I thinks the biggest thing current James Bond should learn from the Mission Impossible franchise is the fun aspect. The Mission Impossible films are fun and not depressing, grounded, a deconstruction etc.
You say it's not 'deconstruction' but the first film does that-the entire team they set up as the lead are wiped out 15 mins in and Ethan never fires a gun nor gets the girl at the end so very playing with spy tropes. MI6+7 have there 'down' moments with characters being killed off.
I feel like Cruise cares more about Ethan Hunt than Craig did about Bond. The Bond films need to get back to having fun and being escapist entertainment again.
@@sandersson2813Very unfair about Craig, I watched Die Another Day last night and it's rightfully seen as stupid, certainly fun in places but it definitely needed a more serious grounded film, Casino Royal was perfect. QOS was a bit crap but Craig was the best thing in it. Skyfall was excellent and a lot of fun, Spectre was the most traditional bond film he did no deep emotions and wasn't the best No time to die still not made my mind up about it but Craig was the best thing in it still. do need another course correction now, I'd like to see something closer to Brosnan in Goldeneye.
@flemit35 Craig's Bond is charmless, personality free, humourless, surly, miserable, ugly, short, wooden and worst of all unlikeable. QOS, Spectre and NTTD are so bad I can't think of a single redeeming thing about any of them they are that forgettable.
@@Cartier777I didn't see people making out Marvel+ Robert Downey Jr hated Iron man when he was killed off, nor Hugh Jackman when he killed Logan off [of course he brought him back]. He's said the whole point of that ending was to make it easier to do a reboot going forward and wipe the slate clean for the new actor [and there were never going to just re-cast with the same continuity anyway].
Cubby Brocolli actually cared about Bond. Barbara does not. It is a burden for her. Daniel Craig hated being Bond. Tom Cruise cares about Ethan Hunt and the audience!!
You are aware that Barbara has worked on Bond since Octopussy in 1983 so for 40+ years or most of her life. Honestly the idea she 'doesn't care' doesn't add up frankly [and the last film Cubby was actively involved in was 35 years ago so comparing his era to now is a bit 'apples and oranges']. In fact the average Mission Impossible gap between films is around 4-5 years which is more like Bond recently.
I'm not talking about the past. I'm talking about recent years. Spectre and No Time to Die. I agree about the gaps between films. Quality wise, Mission impossible is getting it right.
@@evolvelectriclightseeker5260 Both those films had troubled shoots so no wonder there not rushing into another one [and I'd be surprised if we get another MI film after this one for a while after this one given the very messy+ expensive production and Cruise's likely departure].
I like the fact that Tom Cruise cares about his role Mission Impossible, a lot of the actors in James Bond films sometimes don't really care about the role after they're done which is sad to hear
@@williamcoolidge9884 But Roger and Pierce have there fair share of negative comments about making Bond if you look for them [particularly re-View to a Kill for Roger and TND+ DAD for Pierce].
I think that Dalton cared immensely about the role. Moore saw it for what he wanted it to be, Lazenby wanted it as a meal ticket / ego boost, Pierce had it taken from him….
In fairness MI is Cruise's series-he calls all the shots. In most Bond's cases, they've got the rest of there career to get on with [Roger was happy to do tie in shows after he stepped down but his career was winding down as he focused on charity work]. Dalton has been happy to talk about the series in documentaries but I doubt he'd be willing to host TV specials like Roger was.
They only produce Bond films so they're in their own little isolated silo. At least Saltzman and Cubby produced other non-Bond films back in the 60s so they were in step in Hollywood and larger entertainment trends. Imagine Barbara and Michael trying to produce a non-Bond film now. I don't think they'd know how to.
James Bond NEEDS, absolutely NEEDS to go back to the formula that worked from Sean to Pierce. No gritty crap, just a caper, with fun dialogue. Here's the formula: Start with a big pre credit sequence. Epic credits with a great track from current artist. Meeting with M & Q. Gadgets, lots of them. A gadget loaded car. A memorable, charismatic villain. A henchman with a novel personal ability. Women. A plot that's larger than life. A climax in a unique lair.
Given MI7 was criticized for being too close to MI6 in it's plot people are more aware of repetition now. A lot of reviews of the later Brosnan films said that the formula was getting tired after 19/20 films of doing similar things so going back to it 20+ years later is a bit of a stretch as it was retired for a reason [and the Bond actor will want character stuff to work with]. If they could do a new spin on it, that might be interesting.
Appreciate your thoughts as always but I think it’s a stretch to suggest the glacial pace of Eon is anything other than a negative. A two or three year cadence, as well as providing us with great entertainment, takes the pressure off to a certain extent and allows the filmmakers to be braver, knowing they don’t have to hit every single point each time (which I think NTTD’s bloatedness can largely be attributed to). We could have had Boyle’s Bond, and it may have been a bit of a departure - so what? That’s the Bond way. We got OHMSS because of that, and LALD. Our fandom is built on that cadence and all the personal preferences that go with it. We would by now have seen the follow up to Boyle’s Bond and be looking forward to the next, and they would all have slightly different interpretations, some of which I would love more than you and vice versa. You frequently talk about how seminally important your ‘first Bond movie’ experience is. I agree. No movie for 5/6-plus years? A generation potentially misses that moment. TLD was mine because it caught me at just the right age. A five year gap after AVTAK and it may have passed me by altogether. Here’s a thought experiment- you love QOS, and I do too - no way that movie ends up being the way it is with a five year gap after Casino Royale. Ethan Hunt is a far less interesting character than Bond with less global appeal and, all things being equal, Bond will always out gross a MI film. All the more reason why Eon’s approach is so baffling.
Mission Impossible has massive gaps between films. It's only the last two that had two years between them. There was a five year gap between Fallout and Dead Reckoning
@ indeed, and it had a fairly disappointing box office return when it eventually did come out. The enduring appeal of the Bond series for me hangs on the regular cadence of releases. How many of us have mentally ranked the series, or decided to watch through them all again even though we have watched them maybe dozens of times? There is nothing else like it in western cinema and I can’t fathom why Eon isn’t interested in keeping it going.
@@dcwarden My view is the regular cadence was easier when blockbuster filmmaking wasn't so difficult and technological as it is today, and when there wasn't as much competition. In the 60s, they were working with Fleming's source material, which apart for some changes, is quite book accurate until You Only Live Twice. Today, there is so much competition and all that competition takes its time between instalments. The MCU is the same, because it's a universe made up of franchises : Cap America, Iron Man, etc and the distance between each new instalment is about as long as a Bond film, etc. It's just how Hollywood does it now.
Boyle has said his Bond film also ended with Bond's death [and he did like how NTTD did it] so there wouldn't have been a direct follow up. If they had got Bond 25 out in 2019 before Covid we might have seen a new film/reboot by now 5 years later but I always thought there was going to be a big gap. Honestly QOS would have been better coming 3+ years after Spectre so they could have sorted out the script [Sam Mendes has said that he wished Spectre has an extra year at least in development time].
But when they were making Bond films every two years they were sticking to a fairly ridged formula- because that was dropped for the Craig films they were able to try new things. In contrast [by accident or design] MI would have a different director each time so it would feel different [MI96+ MI2 feel nothing alike] but the last few have the same director/writer so do feel more formulaic [with MI7 getting some flack for having a similar structure to Fallout with many illusions/links to the 1996 film].
Simon Pegg is there for the humour. Ethan takes himself fairly seriously. There is a bit in 'Fallout' where Ethan tries a Bond one liner when dropping payload onto a helicopter ['Hold this for me, will ya!'] but he misses his target!
@@callummoore6962 Agreed, there is humour there, it doesn't have to be via innuendoes or sight gags and I would class the humour is MI as also pretty deadpan.
Ghost Protocol is my favorite of the series. Perfect mix of globe trotting, humor and amazing set pieces. Rogue Nation very much feels like a Bond film with its structure. My only gripe is that Ethan always has to go Rogue and never has support from the IMF (except for MI2)
He doesn't go rouge in 'Fallout' which is a plot point as because he's gone rouge so many times the bad guys try to frame him as a traitor! I've noticed that the agents chasing him in MI7 seem to be working with him in the trailer for MI8 so maybe that element has been dropped.
I think the Mission Impossible series started out in a particular way, more serious, less fun and then from 3 on you can see the influence of the Bond movies take over. Lets make great, fun, popcorn movies. I hope things might come full circle with the next run of Bond movies and they go back to what made them great. A mix of fun, action, comedy, drama, action, glamour. It was all there on the screen in a 2 hour package. Looking forward to starting fresh but worried that Eon are totally out of ideas.
@@1utube01Each to there own but no thank you given I think DAD's aged like milk! [Like MI2 being very 2000]. For me Berry was far better in her stretch in John Wick than anything she did in Die Another Day.
As far as a new bond film idea. I think it would be cool to for a throwback in time, to the era that bond was meant to be in. Like set right after the movie The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare. I think that would be a cool change and add a bit of newness to the brand, by going back in time.
It's a nice idea but given Ministry ended up being dumped on Prime in most territories I don't know if there is a market for it with a general audience. If anything I could image a 50's/60's Bond would be fairly low scale [and probably fairly serious like the novels] to keep the budget down given how expensive period filming is.
would make a good TV series I feel rather then film. however I prefer films and I can't see them wanting to have two versions of Bond at the same time.
Get back to basics. Most Bond books and films have him investigating a suspicious occurrence in a British territory. Over the course of his investigation. He uncovers a dastardly plot and some great action scenes occur. Keep things simple.
one of the worse bond films is QOS which is basically a Bourne film in style. Bond films do seem to chase other films a bit. Q0S was a Bourne film, Skyfall obviously looked to the Dark Knight, Spectre felt more Bond like to me but no guarntee to success
I hope that the next Mission Impossible film is a huge hit, as its success is critical to the future of Bond as we know it, by demonstrating that there is still a market for the blockbuster release in theatres. If it doesn't do well financially, then we're more likely to get a Bond series or similar on Amazon Prime, and less likely to get a film.
David, Well said. I especially like your point that EON seems to spend less time focusing on the entertainment aspect of their thrillers. The MI series clearly wants to accomplish one thing: Excite the audience. Perhaps EON thinks their audience is looking for more thoughtful, art house aspects to Bond. In a world where a pandemics 0:02 , war, and political unrest capture headlines, my vote is toward pure entertainment in the style of the MI movies and the Raiders films. Just sayin.’
