The name's Bond. James Bond. Skyfall

MarcLister · 11 Jan 2011 at 22:43

Bond 23 was announced today.

At last! Production starts late 2011 with a November 9th 2012 release date. Daniel Craig returns as Bond and Sam Mendes directs.

Apparently this is the longest time between two Bond films without a change in the actor playing Bond. I hope Bond 23 is more Casino Royale than Quantum Of Solace. A film I still don't really get.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12168421

Bring on the martini, shaken not stirred! :cool:

physichull · 11 Jan 2011 at 22:49

Hopefully it will be much better than Quantum of Solace which I thought was a bit of a step down from Casino Royale.

Anyone know the proposed name?

Digitalle · 11 Jan 2011 at 22:52

Headline spelling fail. Typical BBC.

Rest of article sounds pretty promising though, can't wait

MarcLister · 11 Jan 2011 at 22:57

physichull said:
Anyone know the proposed name?

I'm going with "Bond 23" for now.

I've had a quick look for some Bond fan sites and the currently up-to-date ones just repeat the news so there's no fan knowledge about the title yet.

Considering most, if not all, of the Bond book titles have been used I wonder if we'll get Bond 23 named after something in a Bond novel or will it be a brand new name. For example Goldeneye was the name of an Operation Fleming worked with the American OSS on. It was also the name of his Jamaica retreat.

Tomorrow Never Dies was the first Bond film to have no link to Fleming. So I guess Bond 23 will be another of those.

physichull · 11 Jan 2011 at 23:00

I am guessing that recently they didn't put the "James Bond will return in ...." line in the end credits of the last film.

Jokester · 11 Jan 2011 at 23:02

Sam Mendes directing is interesting, should be good.

rypt · 12 Jan 2011 at 00:14

Jokester said:
Sam Mendes directing is interesting, should be good.

If it's anything like Jarhead then it should be good yes, but that is his one and only "actiony" film

Raymond Lin · 12 Jan 2011 at 00:20

rypt said:
If it's anything like Jarhead then it should be good yes, but that is his one and only "actiony" film

Tbh Jarhead didn't have that many action pieces.

They never got to kill anyone!

rypt · 12 Jan 2011 at 00:28

Raymond Lin said:
Tbh Jarhead didn't have that many action pieces.

They never got to kill anyone!

Bond does not need 24/7 action either, that is too American.

Bond needs a few good action sequences (3 to be precise, one to open, one in the middle, one at the end).

Deep · 12 Jan 2011 at 00:29

I am definitely in the minority who does not like Casino Royale.
I just couldn't like it, it might be Daniel Craig, who I also think he is a pretty rubbish Bond tbh.

Tummy · 12 Jan 2011 at 02:18

Quantum of Solace was a ****ing terrible film.

Gemma Arterton was one of the best things about it, that and it finishing.

mikeyp123 · 12 Jan 2011 at 02:23

Deep said:
I am definitely in the minority who does not like Casino Royale.
I just couldn't like it, it might be Daniel Craig, who I also think he is a pretty rubbish Bond tbh.

I can't stand Casino Royale either..literally seem to have to justify to everyone.

Greenlizard0 · 12 Jan 2011 at 08:58

Casino Royale was a better Bond film but don't forget it's mostly an action genre. Watching 'the most recent' one is different from watching a really old, but better film.

The Pierce Brosnan ones were pretty weak so I think Casino Royale ended up standing out.

Tefal · 12 Jan 2011 at 09:02

Hope it's actually a bond film not the whiny ass crap we've been given the last time.

No1newts · 12 Jan 2011 at 09:07

Greenlizard0 said:
Casino Royale was a better Bond film but don't forget it's mostly an action genre. Watching 'the most recent' one is different from watching a really old, but better film.

The Pierce Brosnan ones were pretty weak so I think Casino Royale ended up standing out.

I loved the Pierce Brosnan ones

I haven't watched a single Bond film since the change to Daniel Craig and what feels like a shift in emphasis of the Bond films (well I tried watching them but gave up halfway through the films). A lot of people say it is more action based now, more gritty etc and I can see why a lot of people would like this. But personally I enjoy the cheesiness, the one liners and the fun of the films. I think toward the end the Brosnan ones were weak but that was more script writing than his acting.

If every film was Goldeneye-esque I would be a happy man as that was, for me at least, the best Bond film ever. Tounge in cheek, not too cheesy with good action and the typical Bond one liners.

Doubt I will watch the new one though I may be tempted into it.

mikeyp123 said:
I can't stand Casino Royale either..literally seem to have to justify to everyone.

Hate it too, hate Daniel Craig as Bond.

Tefal · 12 Jan 2011 at 09:09

thing is it seems like they sort of half arsed to try and make it "gritty" and just ended up with some sloppy mess in between the classic suave bond with amazing gadgets and a generic crime thriller.

No1newts · 12 Jan 2011 at 09:14

Tefal said:
thing is it seems like they sort of half arsed to try and make it "gritty" and just ended up with some sloppy mess in between the classic suave bond with amazing gadgets and a generic crime thriller.

That and the emphasis on action. The one thing that put me off the new Bond films was the advert for the first DC one. I can still clearly remember it and how much it put me off.

I never got to this part of the film but he was on some bungy rope bouncing up and down punching people then he pings up and shoots someone. I can remember thinking "W....T.....F! Save it for the Matrix you clowns." after that I was in a negative mindset about the whole new direction.

semi-pro waster · 12 Jan 2011 at 09:17

Typical - I've just got the Bond boxed set and they announce that they've finally sorted out their squabbles and will make a new one... Here's hoping Mr Mendes does a better job of this new film. Whatever they do for a title of Bond 23 they can't make it worse than Quantum of Solace - the most insipid name for a Bond film ever, it's not punchy, most people are or were unsure what a quantum was in this context and Bond's not supposed to be looking for solace, people are meant to be looking for it after dealing with him.

Complaints about the name aside it was a rubbish film which could just about as easily have been edited down and tacked onto Casino Royale as an additional 30 minutes and it wouldn't have lost anything much. Each Bond adventure is meant to be a standalone, there will be common characters (Q, M, Miss Moneypenny, Felix Leiter etc) but the thrust of the story is supposed to be distinct from any other, not simply a run-on of the previous film.

Having said that I might just rewatch Quantum of Solace at the weekend to remind myself if it really is as bad as I think it was.

Vonhelmet · 12 Jan 2011 at 09:31

QoS was utter crap, so it better not be anything like that. CR was great - much closer to how Bond is in the books.

Sam Mendes should be good as director, assuming they can come up with a decent plot and script.

Vonhelmet · 12 Jan 2011 at 09:32

semi-pro waster said:
Quantum of Solace - the most insipid name for a Bond film ever, it's not punchy, most people are or were unsure what a quantum was in this context and Bond's not supposed to be looking for solace, people are meant to be looking for it after dealing with him.

It's a particularly bizarre title if you've read the short story from which it takes its name. It is literally meaningless in the context of the film's story.