continue the franchise without Bond?
Because business wise that's a really dumb move.The franchise isn't built around a 3 digit number it's built around a character.I have zero interest in watching a movie about Bonds second hand replacement.If they wanted a black Bond then they should have recruited Denzel and made a new Shaft movie.That i would watch.
Yes, this is their plan it's what they want.
shareSixty years, and now they decide to kill it. What a waste.
shareI suspect they will learn the hard way that without Bond there is no franchise.These studios have become so obsessed with pandering to wokeness and identity politics that they've completely lost touch with or maybe just plain stopped caring about what fans actually want.
shareThey're looking to the future and tbh it does look like the future is ALL WOKE.
shareThe future of the entertainment industry is financially bleak then because all these woke identity politics movies are bombing at the box office.
shareI agree with you I just wonder if they know something we don't know.
shareThat's what I'm wondering. This woke entertainment always seems to be losing money, but they push forward like they don't even notice.
shareThis was one of the last pieces of the puzzle for me but I think I figured it out. Who do you think these decision making executives high up in the studios are? Hint: They have A LOT of hate.
PS: These executives make their money no matter what their movies end up making.
It does get the noggin joggin’
Do they assume we’re moving to a Communist system where the customer has zero choice - you’re just force fed whatever the state media produces, which you’re made to pay for through gigantic taxation, on pain of being sent to the gulag.
Is this the kind of hell we’re supposed to live in after The Great Reset?
Cos fuck that.
I'm glad I lived through what I perceive to be the best times if that's our future.
shareWhat you don't know is that soon a woke government will force you to watch woke movies so they will make ton of monies lol
shareI doubt they would do that. They will cast a new younger actor as Bond in a few years and start over.
share[deleted]
From what i read unlike all previous films they killed Bond at the end of this one seemingly setting it up for a new character to take on the 007 designation so unless he's coming back as a zombie they would have to reboot the entire franchise.
share[deleted]
but 007 is dead, the character cannot come back
share[deleted]
Not surprising that the same ppl bitching about wokeness are also too stupid to understand the concept of a reboot.
shareTruthfully i haven't actually seen the movie yet.From what i read about it though i got the impression that Bond was dead and they were going to pass on the 007 designation to a new character of color for the sake of identity politics.If i'm wrong and it is a reboot with Bond i'm good with that.The series could do with a fresh start.
share"Not surprising that the same ppl bitching about wokeness are also too stupid to understand the concept of a reboot."
then tell us all oh wise one... why do woke movies bomb at the box office?
maybe, just maybe, it's because there aren't really that many woke fucking morons like you in the world, so therefore not many tickets are sold.
I totally disagree with you here. This time seems completely different. They have never killed Bond before AND we also have been introduced to a new 007. Can they back-peddle and just introduce a new iteration of Bond? Of course. Does that seem to be the intention at the current time? Absolutely not.
shareI agree. This seems final. The intention should never be to reboot the series every time a Bond actor 'retires'. With Daniel Craig they semi-rebooted the franchise. I didn't really agree with that at the time, though it gave them an excuse to make Casino Royale. If they tried to do that every few years then the franchise will die anyway.
My only hope is that they've realise that Craig's films are not really Bond. So maybe one more reboot will bring back the cool character with the action and the stunts that we love.
If not then it's RIP Bond.
a reboot? of a 50 year old storied franchise? how do you think that will sell tickets moron?
"New continuity. New storyline. New cast"
but it will be called 007? explain yourself!
what is the storyline?
[deleted]
But James Bond cannot return, the character is dead.
you will get your reboot with a black female transgender handicapped midget, and they will call it James Bond, but only to you will it be James Bond, for everyone sane, it will not be.... and the ticket sales will show it.
[deleted]
Lol they never had to kill Bond before - nor is that required for a reboot, genius.
shareexactly, only reason to kill off Bond in this way, has to be to pave way for an entirely different looking James Bond.......
I am sure that will be a big hit among movie fans 🤣
[deleted]
Fuck up dickhead, where did I say you said that? Two can play that game of semantics (moron).
Fucking think before posting next time cockhead.
At the end of credits it said "James Bond will return" dont worry. It did not say 007 will return
shareThey’ve only rebooted the franchise once and it was for Casino Royale. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
Do you seriously want yet another “Bond origin story”? They’d have to because seeing Bond at the beginning of the 26th film back in action with no explanation would be weird after we just saw him die.
[deleted]
It absolutely would be weird and it would make the ending of NTTD seem very meaningless and his intended epic death scene irrelevant if he’s just back to his usual self in Bond 26. They really boxed themselves into a corner and they have no one but themselves to blame
shareThe difference here is that for 60 years when a new actor played Bond they WERE playing the same guy. Up until Crag's era the bond franchise was all standalone films with a call back here and there but basically all stand alone films. People can come up with BS stuff like Bond is a code name because THEY have to explain to themselves why Bond looks different. God help them if they ever see a play twice.
They could show Bond in the middle of his career and it would not be weird, what was weird is that Craig's Bond went from a new 00 to retiring.
forget about it..... this "hans" poster is a fucking moron.
immune to any reason... SMFH
You keep telling people to forget Hans....but YOU keep replying to him yourself lol. You're either being a hypocrite, or a troll. Which is it?
shareneither, i just respond to bullshit. and hans have been silenced by other posters than me
shareYou're telling people not to bother responding to him...but respond yourself. Thats legit hypocrisy lol.