Having fun, and excitement. Craig era was too brooding for me. Skyfall I enjoy frequently, but that’s more Silva, Bardem bringing gravitas. As great as Casino is, I just can’t sit down and watch it repeatedly. ( now, Casino is in my top 5, yes, I just don’t sit down with it much)I love great villains, great henchmen, fun gadgets, Bond being witty, with quips. We have watched Majesties ten times already past few weeks. The film, brings us such great joy, fun, excitement. I miss that from Craig’s era. Mission Impossible is just exciting. But I prefer Bond to MI. I hated the Bourne films, hated the camera, etc about them. But I love your takes on Bond David. And Calvin’s. Love when you and Calvin get together. You guys give us something enjoyable today in this world. I really miss Joe Darlington and Scott’s Bond reviews. 😻
I agree. When I watch Bond movies with my family, we always watch the old Bonds with Sean Connery, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton and Pierce Brosnan and not to forget George Lazenby. Always excited even we know the outcome and what's happened. But Craig Bonds? Not so much. Casino Royal was ok. Skyfall sometimes but the others? Boring, not Bond like, not excitement and fun at all. My feeling is, Graig killed Bond. Not only at NTTD.
I felt Vesper was great. Green did a great job. But like Casino, the train scene is riveting, Bond does emotion in shower scene. Love the actual casino scenes. But opening parkour felt to Bourne, MI. But in Bond films I look forward to Bond and Villian going at it. Le cheif had a great scene with Bond tied to chair, whacking him. But then WTH, White takes him out. It just left me wanting more. But They had Green in incredible dresses mostly. When Bond has to :ski down the Mt, from Blofeld and his men; a lot on one ski; then choking a guy with ski, to not give himself away; getting all the way down to village; then have to evade Bunt and her men; going into a room full of bells, giving himself away; try and hide in crowds. Then Tracy skates up in a skate outfit, and glows so beautifully, I’m stunned, everytime. In the barn Bond shuts doors turns, Tracy whisks her hair, she glows. Not the most glamorous outfit, yet she glows. Same as Solitaire walking out airport, just everyday clothes, and she radiates.
I unabashedly love CR, QoS is an ok action film, Skyfall is good but doesn’t feel like a Bond film to me. Spectre and NTTD are abominations. Bond is not a broody, emotional, metrosexual who wears high fashion clothes. To me, the Bond franchise ended with License to Kill. In Goldeneye, you start seeing the modern politics rearing its ugly head. Bond is insulted by M, lectured on gender rights by Moneypenney. I’m sick of Bond being disrespected by his superiors in the newer films. He’s one of the top agents in the government, if they didn’t trust him, he wouldn’t have a license to kill.
@@JRRob3wnBut in Mission Impossible Ethan is constantly going rouge and being suspected by his own side, even from the beginning. And Bond + Bernard Lee/Robert Brown do not have the easiest relationship [see the confrontation scene in LTK for example]. Frankly Bond just going 'yes sir' to his boss and M being friendly to him would be very boring.
I completely agree, David. In many ways, we have something that is similar in its underlying concept as a film series and is a franchise many Bond fans will enjoy. Using this as something to not only fill in the gaps between any new Bond films, but also to fuel our energy and excitement for the next 007 film seems the only logical way.
Would be tough. He is signed to do a world war 2 movie with Tom Cruise next year called Broadsword. Tom Cruise also has another movie with another director about the most powerful man in the universe thinking he is earths savior.
@@FlyingTaco95 Yeah he's very loyal to Cruise. He pretty much makes up the MI films as he goes along which might not be something Eon [or most studios] would be keen on [and given the mess the production of MI7+8 has been I can understand why even if the results justify it].
I believe it will be 2027 before the Bond franchise returns to cinemas. I have heard the majority of fans believe Bond should return to the 1960s and the Cold War. Some fans have said Pierce Brosnan should return as an older Bond set in contemporary times.
I watched 'Black Adam' the other day and sadly time has caught up with Pierce-his voice had certainly aged and most of the action scenes was with CGI. Bringing him back as Bond in his 70's wouldn't work [and given so much time has passed they wouldn't be anything like his earlier films] although he's shown no interest in it [instead backing other actors like Cillian Murphy]. Sadly were in a new cold war so they wouldn't have to go period to cover it...
You're right. At this rate, James Bond may not mean anything to the next generation Bond. They wouldn't know the Craig Bond or any of the other Bond actors that came before. Also, the fact that they killed off Bond in No Time to Die indicates to me that they were at the time disinclined to do another Bond film.
I really don't buy that given this year we've had successful films in the Planet of the Apes [started in 1968] and Alien [started 1979] series which both have big gaps. Gladiator II has just arrived 24 years after the first and has opened strongly and Top Gun Maverick turning up 36 years after the original didn't do that any harm! And NTTD was only 3 years ago. Honestly Bond 26 being a reboot should make it a lot easier for it to pick up a new audience and it's more going to be down to the quality of Bond 26 if anything.
Dune Part 2 was a big hit this year when I doubt that was a property many young people cared about before part 1 came out. But not only did they make two really good movies but they made sure there was a lot of younger actors involved and they were heavily in the promotion so it can be done.
I do find it a bit curious when people say Craig having a lot of creative control on Bond 'shouldn't have happened' and the long breaks show a lack of passion when Cruise calls all the shots on Mission Impossible since the beginning-choosing the director, cast etc. [on the first two installments him and his then business partner Paula Wagner are the sole producers in the 'Cubby' mould] and until Fallout the typical gap between MI films was 4-5 years [and MI8 is only coming out 2 years after MI7 as they were partly filmed back to back]. Craig also did a lot of his own stunts, injuring himself on pretty much all his Bond and MI is very difficult to make [Jeremy Renner+ Rebecca Ferguson has said they left the series as they were losing other work due to how long production takes, Thandiwe Newton doesn't have much nice things to say about MI2 and Cruise had a blow up over Covid protocols on MI7] while the delays on MI7+8 [originally due to come out 2021+22] show like Bond it's not easy. It's also interesting that Cruise hasn't actually had even an onscreen kiss since MI3 despite having love interests while Bond still gets some bedroom action!
Given all indications [including the title!] that this is the final Mission Impossible film with Cruise [before the inevitable re-boot in a few years time] it will be interesting how it wraps up Ethan's story. Given Cruise is now in his 60's it seems a good time to bow out. Bond is certainly the series that gets greater box office and awards recognition.
Fan of both! I believe MI has pushed Bond to up its game, and I think we had the Daniel Craig Bond as a result. MI will presumably end as Tom Cruise ages. He’s been very very impressive, does most of his own stunts etc, but Bond will continue…
I totally agree. I was invited by a cinema owner to see a preview of GoldenEye. Before then, he was really dismissive: "Bond is dead," etc. This was just after True Lies. There was no way it could beat that, etc. We had the Brosnan era and the dam jump. The rest is history. I love the Mission Impossible series. Bond is a different beast. Bond will be back better than ever because.. It's Bond!
If you became a Bond fan in 2016, you will have had one new movie released over a 10 year span (at least 10). Ridiculous. Broccoli and Wilson need to pass the baton and exit stage left. They are not up to overseeing the franchise anymore.
I see people upset that it takes so long for a Bond film to be released, pointing to Mission Impossible getting their act together and making films on regular basis. But that isn't true. Only the last two have had a gap of two years between them. Most of the others have had massive gaps between them. Four years between the first and second. Six years between two and three and five years between three and Ghost Protocol. And four years between Ghost Protocol and Rogue Nation, And there was a five year hiatus between Fallout and Dead Reckoning. Blockbusters are far more complex to make now. And EON is "reinventing" Bond, which loads of you hate, but it's happening unless Broccoli suddenly retracts her recent comments. So that will also take time. I'm sorry folks but you won't be getting a return to Goldeneye days. To put this in perspective there have been 8 M:I films from 1996 to 2024. in comparison, there has been nine Bond films between 1995 and 2021. Bond has one more film in a period that is four years shorter than the M:I series.
Very good points. I do think 'reinvention' so something people are trying to turn it into something it's not regarding culture war nonsense when she means the property will need rebooting as the main actor has changed [Dalton was hardly a continuation of Moore in tone for example]. Cruise stays on but the MI franchise 'reinvented' itself after MI2 as Ethan goes from being a Bond-esq playboy to getting married. Certainly I agree there won't be a 'return to Goldeneye days', especially as that film is 30 years old next year.
@@jamesatkinsonja We'll certainly find out what Babs means by "reinvention" soon enough. Though she has dropped hints. She says s to continue exploring Bond's psyce, wants another five-film arc, and recently said they're making some "brave changes". The last comments suggests the changes will be more drastic than before, including "whiteness [of bond] not being a given."
@@danielscott8180 Certainly you can't have bond as a cardboard character anymore [Calvin Dyson's excellent 'Emotional storytelling' video rightly said you need to give the actor something to work with] and MI has gone the 'story arc' root itself so for me that was a given. The rest no one can judge until the film is out.
@@jamesatkinsonja Exactly. Craig humanised Bond more than any other Bond. You can't revert back to a cardboard cutout with not character arc. It just cannot be reversed, at least without feeling like something has been lost.
Tom Cruise cares about his audience that's the difference between mission impossible movies and the James Bond movies and I hope to God this isn't the last mission impossible with Tom Cruise 🎰 and even when they get a new actor to play James Bond it's hard to be excited about it like you said whoever they get to play James Bond the actor is not going to be Tom Cruise or Sean Connery 🎲
I've said for so long now that im convinced the Bond team have been waiting for MI to end before rebooting Bond. Which if you think about it, should have been 2 or 3 years ago, but dead reckoning was delayed for a year if not two by covid, the latest one should have been released in May ' 24 but is coming out one year later than planned because of the strikes.
Wow David, you're getting a lot of naysaying comments here. Yikes. I love the Mission Impossible series and of course, 007 and you know, and I know, James Bond will return! What a great day that will be!! Can't wait to see the new MI: Final Reckoning adventure. You can love them both. Just like I love all the actors who've played Bond. They are like my children. I love them all. I play no favorites. They all bring me joy. Cheers!
Except that in James Bond the plot is turned towards James Bond and in mission impossible the plot is turned towards Tom Cruise so that's the big différence
I think Bond needs to go back to being fun and focus on intrigue, style, character, and imagination. These other franchises like M:I and John Wick just do jaw-dropping action and gritty realism much better with two madmen at the helm. The competitive advantage of Bond is a fantasy and lifestyle aspect that the others don’t have. Casino Royale is my second favorite Bond movie but I knew something would be not quite right with the Craig era when Vesper observed that Bond wears his suit “with disdain”.
I enjoy both series. However, the James Bond films make more money than the Mission: Impossible series. NTTD made more money than M:I VII. I do hope M:I VIII is a huge success b/c Cruise and company really have done a great job with the franchise.
@thebondexperience the Mission Impossible movies often wink at 007 Movies. Notice how Solomon Lane resembles Mr. White, coming back for a 2nd movie, worn out, tired, in identical styling. Notice how MI6 has become part of the MI saga with Ilsa and Atlee. Notice the Blenheim Palace been used in Rogue Nation, AFTER Spectre used it. And that one has a super super Easter Egg: A silver Aston Martin DB5 parked outside the palace just before MIF enters. Even if it was a coincidence, no one noticed? 😅
Ethan Hunt is a characterless cypher, a glorified stunt man - Bond has depth, cultural longevity, and sophistication. Men fantasize about being Bond; few do so with Hunt.
