'd like to see EON do is bring in an entirely new creative team and allow them to make a quality film without forcing them to check certain elements off of the list. They should abandon the notion, at least for a film, that there needs to be a certain number of action sequences and they should abandon the notion of the set-piece.

It is the check-list in my opinion that is holding the franchise back from being what it could be rather than the direction that EON wants to take it at the present moment.

I think Casino Royale is probably the closest we have seen and will see to this.

Since we're all pretty much playing the guessing game here, let me throw in my uneducated stab. Bond finds out that Riscio (the villain) is in fact M's brother or 1st child from a previous marriage. When faced with this startling revelation, Bond throws out whatever professionalism or sentiments he has for her, and kidnaps & eliminates her to draw Riscio out of hiding. What follows is a more brutal fight/duel to the death than tmwtgg ever came close to.

Not bad, Ace. Not bad at all.

Avarice wrote:

Shrublands wrote:

It seems that when Morgan was first formulating his pitch and central idea, the question he kept asking himself was, “Do I think it’s still believable that a British secret agent is saving the world?” and the answer was “No”.

Therefore, I think it’s reasonable to assume that his big, clever idea involves a way of making this credible in his eyes.

Morgan wondered how Bond could apologise for British colonialism - you know, all the cruel stuff like a saving the world from Nazism and spreading a global language, democracy and system of justice - and came up with a set piece where Bond indulges in self-immolation. As he dies, 007 screams for forgiveness from all the women he's wronged.
Apparently Babs was moved to tears.

Sounds about right. Good riddance to Morgan.
btw I have no problem with a British agent saving the world, as long as his name is Bond, because that's what he does. Spare us the geo-politics. These are James Bond 007, hard edged fantasy adventure with guns, girls, risque humour and maniacal villains.
That's the formula. Best to stick to it. What's a BAFTA anyway? Make those people buy a ticket like everyone else.

Maybe the head of Quantum is Goldfinger’s twin brother, and he has teleported from the original Bond universe to stop Craig-Bond from making any more films.

That would get my attention.

secretagent007 wrote:

Maybe the head of Quantum is Goldfinger’s twin brother, and he has teleported from the original Bond universe to stop Craig-Bond from making any more films.

That would get my attention.

Meanwhile, Blofeld also transports himself to slap around the head of Quantum. "Pretender!"

Maybe the presence of Blofeld actually is the big "hook" or "shock". Reboot, 50th anniversary, Bond's greatest nemesis, etc. I wouldn't put it past them in the slightest.

Not that I'm not looking forward to Bond 23, but I'd love to see another Bond film where it's just him on a mission. The kind Cubby used to produce.

mattjoes wrote:

Not that I'm not looking forward to Bond 23, but I'd love to see another Bond film where it's just him on a mission. The kind Cubby used to produce.

Indeed, Cubby knew his place and trusted his regular (and, more importantly, talented) team to get on with the job while he just sat there cooking or adding zeroes to Rog's contract. If someone had suggested some of the crap that's made it into the last six films, Cubby would just look up from his cooking, say "fuck off" then go back to his food.

I've no idea where I read this rumour a year or so ago, but apparently Morgan's plot had something to do with avian flu or germ warfare like OHMSS. Anyone else remember this?

Nope. Sounds like typical fan rumour BS to me, but I'd like to be true.

Lazenby. wrote:

Maybe the presence of Blofeld actually is the big "hook" or "shock". Reboot, 50th anniversary, Bond's greatest nemesis, etc. I wouldn't put it past them in the slightest.

This would be a wonderful development. I'd even turn a blind eye to more QoS style "social justice" activism, if Babs would bring back the man with the cat. Put him in a dress even. Not like that hasn't been done before.

Heck I might even go to Bolivia and dig some wells, just to show my gratitude.

mattjoes wrote:

Not that I'm not looking forward to Bond 23, but I'd love to see another Bond film where it's just him on a mission. The kind Cubby used to produce.

The unofficial slogan of Bond 23 should be: "This time, it's NOT personal."