And silenced lol. Its a message board bro. You're taking things a little too seriously.
i am a serious dude LOL
no, quite the contrary, i joke around a lot
okay, i admit it, instead of telling other posters not to respond to that guy i should have just said fuck that hans guy, would that have pleased you more! 😅
okay, here i go: fuck you hans and your love of woke james bond 😅
[deleted]
once again, you are the fucking moron.... this is your post:
"Jesus christ. This was an end to Daniel Craig's Bond. They're OBVIOUSLY going to bring on a new actor to portray the role and start a new James Bond series. LIKE THEY ALWAYS DO.
Are you unaware that Pierce Bronson played the role before Craig? And before him, Sean Connery and Roger Moore and multiple other guys. Thats how James Bond works. They make a few movies with the same actor, then they get a new one and start over. They killed off this Bond because they wanted to finally give a Bond actor a legitimate conclusion. Some actors that are already rumored and a popular choice to play the role next are Richard Madden and Tom Hardy.
Very, very stupid of you to think they wouldn't have a James Bond again. That they'd continue the franchise without the character. Like literally surprisingly stupid."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would they kill James Bond in this movie, there is no need to.
And you can't do it and then say oh, James bond will be back.... no, you just killed the character.
by your logic, James bond could have died in every movie, and still come back every time for the next one.... that is just bullshit.
you are fine with 007 dead, because you want the reboot.
which hopefully will be a transgender of your choice.
[deleted]
James Bond is the same character despite different actors playing him. The Sean Connery —-> Pierce Brosnan eras were all one long story.
share[deleted]
Then why did Roger Moore and George Lazenby both have a wife who died in 1969? The first twenty are all in the same continuity , they were just very loose sequels to each other and they pretty much stood on their own
shareYou could not be more wrong. Connery to Brosnan was ONE character.
shareAbsolutely... and for better or for worse it followed a formula loved by the fans and this is why the franchise carried on so long. Always one guy. The only suspending of disbelief is every once in a while we'd have to get used to him having a new face.
The Craig films are decent films, but they're not Bond films. Barbara Broccoli thinks that because they've gone done better with the critics means she's done the right thing... but a franchise doesn't live for 60 years just because the critics like the films... it's because the fans are invested in the character and the formula. They have now literally, and figuratively, killed James Bond.
👍
shareThey were always meant to be the same guy. For instance, Bond has a dead wife which has been mentioned multiple times over the years despite different actors playing the role.
The only inconsistency is the fact that the movies take place in different decades. They basically use Comicbook Time.
After "One Her Majesty's Secret Service," at least once, Moore, Dalton, and Brosnan's tenures make reference to Bond's dead wife. Whether you like it or not, they're all the same man.
sharedon't bother, hans is a moron.
share"They make a few movies with the same actor, then they get a new one and start over."
That is not what they have always done. The only time they "started over" was with Daniel Craig. Sean Connery, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, and Pierce Brosnan are all playing the same Bond character. Craig is playing a new Bond character (his Bond did not save the world from Hugo Drax, whereas, say, Pierce Brosnan's did). They have never done something like "No Time to Die" does before.
I agree with some youtube reviewers. This is the end of Ian Flemming's stud machine Bond that we've known and loved for decades. When they relaunch, I think it will be largely business as usual. Just with a very much updated and modern Bond that isn't at all interesting. And lacking all of the qualities that make Bond movies what they are. Generic spy thrillers Bond in name only.
I'm honestly fine with it. How the hell was a cold war hero ever supposed to be an immortal legend anyhow? The whole gimmick is the setting and the gadgets. None of it is relevant anymore. Bond died with Brosnan.
Yeah Fleming's Bond is dead and has been for awhile. When they start talking about family values and succumbing to identity politics then it's no longer a Bond movie it's just beyond pathetic. The Bourne movies have been kicking Bond's ass for almost 20 years now..one thing for sure, EON could have made better Bond movies, they just chose not to.
shareCasino Royale blew away all the Bourne films—not even close.
shareThe first two Bourne films are better than anything Bond has done since Connery. But they jumped the shark as hard Craig has done. We live in garbage world now. We're lucky we had it as good as we did.
share👍
shareMission Impossible has only gotten better and better, so you really can't act like there are no great movies like them. Im not sure how Bourne jumped the shark either...Jason Bourne wasn't very good, but it wasn't terrible. It wasn't woke and didn't ruin the character. Silly to say it jumped the shark.
shareyou can blame Austin powers. After that movie series they decided to reboot with Daniel Craigs version and make a darker more "real" Bond.
https://www.theringer.com/movies/2020/4/30/21241822/austin-powers-james-bond-camp
"The truth of it is that I always had this plan in my head is that we got to make them and begin them again and bring all that back in, but it had to happen the way it did. I can't see it happening any other way. We had to destroy the myth because Mike Myers fucked us - I am a huge Mike Myers fan, so don't get me wrong - but he kind of fucked us; made it impossible to do the gags. What I am proudest of in Skyfall is the lightness of touch we've been able to bring to back into it but not lose the drama and the action."
https://gizmodo.com/the-james-bond-movies-had-to-go-darker-because-mike-my-1667143453
Full circle as Spectre is a loose remake of Goldmember
shareYou know they're gonna stick the ugly, masculine, black chick that nobody likes into the role. Then the franchise will tank before the first movie with her as the star will finish. It was part of the woke crowd's plan all along. Nobody wants to see an anti-James Bond character leading the franchise. Until the assholes in Hollyweird get it through their thick skulls and lose enough money, they're gonna keep making shit "reboot" films like that.
shareCloning is the answer. Maybe they could talk to George Lucas and his clone plant from the "Star Wars" prequels. They could hook the Bond machine up for a new model.
share