Anyone saying the Bond films need to be "fun" like the Mission: Impossible films really haven't been paying attention or tribute to the series. They're just as dark and deconstructive as the Craig films. Also, for everyone saying that Craig doesn't care about Bond while Cruise cares about Hunt, yes, but maybe it because Craig is just another actor playing a long running character while Hunt lives and dies with Cruise yknow. I swear at this rate the Bond series just needs to be put to rest
Over 2 years ago during cinema con Tom was on the plane said he was filming mission 8 for the trailer of dead reckoning and a screening of top gun maverick
@@Dohsoda The plan was for the films to come out in 2021+22 but it's been a very troubled shoot [as well as Covid you had the strikes last year] and far increased the budget-they certainly bit off more than they could chew [John Wick was going to do two films back to back before sensibly cutting it to one at the same time] and a factor why this will be the final entry with Cruise as the lead [hence the title].
Some inconvenient truths for Brosnan Bond fans. The M:I series outperformed all of Brosnan's Bonds, but Craig's Bond films (as a whole) outperformed the M:I series. (In comparing Brosnan's films to the M:I series, I'm referring only to the first three M:I films which were made around the same time as Brosnan's Bonds to be fair) Ironically, M:I 2 when adjusted for inflation just outdoes Casino Royale and smashes Quantum of Solace. And Fallout just beats NTTD, but not even close to Skyfall or SPECTRE. NTTD was the first film in theatres after the pandemic, so that has to be taken into consideration. It did rather well considering. But Craig's films by and large smash M:I at the box office. So copying M:I may not be the way forward for Bond. I mean, M:I is already copying Bond, anyway.
Good points. I certainly think MI2's success was something DAD was trying to emulate [to the extent MGM tried to get John Woo to direct it] but both haven't aged particularly well and the follow ups feel like 'Course correction' .
@@jamesatkinsonja John Woo was certainly a favourite director around that time with his slo-mo, exaggerated camera movements and gun-fu action sequences.
@@jamesatkinsonjaI’m sure that they will continue making Mission: Impossible films with or without Tom Cruise. Question is will the next Mission Impossible film come out before the next 007 film?
Possible there also will take a look to The Amateur (from Disney Fox) with Raimi Malek in Bourne style movie. Holt McCallany also is seen in that movie who also playing in Mi8 and Laurence Fishburne who was seen in Mi3.
Actually the Mission films are not that consistent if you consider there have only been 8 films in 29 years. Bond has 9 films in the same time frame. So Bond is doing well.
I think you’re wrong! Cubby Broccoli would have never allowed an actor to get so much control of one of his movies. Cubby was in control all the time. Sadly Barbara doesn’t have the guts and the willing to entertain people. We will be happy if she could sell the rights to someone like her father.
She'd probably hit back that NTTD made $200 million more than Dead Reckoning! Also the most realistic option if Eon sell up would be to a big corporation like Disney that would just see it as a product. Cruise calls the shots on everything in MI as does most big franchises now a days [like Ryan Reynolds with Deadpool] and Cubby would have had to move with the times if he was still around [Pierce was certainly not an 'actor for hire' and was keen to make his opinions known on Bond as he was an experienced producer outside the series].
@@jamesatkinsonjaNTTD made a lot of money, but like the Last Jedi, it burned up a lot of good will. If they don’t get this next film right, I’m not sure that the franchise has much gas left in it. Her talk of being very interested in gender or race swapping the character does not bode well.
@@JRRob3wn I really don't think NTTD will have much relevance on Bond 26 given it's a fresh start and more than likely a whole new cast and crew. Die Another Day really didn't affect Casino Royale's success because the films have virtually no connection [especially with general audience].
@@JRRob3wn She's repeatedly said that Bond will remain male and she has no interest in gender swapping the character and it's prudent to cast the net wide in casting [it really doesn't bother me personally but more than likely it will be a white actor].
The only people who could afford to buy Eon/Bond are big companies like Amazon or Disney [so not people like Cubby] who'll just see it as a product to milk into the ground. I don't think producers like Cubby are really around anymore to be honest.
To be honest it does mean much to Bond given as the title suggests, this is the final MI film with Cruise as the lead. I'm sure they'll be a reboot eventually but replacing Cruise in front+ behind the camera is a huge ask as he's very tied to the brand [he vetoed a MI tv show for paramount plus and I suspect Skydance's 'Heart of Stone' might well have started life as an Ilsa Faust spin off]. Bourne was the big Bond rival in the 2000's but the 2010's output wasn't as well received [there is meant to be an new installment coming but I'm dubious how well it will do]. The first Kingsman film was pretty popular but that franchise seems to have died a death [with 20th Century saying they have no plans to continue it].
Totally wish Barbara Broccoli would move on and let a producer that loved the James Bond genre take over. NTTD proved Barbara is played out and needs to retire!
But what producer fits that description? Christopher Nolan isn't going to buy the Bond rights [nor I suspect would he be interested in doing more than a couple of films before moving on]. The only people who could possibly afford Bond is big companies like Disney and I'm worried if they buy it whoever is put in charge will just see it as a job to churn things out quickly to make the money back regardless of quality.
Craig killed Bond and that was his Mission from the start, Craig is egotistical and got too big for his boots as it came to the end or his tenure. There is no appetite from those holding the Bond franchise for it to continue certainly not in the next 5 years. Craig put the franchise in a corner from which it cannot find away out. My guess is that if they do come up with something it will be going back because they cannot go forward with the name BOND, he's dead, the best they can do is continue the 007 agent franchise as the number passes from one agent to another.
What was interesting is that question was posed to Cruse and the cast on Fallout and while the actors [Cruise+ Rebecca Ferguson] straight away said 'No', director+ writer Christopher McQ and Simon Pegg [who's written scripts away from MI] thought the idea had merit. Given it's been established that Ethan can't stay away from the action [as the character retired after MI3 but quickly returned] I am curious how they end his saga.
Or if they do, then he goes out a badass saving the day, like literally the last moment of his life is doing the thing that "saves the world". NOT limping up a ladder and standing on a roof going through some kind of cinematic "soap opera goodbye scene".
Simon pegg said cruise is very hands on with the movies but wouldn't expand on if this last ones the end or just a way of getting the fans excited for the next movie that's out next year. Growing up bond was a highlight of going to the movies the last film was not my bond I liked skyfall thay could go back to his childhood if thay did a reboot but until that stop going woke I can't see anything happening untill thay find a new guy to step into the bond shoes
I feel Brosnan and Craig were helped by Bond being away for a bit before there first outing [so people were in the mood for a change] while Dalton coming only 2 years after Moore finished did him no favours.
@sinjinadams2862 What are you talking about ? maverick made 1 billion easily, mission impossible doesn't make 1 billion or earn more than bond because they don't offer anything new, unlike bond who provide something fresh each time. Ethan hunt is a boring character, while maverick & bond isn't.
@gauravtributes5023 Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Tom Cruise is the man! The fact that he does all his own stunts really adds to his appeal to me. It makes the movies much more realistic, authentic and exciting. Bond films on the other hand are a snooze fest. Boring!
@sinjinadams2862 You can disagree all you want, but bond is still earning more than any MI film. Tom Cruise learn to perform stunts from professional stuntman, Stunts in James bond films are performed by professional stuntman. I will take master performing fantastic stunts than students like Tom cruise performing avarage stunts. What bond does today, cruise does tomorrow. Ethan Hunt is a boring character, while Maverick and bond are fantastic character.
Mission Impossible has been fantastic the last few movies but goodness me it has cost a shed full of $$$ with disappointing financial returns in respect of the last movie. I hope from reading Barbara Broccoli's comments last week that there is a 3-4 film arc for a decade in respect of the next Bond.
Flashing back to 2015, Spectre vs MI: Rogue Nation. I was so disappointed in Spectre and spent years wondering why I wasn't as entertained as Rogue Nation.
I mean maybe, but have people forgotten that Dead Reckoning UNDERPERFORMED last year at the box office, right? I know a lot liked it, but personally found the film overall to be rather mediocre and most people who I talk to who have seen it call it a very "in one ear and out the other" mentality to it. Like talk about a step down from "Fallout", a film where I actually care for the character writing, therefore giving weight to the action and substance the film is trying to tackle. "Dead Reckoning" has a similar issue that most modern blockbusters have: it feels like a superhero film....therefore feeling rather sanitized and bland within the current media landscape.
I don’t watch trailers for movies, especially if it’s something like Mission Impossible, but I think Bond movies should not try to emulate those. It needs to bring back grounded action, fun but serious spy intrigue. Basically, instead of trying to mimic a current hot trend, it’s time to be its own type of Bond that feels different than current action/spy films.
I liked Daniel Craig. I really enjoyed the harder style action he offered. However, his mindset for NTTD and how he talked about not wanting to do another movie, then there happened NTTD. Also, the ending was ridiculous if youre wanting to continue the franchise forward. However, the ending can bring a good revamp to the franchise as well. Its been too long, that's becoming the issue.
The problem with EON productions is the timing of their productions. The mission impossible films are coming out every 3 to 4 years. People get impatient.
MI used to come out every 4-5 years [6 between 2+ 3] and there was a 5 year gap between Fallout+ Dead Reckoning so big gaps are actually pretty common in that series.
Bond has always been the classic spectacle and stunt source for the MI films. Bond potentially dying and having a family is the critical story opportunity or obstacle for writing into the next movie. Bond tracks back through a deep GB Military Culture which MI Ethan Hunt misses. ⚓💂
I think Tom above all else cares about movies and the experience of theatre presentations. We all saw how he kept production safely moving through COVID. I don't think it's an exaggeration that he saved the movie experience... Or at least kept it alive. We need theatre presentations and we need Bond to be theatre presentations
One of my local cinemas shut down just before I watched 'Deadpool & Wolverine' with a packed crowd which was a good reminder why I want cinema to be preserved.
He did say that before MI7 underperformed. It being retitled 'the final reckoning' suggests this is his last outing [as does him signing up with Warner Bros going forward]. There was an idea to make him the 'M' figure from MI5 onwards but he wasn't keen.
@jamesatkinsonja Cruise has been making several movies with Warner Bros and his contract is not exclusive. I don't think he'll give up on the MI franchise. There's this thing called Ego and it's pretty strong with him. Will have to wait and see.
@@chronocommander007 True- MI Ghost Protocol was going to hand the series to Jeremy Renner but Cruise kept control. Given Dead Reckoning underperformed I can see him being pushed out but we'll have to see what goes down in the film- maybe it is time for him to take the 'M' role going forward? [I always felt Ilsa was the character for him to hand over too given her popularity with fans but it wasn't to be...].
I love them both. But I don't compare them. I can enjoy them completely separate. My family will watch Mission Impossible, they don't watch Bond movies with me. I think MI is more for the masses, Bond has a more narrow field of fans
@@gauravtributes5023Exactly. The idea Bond is for a 'niche' audience really doesn't hold water for the films. The novels etc are more niche but that's true with 'expanded universe' stuff in general [I don't think the people who watch MCU films will have read all the comics].