Craig has stated multiple times that he has no intention of having Blofeld return as Bond's nemesis, because the character has become stale and ruined after 50 years of pop-culture parody.

dr. strangelove wrote:

Craig has stated multiple times that he has no intention of having Blofeld return as Bond's nemesis, because the character has become stale and ruined after 50 years of pop-culture parody.

Going off on a tangent here. But do we really *know* if Craig actually has a say in such matter?. It's a talking point in Eon publicity that he somehow has a big voice, but does he really?

GeneralGogol wrote:

I've no idea where I read this rumour a year or so ago, but apparently Morgan's plot had something to do with avian flu or germ warfare like OHMSS. Anyone else remember this?

About all I remember is that Morgan said somewhere that his idea was quite topical, and that the moment for using it had passed. (Which perhaps suggests the avian flu scare from a couple years back.) I can't find a source for the life of me, though.

dr. strangelove wrote:

Craig has stated multiple times that he has no intention of having Blofeld return as Bond's nemesis, because the character has become stale and ruined after 50 years of pop-culture parody.

I don't think there is much chance of Blofeld coming back anytime soon. There's just no talk to that effect.

As for Craig. I don't care what he thinks. He's wrong about Blofeld. The character is timeless and iconic and unlike the other legend Bond villains, he's not trapped in one story. Eon saw to that. The man with the cat can be dusted off any old time and returned to his former glory.

When we are done with Craig and his disdain for the classic Bond films, Ernst may rise again.

In the meantime it's Bolivian water shortages, and whatever deep social commentary Mendes and Craig have in store for B23. Craig doesn't deserve a villain of Blofeld's stature anyway. Greene and Elvis are more his speed.

Napoleon Solo wrote:

Going off on a tangent here. But do we really *know* if Craig actually has a say in such matter?. It's a talking point in Eon publicity that he somehow has a big voice, but does he really?

Excellent questions, but ones that aren't easily answered. If he said it it's a shame, because I don't think he should be allowed to have much of an opinion on the quality of the script. Writers don't like it when actors like to critique their work or change it.

But with Babs Broccoli's social activism creeping into the series lately the main plot will probably be 007 trying to save the be-speckled African barn owl and passing around bags of rice and grain to malnourished Afrikaans.

tiffanywint wrote:

As for Craig. I don't care what he thinks. He's wrong about Blofeld. The character is timeless and iconic and unlike the other legend Bond villains, he's not trapped in one story. Eon saw to that. The man with the cat can be dusted off any old time and returned to his former glory.

Hard to argue that the character hasn't been ruined by parody, isn't it? To the public, bald man in a nehru suit with a white cat = Dr Evil.

tiffanywint wrote:

When we are done with Craig and his disdain for the classic Bond films, Ernst may rise again.

We'll see what the McClory estate says about that.

tiffanywint wrote:

Craig doesn't deserve a villain of Blofeld's stature anyway. Greene and Elvis are more his speed.

If anything, he needs a strong villain to fight. His Bond is driven unlike any of the others and needs a serious threat. If EON did decide to bring Blofeld back, they would probably bring back the Pleasance or Grey versions to keep up their line of pathetic villains for Craig.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

But with Babs Broccoli's social activism creeping into the series lately the main plot will probably be 007 trying to save the be-speckled African barn owl and passing around bags of rice and grain to malnourished Afrikaans.

The Bolivian water supply subplot was MGW's idea, actually. But believe whatever entertains you.

Louis Armstrong wrote:

tiffanywint wrote:

As for Craig. I don't care what he thinks. He's wrong about Blofeld. The character is timeless and iconic and unlike the other legend Bond villains, he's not trapped in one story. Eon saw to that. The man with the cat can be dusted off any old time and returned to his former glory.

Hard to argue that the character hasn't been ruined by parody, isn't it? To the public, bald man in a nehru suit with a white cat = Dr Evil.