Ive just started the MI films & frankly they are better than the last 2 Bond films in action & fun. Also after watching Fallout could see Cavill as Bond now.
Certainly Fallout gives you an idea what him playing a darker Bond would be like and it shows he has more range than the 'Moore/Brosnan' esq Bond he's pigeon holed as.
Casino Royal was so good, and maybe the key is having someone who is not actually a bond fan and thinks how he can be creative and make the character more in depth , the fan might get locked into what the status quo of bond versus expanding the character
Ethan Hunt is the point man for his team on the mission. Whereas James Bond is a solo operator in his own globalised geopolitical GTA like adventure. I believe with Bond they need to reset him before the new actor takes over and drives that meat suit forward. I think 🤔 there is no good way to do this, because they killed Bond off. So all you can do is go with the best of the bad ideas. The best one is probably going to be easiest to shoot too. So here it is. Bond is lounging on a beach deck chair watching a beautiful woman playing with her daughter in the water. Bond hears a voice calling him “Mr Bond, Mr Bond!” Bond startles and wakes up to see a waiter holding his drink 🍸 on a tray. “Oh Mr Bond. Are you ok?” Bond replies “I fell asleep here in the sun and dreamt I was on an Island and got blown up.” The waiter says “That’s not a good dream sir. Here’s your Vodka Martini 🍸 shaken not stirred. I think I might have to move you from 2 olives 🫒 with your drinks to one.” Bond replies “Not unless you have lost your will to live.” Bond raises the brim on his hat 👒 slightly and downs his drink 🍸 then the credits roll.
Dont feel MI, Jason Bourne etc. are worthy to be compared to James Bond. Its own entity and always takes years to build on. The worry is for the older ppl who get to see less of it with the gaps.
Nearly every Movie Trailer got this boom boom boom nowadays..not bad...but at one point every Filmtrailer sounds the same.I think Bond can reinvent itself by mixing old with new..not to go into the extrem.
MI: DR1 basically copied the bike chase from TND (handcuffed together) and the car chase from FYEO (underpowered car vs opponents + comedic approach) and mashed them together. Also the whole final train sequence was lifted directly from uncharted 2 as well. Along with issues with exposition and honestly just a bad plot, I wouldn't hold up the current MI as a gold standard of creativity and what to take notes from.
Both sequences owe a debt to Hitchcock's 39 Steps [where a couple is handcuffed together on the run]. The train sequence was very much a homage to the 1996 original film [which was out 13 years before Uncharted 2].
If the Broccoli/Wilson duo have no further interest in making new Bond movies they should sell the rights to someone who would service much better as custodians of such legacy. Also, if said duo need new, fresh, challenges they should acquire the rights to the Dennis Wheatley novels about Gregory Sallust and turn them into TV shows. This way, we all win.
I wouldn't be surprised if they are looking for a sale but given LucasFIlms cost Disney $4.05 billion, that's the sort of figure I'd image they'd want for the studio+ bond. Given the price tag, it will be only the big studios who would buy it and given Disney milking Star Wars I do feel it's a bit like 'be careful what you wish for' [and arguably there 'custodians' in the sense of not letting Bond be milked in the same manor].
I’m concerned for the next Bond film. I just don’t believe that the producers are willing or capable of taking the character to where he’s needs to be: back to the source material.
The main problem now is the death of James Bond and the farewell of Daniel Craig. Daniel Craig made James Bond practically perfect, a perfect mix of technique, charisma, seduction and irony, Tom Cruise would never have been capable of it. Honestly I would have made more movies with Daniel Craig. To get out of the problem now, we should start again with a spin-off of a James Bond at the beginning of his career. ( my opinion ).
I am just starting to wonder. Is there some hidden financial reason why Eon might benefit from the Bond brand failing? The pace, lack of news and limp attitude towards the Bond community all are just starting to smell too deliberate to just be mistakes or 'we are taking our time over things'. If we are unlikely to get any major news, like a director, for another 6 months..I get the feeling that many 'mid-level' Bond fans will just quietly wander off. We'll probably go see the next film whenever it finally happens, but I can see a chunk of the people who are 'active' in their bond interest falling away. IF Eon doesn't seem to care, why should I? Would be a very understandable stance. When MI and other franchises can turn decent to good (to very good) films out at significantly better than twice the pace of Bond, then Bond is in deep trouble when they seem intent on displaying an almost haughty distain towards those wanting to see movement, signs of life, a hearbeat. I've long been a casual Bond fan, almost a normal British Bond fan so to speak. But, when I really don't care anymore one way or the other. Yeah. (Are Eon so inside their own bubble? Do they think that 'It's Bond, we are entitled to the support of the public/community no matter what'?)
Looking like they will kill off Ethan in the new MI ala NTTD. MI has always taken aspects / stunts from Bond films, like stunts and cars from the Brosnan bonds. MI has always been consistent and fun, can’t say the same about Craig bond films
When the time comes for a new James Bond actor to be announced it'll be huge news. The next movie will also be huge news, and will do great business and reinvigorate Bond as a franchise. Bond is after all, a British institution. No matter the direction a new Bond takes, it will be noticed by the public. Whether or not the public interest is sustained... Look, I don't think James Bond should be taking notes from Ethan Hunt. Bond has a rich and lasting legacy of its own behind it that surpasses Mission Impossible. The notes Bond producers should be taking is from its own legacy - Sean Connery, Roger Moore, Pierce Brosnan - what made them iconic Bonds? What continues to make those movies enjoyable to watch? The sense of fun and escapism those movies had that appealed to all ages, all audiences needs to return to James Bond both on the big screen and within the brand itself - the Bond brand needs to be as much at home down high streets up and down the UK as it is down Savile Row, accessible not just to those who have money, but kids and families. The Bond productions need less of the art-house, naval gazing hubris of the Craig-era and more of the accessible enjoyment kids used to have watching a Roger Moore or Pierce Brosnan Bond movie. I have no doubt that Bond will return in a new way that is different from Daniel Craig. My hope is though, that the producers who bring us a new era of Bond, aren't Broccoli or Wilson, but producers who understand the business of managing and building upon the success of a billion dollar franchise in a consistent way. James Bond shouldn't just be a movie every 4/5/6/7 years, it should be movies, books for all types and ages of readers, toys, gifts, merchandise, tie-in TV shows (bring back a brand new James Bond Jr. kids animated TV show). Actually treat Bond as a franchise and not as this exclusive members-only brand, but as a household brand that is as consistent as Star Trek, Star Wars, DC, Marvel have been.
Especially as Bond 26 is a fresh start so it should be easier to get a general audience interested [if Bond 26 was a continuation of the Craig era it probably would be harder].
You are walking about the room, yet you refuse to call out the issue. James Bond chose to move away from their core audience, much like Star Wars, much like Bud Lite, much like Jaguar, etc. Cinema, Comedy, Science, and many others work when they are based in reality, and they make logical points. When brands go political, and support political ideologies that are against free market policies this happens: societies loose their purchase power, so they are unable to sustain regular consumption; first brands to go are the ones selling ideas that are completly unappealling, in this case, a manly audience. I have the Bond 50 collection, haven't bought a thing after that - the image is tainted, either get back on the horse, or face extinction.
Sadly Barbara is determined to send it the way of Jaguar, it’s about legacy for her, that means steering it in a woke direction so she can virtue signal to her London chums. Bond needs masculinity to succeed as a character, that’s how it was written and why it’s successful, anything else is a bastardisation. To kill off Bond was an indulgence to Craig by Babs to say goodbye to him on-screen which is unforgivable.
I know they waited to see how well TRUE LIES would perform at the box office before making GOLDENEYE. With the mission impossoble films this might the same idea going on!!
The MI franchise does not identify with Bond. This is not a subject of concern. You're definitely over analysing and reading too much into it. Or have far too much time on your hands lmfao
I thinks the biggest thing current James Bond should learn from the Mission Impossible franchise is the fun aspect. The Mission Impossible films are fun and not depressing, grounded, a deconstruction etc.
I agree… only, though, if Bond gets back to seducing and bedding hot women for his country…
Thx. Exactly my point.
Yes!
They’re just two different franchise
You say it's not 'deconstruction' but the first film does that-the entire team they set up as the lead are wiped out 15 mins in and Ethan never fires a gun nor gets the girl at the end so very playing with spy tropes. MI6+7 have there 'down' moments with characters being killed off.
I feel like Cruise cares more about Ethan Hunt than Craig did about Bond. The Bond films need to get back to having fun and being escapist entertainment again.
Craig didn't care about Bond, so neither did I.
He made Bond unlikeable.
@@astrosquirrel5038 thats why he pushed killing the character off. Seems like he and eon dont like bond much.
@@sandersson2813Very unfair about Craig, I watched Die Another Day last night and it's rightfully seen as stupid, certainly fun in places but it definitely needed a more serious grounded film, Casino Royal was perfect. QOS was a bit crap but Craig was the best thing in it. Skyfall was excellent and a lot of fun, Spectre was the most traditional bond film he did no deep emotions and wasn't the best No time to die still not made my mind up about it but Craig was the best thing in it still. do need another course correction now, I'd like to see something closer to Brosnan in Goldeneye.
@flemit35 Craig's Bond is charmless, personality free, humourless, surly, miserable, ugly, short, wooden and worst of all unlikeable.
QOS, Spectre and NTTD are so bad I can't think of a single redeeming thing about any of them they are that forgettable.
@@Cartier777I didn't see people making out Marvel+ Robert Downey Jr hated Iron man when he was killed off, nor Hugh Jackman when he killed Logan off [of course he brought him back]. He's said the whole point of that ending was to make it easier to do a reboot going forward and wipe the slate clean for the new actor [and there were never going to just re-cast with the same continuity anyway].
Cubby Brocolli actually cared about Bond. Barbara does not. It is a burden for her. Daniel Craig hated being Bond.
Tom Cruise cares about Ethan Hunt and the audience!!
💯
Amen
You are aware that Barbara has worked on Bond since Octopussy in 1983 so for 40+ years or most of her life. Honestly the idea she 'doesn't care' doesn't add up frankly [and the last film Cubby was actively involved in was 35 years ago so comparing his era to now is a bit 'apples and oranges']. In fact the average Mission Impossible gap between films is around 4-5 years which is more like Bond recently.
I'm not talking about the past. I'm talking about recent years. Spectre and No Time to Die. I agree about the gaps between films. Quality wise, Mission impossible is getting it right.
@@evolvelectriclightseeker5260 Both those films had troubled shoots so no wonder there not rushing into another one [and I'd be surprised if we get another MI film after this one for a while after this one given the very messy+ expensive production and Cruise's likely departure].
I like the fact that Tom Cruise cares about his role Mission Impossible, a lot of the actors in James Bond films sometimes don't really care about the role after they're done which is sad to hear
Craig and Connery became contemptuous of the role. I love that Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan relished it.
@@williamcoolidge9884 But Roger and Pierce have there fair share of negative comments about making Bond if you look for them [particularly re-View to a Kill for Roger and TND+ DAD for Pierce].
I think that Dalton cared immensely about the role. Moore saw it for what he wanted it to be, Lazenby wanted it as a meal ticket / ego boost, Pierce had it taken from him….
In fairness MI is Cruise's series-he calls all the shots. In most Bond's cases, they've got the rest of there career to get on with [Roger was happy to do tie in shows after he stepped down but his career was winding down as he focused on charity work]. Dalton has been happy to talk about the series in documentaries but I doubt he'd be willing to host TV specials like Roger was.
I hope Barbara & Michael are watching the trailer and taking notes. Because Cruise & Co are clearly doing something right.🍸
They are taking notes but not from us their notes come from UN social programmes
They're totally oblivious 🇬🇧
Babs and Mike no longer give a crap.
They seem to have to stopped taking notes a long time ago.
They only produce Bond films so they're in their own little isolated silo. At least Saltzman and Cubby produced other non-Bond films back in the 60s so they were in step in Hollywood and larger entertainment trends. Imagine Barbara and Michael trying to produce a non-Bond film now. I don't think they'd know how to.
James Bond NEEDS, absolutely NEEDS to go back to the formula that worked from Sean to Pierce. No gritty crap, just a caper, with fun dialogue. Here's the formula:
Start with a big pre credit sequence.
Epic credits with a great track from current artist.
Meeting with M & Q.
Gadgets, lots of them.
A gadget loaded car.
A memorable, charismatic villain.
A henchman with a novel personal ability.
Women.
A plot that's larger than life.
A climax in a unique lair.
Given MI7 was criticized for being too close to MI6 in it's plot people are more aware of repetition now. A lot of reviews of the later Brosnan films said that the formula was getting tired after 19/20 films of doing similar things so going back to it 20+ years later is a bit of a stretch as it was retired for a reason [and the Bond actor will want character stuff to work with]. If they could do a new spin on it, that might be interesting.
Appreciate your thoughts as always but I think it’s a stretch to suggest the glacial pace of Eon is anything other than a negative. A two or three year cadence, as well as providing us with great entertainment, takes the pressure off to a certain extent and allows the filmmakers to be braver, knowing they don’t have to hit every single point each time (which I think NTTD’s bloatedness can largely be attributed to). We could have had Boyle’s Bond, and it may have been a bit of a departure - so what? That’s the Bond way. We got OHMSS because of that, and LALD. Our fandom is built on that cadence and all the personal preferences that go with it. We would by now have seen the follow up to Boyle’s Bond and be looking forward to the next, and they would all have slightly different interpretations, some of which I would love more than you and vice versa.
You frequently talk about how seminally important your ‘first Bond movie’ experience is. I agree. No movie for 5/6-plus years? A generation potentially misses that moment. TLD was mine because it caught me at just the right age. A five year gap after AVTAK and it may have passed me by altogether.
Here’s a thought experiment- you love QOS, and I do too - no way that movie ends up being the way it is with a five year gap after Casino Royale.
Ethan Hunt is a far less interesting character than Bond with less global appeal and, all things being equal, Bond will always out gross a MI film. All the more reason why Eon’s approach is so baffling.
Mission Impossible has massive gaps between films. It's only the last two that had two years between them. There was a five year gap between Fallout and Dead Reckoning
@ indeed, and it had a fairly disappointing box office return when it eventually did come out. The enduring appeal of the Bond series for me hangs on the regular cadence of releases. How many of us have mentally ranked the series, or decided to watch through them all again even though we have watched them maybe dozens of times? There is nothing else like it in western cinema and I can’t fathom why Eon isn’t interested in keeping it going.
@@dcwarden My view is the regular cadence was easier when blockbuster filmmaking wasn't so difficult and technological as it is today, and when there wasn't as much competition. In the 60s, they were working with Fleming's source material, which apart for some changes, is quite book accurate until You Only Live Twice. Today, there is so much competition and all that competition takes its time between instalments. The MCU is the same, because it's a universe made up of franchises : Cap America, Iron Man, etc and the distance between each new instalment is about as long as a Bond film, etc. It's just how Hollywood does it now.
Boyle has said his Bond film also ended with Bond's death [and he did like how NTTD did it] so there wouldn't have been a direct follow up. If they had got Bond 25 out in 2019 before Covid we might have seen a new film/reboot by now 5 years later but I always thought there was going to be a big gap. Honestly QOS would have been better coming 3+ years after Spectre so they could have sorted out the script [Sam Mendes has said that he wished Spectre has an extra year at least in development time].
But when they were making Bond films every two years they were sticking to a fairly ridged formula- because that was dropped for the Craig films they were able to try new things. In contrast [by accident or design] MI would have a different director each time so it would feel different [MI96+ MI2 feel nothing alike] but the last few have the same director/writer so do feel more formulaic [with MI7 getting some flack for having a similar structure to Fallout with many illusions/links to the 1996 film].
Mission Impossible has never tried to be anything more than a TV show on the big screen. Ethan Hunt does have a sense of humor.
I don't think Ethan Hunt has a sense of humour at all. I see him as a bland Bond clone
Simon Pegg is there for the humour. Ethan takes himself fairly seriously. There is a bit in 'Fallout' where Ethan tries a Bond one liner when dropping payload onto a helicopter ['Hold this for me, will ya!'] but he misses his target!
@@jamesatkinsonja Yeah he's Q basically.
Uhhhh Craig's Bond does have a sense of humour. Are Bond fans so dumb that they don't know what deadpan humour is?
@@callummoore6962 Agreed, there is humour there, it doesn't have to be via innuendoes or sight gags and I would class the humour is MI as also pretty deadpan.
Ghost Protocol is my favorite of the series. Perfect mix of globe trotting, humor and amazing set pieces. Rogue Nation very much feels like a Bond film with its structure. My only gripe is that Ethan always has to go Rogue and never has support from the IMF (except for MI2)
He doesn't go rouge in 'Fallout' which is a plot point as because he's gone rouge so many times the bad guys try to frame him as a traitor! I've noticed that the agents chasing him in MI7 seem to be working with him in the trailer for MI8 so maybe that element has been dropped.
I think the Mission Impossible series started out in a particular way, more serious, less fun and then from 3 on you can see the influence of the Bond movies take over. Lets make great, fun, popcorn movies. I hope things might come full circle with the next run of Bond movies and they go back to what made them great. A mix of fun, action, comedy, drama, action, glamour. It was all there on the screen in a 2 hour package. Looking forward to starting fresh but worried that Eon are totally out of ideas.
I agree. Dead Reckoning Part One was the most Bondian film of the franchise.
Bring back Die Another Day, Halle Berry, and Ice settings. If Halle Berry is good enough for Wick, bring her back!
@@1utube01Each to there own but no thank you given I think DAD's aged like milk! [Like MI2 being very 2000]. For me Berry was far better in her stretch in John Wick than anything she did in Die Another Day.
@@jamesatkinsonjaAll of Brosnan’s films have aged like milk.
As far as a new bond film idea. I think it would be cool to for a throwback in time, to the era that bond was meant to be in. Like set right after the movie The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare. I think that would be a cool change and add a bit of newness to the brand, by going back in time.
It's a nice idea but given Ministry ended up being dumped on Prime in most territories I don't know if there is a market for it with a general audience. If anything I could image a 50's/60's Bond would be fairly low scale [and probably fairly serious like the novels] to keep the budget down given how expensive period filming is.
would make a good TV series I feel rather then film. however I prefer films and I can't see them wanting to have two versions of Bond at the same time.
Get back to basics. Most Bond books and films have him investigating a suspicious occurrence in a British territory. Over the course of his investigation. He uncovers a dastardly plot and some great action scenes occur. Keep things simple.
Bond was screwed when Bourne blew it out of the water.
one of the worse bond films is QOS which is basically a Bourne film in style. Bond films do seem to chase other films a bit. Q0S was a Bourne film, Skyfall obviously looked to the Dark Knight, Spectre felt more Bond like to me but no guarntee to success
I hope that the next Mission Impossible film is a huge hit, as its success is critical to the future of Bond as we know it, by demonstrating that there is still a market for the blockbuster release in theatres. If it doesn't do well financially, then we're more likely to get a Bond series or similar on Amazon Prime, and less likely to get a film.
David,
Well said. I especially like your point that EON seems to spend less time focusing on the entertainment aspect of their thrillers. The MI series clearly wants to accomplish one thing: Excite the audience.
Perhaps EON thinks their audience is looking for more thoughtful, art house aspects to Bond. In a world where a pandemics 0:02 , war, and political unrest capture headlines, my vote is toward pure entertainment in the style of the MI movies and the Raiders films. Just sayin.’
Having fun, and excitement. Craig era was too brooding for me. Skyfall I enjoy frequently, but that’s more Silva, Bardem bringing gravitas. As great as Casino is, I just can’t sit down and watch it repeatedly. ( now, Casino is in my top 5, yes, I just don’t sit down with it much)I love great villains, great henchmen, fun gadgets, Bond being witty, with quips. We have watched Majesties ten times already past few weeks. The film, brings us such great joy, fun, excitement. I miss that from Craig’s era. Mission Impossible is just exciting. But I prefer Bond to MI. I hated the Bourne films, hated the camera, etc about them.
But I love your takes on Bond David. And Calvin’s. Love when you and Calvin get together. You guys give us something enjoyable today in this world. I really miss Joe Darlington and Scott’s Bond reviews. 😻
Casino sucks. So overrated and boring. Eva Green bored me as well 😂
I agree. When I watch Bond movies with my family, we always watch the old Bonds with Sean Connery, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton and Pierce Brosnan and not to forget George Lazenby. Always excited even we know the outcome and what's happened. But Craig Bonds? Not so much. Casino Royal was ok. Skyfall sometimes but the others? Boring, not Bond like, not excitement and fun at all. My feeling is, Graig killed Bond. Not only at NTTD.
I felt Vesper was great. Green did a great job. But like Casino, the train scene is riveting, Bond does emotion in shower scene. Love the actual casino scenes. But opening parkour felt to Bourne, MI. But in Bond films I look forward to Bond and Villian going at it. Le cheif had a great scene with Bond tied to chair, whacking him. But then WTH, White takes him out. It just left me wanting more.
But They had Green in incredible dresses mostly. When Bond has to :ski down the Mt, from Blofeld and his men; a lot on one ski; then choking a guy with ski, to not give himself away; getting all the way down to village; then have to evade Bunt and her men; going into a room full of bells, giving himself away; try and hide in crowds. Then Tracy skates up in a skate outfit, and glows so beautifully, I’m stunned, everytime. In the barn Bond shuts doors turns, Tracy whisks her hair, she glows. Not the most glamorous outfit, yet she glows. Same as Solitaire walking out airport, just everyday clothes, and she radiates.