Surely if Austin Powers has ruined Blofeld by parody, then it's also ruined Bond himself? Yet just as Craig has given us a Bond suitably remodelled for the today's world, I'm sure it would be more than possible for Blofeld to be resurrected and updated - and, after all, it's not as though the character must be portrayed as a bald man in a Nehru suit with a white cat.

I can very easily argue that the Blofeld character is as potentially vital as ever. Parody doesn't impact in any meaningful way. That's just Craig's convenient excuse for staying clear of the character.
I can respect that Craig doesn't want to do battle with Blofeld but he doesn't need to be so pompous as to suggest that it simply can't be done. Rather the truth is, it's just his preference. He also doesn't like gadgets and prefers his Bond films be more character driven. He's got his own vision. So far it's a dreary one IMO but we anxiously await the next installment and what Messr's Mendes and Craig plan on serving up next.
Now as far as McClory and his rights. My understanding is that the rights have been back in play for a while. Eon could use Blofeld or Spectre if they wanted. I could be wrong but I could swear that was established in a long ago thread on the old Mi6.
I do think though it might be better to save Blofeld and Spectre for a more conventional Connery/Lazenby or Moore inspired Bond in the future. Craig and his ilk might just cock it up. Better they work with their own inventions.
As for Bolivian water. It doesn't really matter if MGW or Babs sparked the idea, Bab's social activism is well known. MGW could very well have hoisted the idea because he thought she and Haggfish migh like it. Who knows, who cares. Bottom line is that under the Babs/MGW direction the Bond films made a very hard shift in the direction of leftist social-activism in the last film. The Haggfish's presence and proven track record was no doubt a mitigating factor as well.

Napoleon Solo wrote:

dr. strangelove wrote:

Craig has stated multiple times that he has no intention of having Blofeld return as Bond's nemesis, because the character has become stale and ruined after 50 years of pop-culture parody.

Going off on a tangent here. But do we really *know* if Craig actually has a say in such matter?. It's a talking point in Eon publicity that he somehow has a big voice, but does he really?

Of course he has a say in what happens. He's the star of the franchise, so EON is going to take his opinion in to consideration, at least a little bit. Just like Damon had a say in what happened with Bourne, and how Bale has input with Batman (remember his comments on Robin?).

Take a look at this interview from before CASINO ROYALE came out. Craig talks about this very subject around the 6 minute mark...
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/126

Quote :

She always said that she wanted me to do it. And I said to her from the very beginning, I said "If you allow me to get involved with this, if you allow me to get involved with every process that's going on...with the music, with the way it looks, with the way it feels, and just sort of allow me to have a go at recreating something here, then I promise I won't let you down on the Bond factor. Then I can walk onto that set and pretend to be James Bond."

Anyway, I don't think Craig is far off on the Blofeld thing. It'd be nearly impossible to present the character without him seeming ridiculous. Unless, that is, that EON decides to portray the character like he is in the novels, but EON hasn't shown any desire recently to put the literary Bond onscreen.

Also, if they had their heart set on reintroducing Blofeld, they would have introduced SPECTRE first, not Quantum.

Quote :

When we are done with Craig and his disdain for the classic Bond films, Ernst may rise again.

What makes you say this? Craig has stated that he loves Connery and the older films, and that DR. NO and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE are two of his favorite movies. He's never indicated otherwise.

dr. strangelove wrote:

What makes you say this? Craig has stated that he loves Connery and the older films, and that DR. NO and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE are two of his favorite movies. He's never indicated otherwise.

I take Craig with a big bag of salt here. This is the politically correct thing to say. You can't very well diss the classics or Connery's iconic portrayal.
What's not clear is what Craig intends to take from the classics.That's open to his interpretation. Forster promised us that he was very smitten with the early Bonds as well.
The vibe of the early Connery films is much different that what we've got so far. I don't think Craig's vision for Bond has much in common with Connery's vision. But we shall see. The first two films can be excused as tedious exposition of Bond dealing with trust issues and the betrayal of Vesper.
I guess we finally will get to see what Craig's Bond is really all about in the next film.

tiffanywint wrote:

Who knows, who cares.

You don't, and I care. :)