I unabashedly love CR, QoS is an ok action film, Skyfall is good but doesn’t feel like a Bond film to me. Spectre and NTTD are abominations. Bond is not a broody, emotional, metrosexual who wears high fashion clothes. To me, the Bond franchise ended with License to Kill. In Goldeneye, you start seeing the modern politics rearing its ugly head. Bond is insulted by M, lectured on gender rights by Moneypenney. I’m sick of Bond being disrespected by his superiors in the newer films. He’s one of the top agents in the government, if they didn’t trust him, he wouldn’t have a license to kill.
@@JRRob3wnBut in Mission Impossible Ethan is constantly going rouge and being suspected by his own side, even from the beginning. And Bond + Bernard Lee/Robert Brown do not have the easiest relationship [see the confrontation scene in LTK for example]. Frankly Bond just going 'yes sir' to his boss and M being friendly to him would be very boring.
I completely agree, David. In many ways, we have something that is similar in its underlying concept as a film series and is a franchise many Bond fans will enjoy. Using this as something to not only fill in the gaps between any new Bond films, but also to fuel our energy and excitement for the next 007 film seems the only logical way.
Now it´s time to hire Christopher Mcquarrie!!!!
Would be tough. He is signed to do a world war 2 movie with Tom Cruise next year called Broadsword. Tom Cruise also has another movie with another director about the most powerful man in the universe thinking he is earths savior.
@@FlyingTaco95 Yeah he's very loyal to Cruise. He pretty much makes up the MI films as he goes along which might not be something Eon [or most studios] would be keen on [and given the mess the production of MI7+8 has been I can understand why even if the results justify it].
If there no MI film for 3 years would there be the same online noise demanding to know when it is coming??
Yes, especially considering the momentum Tom Cruise has with Top Gun Maverick
I doubt it given the typical gap for MI films is about 5 years [such as 6 between MI2+ 3].
I believe it will be 2027 before the Bond franchise returns to cinemas. I have heard the majority of fans believe Bond should return to the 1960s and the Cold War. Some fans have said Pierce Brosnan should return as an older Bond set in contemporary times.
I watched 'Black Adam' the other day and sadly time has caught up with Pierce-his voice had certainly aged and most of the action scenes was with CGI. Bringing him back as Bond in his 70's wouldn't work [and given so much time has passed they wouldn't be anything like his earlier films] although he's shown no interest in it [instead backing other actors like Cillian Murphy]. Sadly were in a new cold war so they wouldn't have to go period to cover it...
You're right. At this rate, James Bond may not mean anything to the next generation Bond. They wouldn't know the Craig Bond or any of the other Bond actors that came before. Also, the fact that they killed off Bond in No Time to Die indicates to me that they were at the time disinclined to do another Bond film.
I really don't buy that given this year we've had successful films in the Planet of the Apes [started in 1968] and Alien [started 1979] series which both have big gaps. Gladiator II has just arrived 24 years after the first and has opened strongly and Top Gun Maverick turning up 36 years after the original didn't do that any harm! And NTTD was only 3 years ago. Honestly Bond 26 being a reboot should make it a lot easier for it to pick up a new audience and it's more going to be down to the quality of Bond 26 if anything.
Dune Part 2 was a big hit this year when I doubt that was a property many young people cared about before part 1 came out. But not only did they make two really good movies but they made sure there was a lot of younger actors involved and they were heavily in the promotion so it can be done.
I do find it a bit curious when people say Craig having a lot of creative control on Bond 'shouldn't have happened' and the long breaks show a lack of passion when Cruise calls all the shots on Mission Impossible since the beginning-choosing the director, cast etc. [on the first two installments him and his then business partner Paula Wagner are the sole producers in the 'Cubby' mould] and until Fallout the typical gap between MI films was 4-5 years [and MI8 is only coming out 2 years after MI7 as they were partly filmed back to back]. Craig also did a lot of his own stunts, injuring himself on pretty much all his Bond and MI is very difficult to make [Jeremy Renner+ Rebecca Ferguson has said they left the series as they were losing other work due to how long production takes, Thandiwe Newton doesn't have much nice things to say about MI2 and Cruise had a blow up over Covid protocols on MI7] while the delays on MI7+8 [originally due to come out 2021+22] show like Bond it's not easy. It's also interesting that Cruise hasn't actually had even an onscreen kiss since MI3 despite having love interests while Bond still gets some bedroom action!
Thanks so much for helping keep Bond alive David. EON needs to get you on their payroll
Sorry David a little of topic, but any chance of your home theatre set up? Just love to see how you watch your James Bond movies. Cheers :)
Given all indications [including the title!] that this is the final Mission Impossible film with Cruise [before the inevitable re-boot in a few years time] it will be interesting how it wraps up Ethan's story. Given Cruise is now in his 60's it seems a good time to bow out. Bond is certainly the series that gets greater box office and awards recognition.
Fan of both!
I believe MI has pushed Bond to up its game, and I think we had the Daniel Craig Bond as a result.
MI will presumably end as Tom Cruise ages. He’s been very very impressive, does most of his own stunts etc, but Bond will continue…
I totally agree. I was invited by a cinema owner to see a preview of GoldenEye. Before then, he was really dismissive: "Bond is dead," etc. This was just after True Lies. There was no way it could beat that, etc. We had the Brosnan era and the dam jump. The rest is history. I love the Mission Impossible series. Bond is a different beast. Bond will be back better than ever because.. It's Bond!
Two new M:I movies while James Bond remains a half-forgotten smoldering pile of ashes.
Love that jacket! What brand is it?
Just what I was wondering too!
If you became a Bond fan in 2016, you will have had one new movie released over a 10 year span (at least 10). Ridiculous. Broccoli and Wilson need to pass the baton and exit stage left. They are not up to overseeing the franchise anymore.
All they care about is milking Daniel Craig.. it’s like beating a dead horse at this point
I see people upset that it takes so long for a Bond film to be released, pointing to Mission Impossible getting their act together and making films on regular basis. But that isn't true. Only the last two have had a gap of two years between them. Most of the others have had massive gaps between them. Four years between the first and second. Six years between two and three and five years between three and Ghost Protocol. And four years between Ghost Protocol and Rogue Nation, And there was a five year hiatus between Fallout and Dead Reckoning. Blockbusters are far more complex to make now. And EON is "reinventing" Bond, which loads of you hate, but it's happening unless Broccoli suddenly retracts her recent comments. So that will also take time. I'm sorry folks but you won't be getting a return to Goldeneye days.
To put this in perspective there have been 8 M:I films from 1996 to 2024. in comparison, there has been nine Bond films between 1995 and 2021. Bond has one more film in a period that is four years shorter than the M:I series.
Very good points. I do think 'reinvention' so something people are trying to turn it into something it's not regarding culture war nonsense when she means the property will need rebooting as the main actor has changed [Dalton was hardly a continuation of Moore in tone for example]. Cruise stays on but the MI franchise 'reinvented' itself after MI2 as Ethan goes from being a Bond-esq playboy to getting married. Certainly I agree there won't be a 'return to Goldeneye days', especially as that film is 30 years old next year.
@@jamesatkinsonja We'll certainly find out what Babs means by "reinvention" soon enough. Though she has dropped hints. She says s to continue exploring Bond's psyce, wants another five-film arc, and recently said they're making some "brave changes". The last comments suggests the changes will be more drastic than before, including "whiteness [of bond] not being a given."
@@danielscott8180 Certainly you can't have bond as a cardboard character anymore [Calvin Dyson's excellent 'Emotional storytelling' video rightly said you need to give the actor something to work with] and MI has gone the 'story arc' root itself so for me that was a given. The rest no one can judge until the film is out.
@@jamesatkinsonja Exactly. Craig humanised Bond more than any other Bond. You can't revert back to a cardboard cutout with not character arc. It just cannot be reversed, at least without feeling like something has been lost.
Cool jacket
Tom Cruise cares about his audience that's the difference between mission impossible movies and the James Bond movies and I hope to God this isn't the last mission impossible with Tom Cruise 🎰 and even when they get a new actor to play James Bond it's hard to be excited about it like you said whoever they get to play James Bond the actor is not going to be Tom Cruise or Sean Connery 🎲
Nice suede jacket David. NPeal or Sunspel ?
I've said for so long now that im convinced the Bond team have been waiting for MI to end before rebooting Bond. Which if you think about it, should have been 2 or 3 years ago, but dead reckoning was delayed for a year if not two by covid, the latest one should have been released in May ' 24 but is coming out one year later than planned because of the strikes.
It means the Mission impossible movies are better than the Bond movies now
Wow David, you're getting a lot of naysaying comments here. Yikes. I love the Mission Impossible series and of course, 007 and you know, and I know, James Bond will return! What a great day that will be!! Can't wait to see the new MI: Final Reckoning adventure. You can love them both. Just like I love all the actors who've played Bond. They are like my children. I love them all. I play no favorites. They all bring me joy. Cheers!
@@waltppk Bond, MI, Bourne, FF, Wick, they are all fun franchises and enjoyable for me.
Except that in James Bond the plot is turned towards James Bond and in mission impossible the plot is turned towards Tom Cruise so that's the big différence
David, did you see that the BBC channel will be playing Bond films all day on Thanksgiving day. Good to record them.
Pluto tv has the bond films streaming right now for free. I’ve been watching them at work
John Wick should be as great an influence on future Bond as MI.
Certainly that 'one take' action scene at the end of NTTD owed a debt to Wick [although that series is going the 'spin off' route to keep going].
I think Bond needs to go back to being fun and focus on intrigue, style, character, and imagination. These other franchises like M:I and John Wick just do jaw-dropping action and gritty realism much better with two madmen at the helm. The competitive advantage of Bond is a fantasy and lifestyle aspect that the others don’t have. Casino Royale is my second favorite Bond movie but I knew something would be not quite right with the Craig era when Vesper observed that Bond wears his suit “with disdain”.
The Mission Impossible films have gone from strength to strength since the 3rd film. Eon need to take notice.
I enjoy both series. However, the James Bond films make more money than the Mission: Impossible series. NTTD made more money than M:I VII. I do hope M:I VIII is a huge success b/c Cruise and company really have done a great job with the franchise.
Given MI7 underperformed [and certainly wasn't considered as good as Fallout] I hope they end on a high.
Comparison will be valid when M:I gets to 60 years 32 years and 17 more movies from now
@thebondexperience the Mission Impossible movies often wink at 007 Movies. Notice how Solomon Lane resembles Mr. White, coming back for a 2nd movie, worn out, tired, in identical styling. Notice how MI6 has become part of the MI saga with Ilsa and Atlee. Notice the Blenheim Palace been used in Rogue Nation, AFTER Spectre used it. And that one has a super super Easter Egg: A silver Aston Martin DB5 parked outside the palace just before MIF enters. Even if it was a coincidence, no one noticed? 😅
Ethan Hunt is a characterless cypher, a glorified stunt man - Bond has depth, cultural longevity, and sophistication. Men fantasize about being Bond; few do so with Hunt.
What was the saying? Something like Women want to be with Bond and Men want to be Bond.
Everyone saying Bond films should be escapist fun again complained about Die Another Day, and fun invisible cars. Make up your minds! 😂
There’s a difference between fun and silly and incoherent. DAD was the latter and even worse was a slog to watch. I almost walked out of the theater.
Mission impossible experience!? 😊
Very solid synopsis on the mission impossible series and the comparisons to james bond 👏 👍
Anyone saying the Bond films need to be "fun" like the Mission: Impossible films really haven't been paying attention or tribute to the series. They're just as dark and deconstructive as the Craig films. Also, for everyone saying that Craig doesn't care about Bond while Cruise cares about Hunt, yes, but maybe it because Craig is just another actor playing a long running character while Hunt lives and dies with Cruise yknow. I swear at this rate the Bond series just needs to be put to rest
This film has been in production for over 2 years
Its pretty much a hold over from the COVID-19 era. I believe 7&8 were originally filmed back to back, until it was decided to focus on 7.
They were shooting two huge movies back to back.
Over 2 years ago during cinema con Tom was on the plane said he was filming mission 8 for the trailer of dead reckoning and a screening of top gun maverick
@@Dohsoda The plan was for the films to come out in 2021+22 but it's been a very troubled shoot [as well as Covid you had the strikes last year] and far increased the budget-they certainly bit off more than they could chew [John Wick was going to do two films back to back before sensibly cutting it to one at the same time] and a factor why this will be the final entry with Cruise as the lead [hence the title].
Some inconvenient truths for Brosnan Bond fans. The M:I series outperformed all of Brosnan's Bonds, but Craig's Bond films (as a whole) outperformed the M:I series. (In comparing Brosnan's films to the M:I series, I'm referring only to the first three M:I films which were made around the same time as Brosnan's Bonds to be fair) Ironically, M:I 2 when adjusted for inflation just outdoes Casino Royale and smashes Quantum of Solace. And Fallout just beats NTTD, but not even close to Skyfall or SPECTRE. NTTD was the first film in theatres after the pandemic, so that has to be taken into consideration. It did rather well considering. But Craig's films by and large smash M:I at the box office. So copying M:I may not be the way forward for Bond. I mean, M:I is already copying Bond, anyway.
Good points. I certainly think MI2's success was something DAD was trying to emulate [to the extent MGM tried to get John Woo to direct it] but both haven't aged particularly well and the follow ups feel like 'Course correction' .
@@jamesatkinsonja John Woo was certainly a favourite director around that time with his slo-mo, exaggerated camera movements and gun-fu action sequences.
I think James Bond could benefit from a TV series, a mix of the Gentleman and 24.
What TV are u still watching😂
There was a plan for an MI TV series for Paramount Plus but it was vetoed by Cruise.
Mission Impossible and Bond co-existing? Right now only Mission Impossible exists...Eon is really letting fans down with no new film.
MI won't be around for long as this is the last entry of the series [hence the title 'Final reckoning'].
@@jamesatkinsonjaI’m sure that they will continue making Mission: Impossible films with or without Tom Cruise.
Question is will the next Mission Impossible film come out before the next 007 film?
Possible there also will take a look to The Amateur (from Disney Fox) with Raimi Malek in Bourne style movie. Holt McCallany also is seen in that movie who also playing in Mi8 and Laurence Fishburne who was seen in Mi3.
Actually the Mission films are not that consistent if you consider there have only been 8 films in 29 years. Bond has 9 films in the same time frame. So Bond is doing well.
25 films dude😊
@@yestoadventure007 not with a 4-5 year layoff between films. EON is not doing well with 007 franchise
I’m just worried that the first aid satchel behind you has a bomb or opium in it!
I think you’re wrong! Cubby Broccoli would have never allowed an actor to get so much control of one of his movies. Cubby was in control all the time. Sadly Barbara doesn’t have the guts and the willing to entertain people. We will be happy if she could sell the rights to someone like her father.
She'd probably hit back that NTTD made $200 million more than Dead Reckoning! Also the most realistic option if Eon sell up would be to a big corporation like Disney that would just see it as a product. Cruise calls the shots on everything in MI as does most big franchises now a days [like Ryan Reynolds with Deadpool] and Cubby would have had to move with the times if he was still around [Pierce was certainly not an 'actor for hire' and was keen to make his opinions known on Bond as he was an experienced producer outside the series].
@@jamesatkinsonjaNTTD made a lot of money, but like the Last Jedi, it burned up a lot of good will. If they don’t get this next film right, I’m not sure that the franchise has much gas left in it. Her talk of being very interested in gender or race swapping the character does not bode well.
@@JRRob3wn I really don't think NTTD will have much relevance on Bond 26 given it's a fresh start and more than likely a whole new cast and crew. Die Another Day really didn't affect Casino Royale's success because the films have virtually no connection [especially with general audience].
@@JRRob3wn She's repeatedly said that Bond will remain male and she has no interest in gender swapping the character and it's prudent to cast the net wide in casting [it really doesn't bother me personally but more than likely it will be a white actor].
The only people who could afford to buy Eon/Bond are big companies like Amazon or Disney [so not people like Cubby] who'll just see it as a product to milk into the ground. I don't think producers like Cubby are really around anymore to be honest.
The MI franchise is a hard working franchise. The Bond franchise is the laziest franchise in the world.
To be honest it does mean much to Bond given as the title suggests, this is the final MI film with Cruise as the lead. I'm sure they'll be a reboot eventually but replacing Cruise in front+ behind the camera is a huge ask as he's very tied to the brand [he vetoed a MI tv show for paramount plus and I suspect Skydance's 'Heart of Stone' might well have started life as an Ilsa Faust spin off]. Bourne was the big Bond rival in the 2000's but the 2010's output wasn't as well received [there is meant to be an new installment coming but I'm dubious how well it will do]. The first Kingsman film was pretty popular but that franchise seems to have died a death [with 20th Century saying they have no plans to continue it].
Totally wish Barbara Broccoli would move on and let a producer that loved the James Bond genre take over. NTTD proved Barbara is played out and needs to retire!
But what producer fits that description? Christopher Nolan isn't going to buy the Bond rights [nor I suspect would he be interested in doing more than a couple of films before moving on]. The only people who could possibly afford Bond is big companies like Disney and I'm worried if they buy it whoever is put in charge will just see it as a job to churn things out quickly to make the money back regardless of quality.
Craig killed Bond and that was his Mission from the start, Craig is egotistical and got too big for his boots as it came to the end or his tenure. There is no appetite from those holding the Bond franchise for it to continue certainly not in the next 5 years. Craig put the franchise in a corner from which it cannot find away out. My guess is that if they do come up with something it will be going back because they cannot go forward with the name BOND, he's dead, the best they can do is continue the 007 agent franchise as the number passes from one agent to another.
Tom Cruise knows better and won't kill off Ethan Hunt!
What was interesting is that question was posed to Cruse and the cast on Fallout and while the actors [Cruise+ Rebecca Ferguson] straight away said 'No', director+ writer Christopher McQ and Simon Pegg [who's written scripts away from MI] thought the idea had merit. Given it's been established that Ethan can't stay away from the action [as the character retired after MI3 but quickly returned] I am curious how they end his saga.
Or if they do, then he goes out a badass saving the day, like literally the last moment of his life is doing the thing that "saves the world". NOT limping up a ladder and standing on a roof going through some kind of cinematic "soap opera goodbye scene".
Simon pegg said cruise is very hands on with the movies but wouldn't expand on if this last ones the end or just a way of getting the fans excited for the next movie that's out next year. Growing up bond was a highlight of going to the movies the last film was not my bond I liked skyfall thay could go back to his childhood if thay did a reboot but until that stop going woke I can't see anything happening untill thay find a new guy to step into the bond shoes
@@nothingtoseehere2336 But Bond does save the world as he makes sure that the site is destroyed and the nanobots will never harm anyone.
They are doing the next guy a favor by taking this long.
I feel Brosnan and Craig were helped by Bond being away for a bit before there first outing [so people were in the mood for a change] while Dalton coming only 2 years after Moore finished did him no favours.
Well no time to die made more money the last mission impossible film
That is true. A lot of people just do not like Tom Cruise. I'm not one of them but unfortunately for him that's the case.
@@sinjinadams2862 paramount realised the film at the wrong time
@sinjinadams2862 What are you talking about ? maverick made 1 billion easily, mission impossible doesn't make 1 billion or earn more than bond because they don't offer anything new, unlike bond who provide something fresh each time. Ethan hunt is a boring character, while maverick & bond isn't.
@gauravtributes5023 Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Tom Cruise is the man! The fact that he does all his own stunts really adds to his appeal to me. It makes the movies much more realistic, authentic and exciting. Bond films on the other hand are a snooze fest. Boring!
@sinjinadams2862 You can disagree all you want, but bond is still earning more than any MI film.
Tom Cruise learn to perform stunts from professional stuntman, Stunts in James bond films are performed by professional stuntman. I will take master performing fantastic stunts than students like Tom cruise performing avarage stunts. What bond does today, cruise does tomorrow.
Ethan Hunt is a boring character, while Maverick and bond are fantastic character.
Mission Impossible has been fantastic the last few movies but goodness me it has cost a shed full of $$$ with disappointing financial returns in respect of the last movie. I hope from reading Barbara Broccoli's comments last week that there is a 3-4 film arc for a decade in respect of the next Bond.
Flashing back to 2015, Spectre vs MI: Rogue Nation. I was so disappointed in Spectre and spent years wondering why I wasn't as entertained as Rogue Nation.
I mean maybe, but have people forgotten that Dead Reckoning UNDERPERFORMED last year at the box office, right?
I know a lot liked it, but personally found the film overall to be rather mediocre and most people who I talk to who have seen it call it a very "in one ear and out the other" mentality to it. Like talk about a step down from "Fallout", a film where I actually care for the character writing, therefore giving weight to the action and substance the film is trying to tackle. "Dead Reckoning" has a similar issue that most modern blockbusters have: it feels like a superhero film....therefore feeling rather sanitized and bland within the current media landscape.
I don’t watch trailers for movies, especially if it’s something like Mission Impossible, but I think Bond movies should not try to emulate those. It needs to bring back grounded action, fun but serious spy intrigue.
Basically, instead of trying to mimic a current hot trend, it’s time to be its own type of Bond that feels different than current action/spy films.
I liked Daniel Craig. I really enjoyed the harder style action he offered. However, his mindset for NTTD and how he talked about not wanting to do another movie, then there happened NTTD.
Also, the ending was ridiculous if youre wanting to continue the franchise forward. However, the ending can bring a good revamp to the franchise as well.
Its been too long, that's becoming the issue.
Amazon announced a "Jack Ryan" movie. The Bond franchise is going backwards.
The problem with EON productions is the timing of their productions. The mission impossible films are coming out every 3 to 4 years. People get impatient.
MI used to come out every 4-5 years [6 between 2+ 3] and there was a 5 year gap between Fallout+ Dead Reckoning so big gaps are actually pretty common in that series.
Bond has always been the classic spectacle and stunt source for the MI films. Bond potentially dying and having a family is the critical story opportunity or obstacle for writing into the next movie. Bond tracks back through a deep GB Military Culture which MI Ethan Hunt misses. ⚓💂
I think Tom above all else cares about movies and the experience of theatre presentations. We all saw how he kept production safely moving through COVID. I don't think it's an exaggeration that he saved the movie experience... Or at least kept it alive. We need theatre presentations and we need Bond to be theatre presentations
One of my local cinemas shut down just before I watched 'Deadpool & Wolverine' with a packed crowd which was a good reminder why I want cinema to be preserved.
Tom Cruise has said he wanted to keep making MI movies into his 70s. With him being in them.
He did say that before MI7 underperformed. It being retitled 'the final reckoning' suggests this is his last outing [as does him signing up with Warner Bros going forward]. There was an idea to make him the 'M' figure from MI5 onwards but he wasn't keen.
@jamesatkinsonja Cruise has been making several movies with Warner Bros and his contract is not exclusive. I don't think he'll give up on the MI franchise. There's this thing called Ego and it's pretty strong with him. Will have to wait and see.
@@chronocommander007 True- MI Ghost Protocol was going to hand the series to Jeremy Renner but Cruise kept control. Given Dead Reckoning underperformed I can see him being pushed out but we'll have to see what goes down in the film- maybe it is time for him to take the 'M' role going forward? [I always felt Ilsa was the character for him to hand over too given her popularity with fans but it wasn't to be...].
I love them both. But I don't compare them. I can enjoy them completely separate. My family will watch Mission Impossible, they don't watch Bond movies with me. I think MI is more for the masses, Bond has a more narrow field of fans
James Bond now is for a nitch older audience.
If MI is for the masses, then how exactly bond is still earning more money than MI ? 🤔
@@gauravtributes5023Maybe the smaller, older niche audience is seeing the Bond movies multiple times per person?
@@caza728 Wouldn't same logic apply to all other films ? 🤔
@@gauravtributes5023Exactly. The idea Bond is for a 'niche' audience really doesn't hold water for the films. The novels etc are more niche but that's true with 'expanded universe' stuff in general [I don't think the people who watch MCU films will have read all the comics].
Dead Reckoning was an amazing movie.
I enjoy both franchise's but you have to sit back and admire Tom Cruise's longevity.
Ive just started the MI films & frankly they are better than the last 2 Bond films in action & fun. Also after watching Fallout could see Cavill as Bond now.
Certainly Fallout gives you an idea what him playing a darker Bond would be like and it shows he has more range than the 'Moore/Brosnan' esq Bond he's pigeon holed as.
Casino Royal was so good, and maybe the key is having someone who is not actually a bond fan and thinks how he can be creative and make the character more in depth , the fan might get locked into what the status quo of bond versus expanding the character
Ethan Hunt is the point man for his team on the mission. Whereas James Bond is a solo operator in his own globalised geopolitical GTA like adventure.
I believe with Bond they need to reset him before the new actor takes over and drives that meat suit forward. I think 🤔 there is no good way to do this, because they killed Bond off. So all you can do is go with the best of the bad ideas. The best one is probably going to be easiest to shoot too. So here it is.
Bond is lounging on a beach deck chair watching a beautiful woman playing with her daughter in the water. Bond hears a voice calling him “Mr Bond, Mr Bond!” Bond startles and wakes up to see a waiter holding his drink 🍸 on a tray. “Oh Mr Bond. Are you ok?” Bond replies “I fell asleep here in the sun and dreamt I was on an Island and got blown up.” The waiter says “That’s not a good dream sir. Here’s your Vodka Martini 🍸 shaken not stirred. I think I might have to move you from 2 olives 🫒 with your drinks to one.”
Bond replies “Not unless you have lost your will to live.” Bond raises the brim on his hat 👒 slightly and downs his drink 🍸 then the credits roll.
I really enjoyed Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part 1. Best Mission: Impossible movie in years.
Fallout was much better in my opinion.
Dont feel MI, Jason Bourne etc. are worthy to be compared to James Bond. Its own entity and always takes years to build on. The worry is for the older ppl who get to see less of it with the gaps.
Because at the end of the day James Bond supposed to be about fun
Nearly every Movie Trailer got this boom boom boom nowadays..not bad...but at one point every Filmtrailer sounds the same.I think Bond can reinvent itself by mixing old with new..not to go into the extrem.
MI: DR1 basically copied the bike chase from TND (handcuffed together) and the car chase from FYEO (underpowered car vs opponents + comedic approach) and mashed them together. Also the whole final train sequence was lifted directly from uncharted 2 as well. Along with issues with exposition and honestly just a bad plot, I wouldn't hold up the current MI as a gold standard of creativity and what to take notes from.
Both sequences owe a debt to Hitchcock's 39 Steps [where a couple is handcuffed together on the run]. The train sequence was very much a homage to the 1996 original film [which was out 13 years before Uncharted 2].
If the Broccoli/Wilson duo have no further interest in making new Bond movies they should sell the rights to someone who would service much better as custodians of such legacy.
Also, if said duo need new, fresh, challenges they should acquire the rights to the Dennis Wheatley novels about Gregory Sallust and turn them into TV shows. This way, we all win.
I wouldn't be surprised if they are looking for a sale but given LucasFIlms cost Disney $4.05 billion, that's the sort of figure I'd image they'd want for the studio+ bond. Given the price tag, it will be only the big studios who would buy it and given Disney milking Star Wars I do feel it's a bit like 'be careful what you wish for' [and arguably there 'custodians' in the sense of not letting Bond be milked in the same manor].
I’m concerned for the next Bond film. I just don’t believe that the producers are willing or capable of taking the character to where he’s needs to be: back to the source material.
Well they did exactly that with Casino Royale but for a 2000's audience, similar to Dalton was 'back to Fleming' but still very 80's.
The main problem now is the death of James Bond and the farewell of Daniel Craig.
Daniel Craig made James Bond practically perfect, a perfect mix of technique, charisma, seduction and irony, Tom Cruise would never have been capable of it.
Honestly I would have made more movies with Daniel Craig.
To get out of the problem now, we should start again with a spin-off of a James Bond at the beginning of his career. ( my opinion ).
I am just starting to wonder. Is there some hidden financial reason why Eon might benefit from the Bond brand failing? The pace, lack of news and limp attitude towards the Bond community all are just starting to smell too deliberate to just be mistakes or 'we are taking our time over things'. If we are unlikely to get any major news, like a director, for another 6 months..I get the feeling that many 'mid-level' Bond fans will just quietly wander off. We'll probably go see the next film whenever it finally happens, but I can see a chunk of the people who are 'active' in their bond interest falling away. IF Eon doesn't seem to care, why should I? Would be a very understandable stance. When MI and other franchises can turn decent to good (to very good) films out at significantly better than twice the pace of Bond, then Bond is in deep trouble when they seem intent on displaying an almost haughty distain towards those wanting to see movement, signs of life, a hearbeat. I've long been a casual Bond fan, almost a normal British Bond fan so to speak. But, when I really don't care anymore one way or the other. Yeah. (Are Eon so inside their own bubble? Do they think that 'It's Bond, we are entitled to the support of the public/community no matter what'?)
Looking like they will kill off Ethan in the new MI ala NTTD. MI has always taken aspects / stunts from Bond films, like stunts and cars from the Brosnan bonds. MI has always been consistent and fun, can’t say the same about Craig bond films
When the time comes for a new James Bond actor to be announced it'll be huge news. The next movie will also be huge news, and will do great business and reinvigorate Bond as a franchise. Bond is after all, a British institution. No matter the direction a new Bond takes, it will be noticed by the public.
Whether or not the public interest is sustained...
Look, I don't think James Bond should be taking notes from Ethan Hunt. Bond has a rich and lasting legacy of its own behind it that surpasses Mission Impossible. The notes Bond producers should be taking is from its own legacy - Sean Connery, Roger Moore, Pierce Brosnan - what made them iconic Bonds? What continues to make those movies enjoyable to watch? The sense of fun and escapism those movies had that appealed to all ages, all audiences needs to return to James Bond both on the big screen and within the brand itself - the Bond brand needs to be as much at home down high streets up and down the UK as it is down Savile Row, accessible not just to those who have money, but kids and families. The Bond productions need less of the art-house, naval gazing hubris of the Craig-era and more of the accessible enjoyment kids used to have watching a Roger Moore or Pierce Brosnan Bond movie.
I have no doubt that Bond will return in a new way that is different from Daniel Craig. My hope is though, that the producers who bring us a new era of Bond, aren't Broccoli or Wilson, but producers who understand the business of managing and building upon the success of a billion dollar franchise in a consistent way. James Bond shouldn't just be a movie every 4/5/6/7 years, it should be movies, books for all types and ages of readers, toys, gifts, merchandise, tie-in TV shows (bring back a brand new James Bond Jr. kids animated TV show).
Actually treat Bond as a franchise and not as this exclusive members-only brand, but as a household brand that is as consistent as Star Trek, Star Wars, DC, Marvel have been.
Especially as Bond 26 is a fresh start so it should be easier to get a general audience interested [if Bond 26 was a continuation of the Craig era it probably would be harder].
I have never seen a Mission Impossible film and have I missed out?
They have got better as they went along
YES. The last few have been exceptional.
They are all good, you can skip #2 though.
@ yes absolutely who needs slow motion Tom Cruse long hair
@@agentøøasmrWatching MI2 makes me feel better.
You are walking about the room, yet you refuse to call out the issue.
James Bond chose to move away from their core audience, much like Star Wars, much like Bud Lite, much like Jaguar, etc.
Cinema, Comedy, Science, and many others work when they are based in reality, and they make logical points. When brands go political, and support political ideologies that are against free market policies this happens: societies loose their purchase power, so they are unable to sustain regular consumption; first brands to go are the ones selling ideas that are completly unappealling, in this case, a manly audience.
I have the Bond 50 collection, haven't bought a thing after that - the image is tainted, either get back on the horse, or face extinction.
Sadly Barbara is determined to send it the way of Jaguar, it’s about legacy for her, that means steering it in a woke direction so she can virtue signal to her London chums. Bond needs masculinity to succeed as a character, that’s how it was written and why it’s successful, anything else is a bastardisation. To kill off Bond was an indulgence to Craig by Babs to say goodbye to him on-screen which is unforgivable.
@@mikecassidy1623I totally agree...
In the UK Bond has always had wide appeal as it's on TV any time of the day
I know they waited to see how well TRUE LIES would perform at the box office before making GOLDENEYE. With the mission impossoble films this might the same idea going on!!
Dead Reckoning Part One was better than No Time to Die.
The MI franchise does not identify with Bond. This is not a subject of concern. You're definitely over analysing and reading too much into it. Or have far too much time on your hands lmfao
Just the delays and excuses with the new Bond movie, that's all.
Tom Cruise for Felix Leighter
The Bond creators are too busy making another movie (Othello) for the actor that killed Bond.
M.I. is GREAT but Bond films are totally on another level.