Submitted by djalekks t3_zzddtp in movies

I’ve been thinking about the next Bond, and generally looking at who people want for the next one. However, I think a change in pace would do wonders for the franchise. Why not take a break from long term bonds and do a several one off Bonds, something that would let them really explore the depths of Bond? For example I think a Tom Hardy bond would be amazing, but only for one movie. Does anyone else like this idea? (Not Tom Hardy, but the concept)



You must log in or register to comment.

WeDriftEternal t1_j2ax31j wrote

More or less, Jack Ryan / Tom Clancy movies did this and there wasn't anything wrong with that.

The problem is that anyone taking the role of Bond and people working on it would probably be interested in a longer term relationship. If the movie is a success, all that means is that everyone involved, literally everyone, is primed for an even bigger payday in the sequel.


SomeDuderr t1_j2axma7 wrote

But they used the same actors for older Bond movies as well. Both Connery and Moore did quite a few movies, with no need for continuity between them.

So yea, I think this can definately work and is probably my preferred format for Bond. The experiment with Craig and his decades-long lusting for Vesper was... interesting? But ultimately not worth dedicating 6 (?) movies to.


GetFreeCash t1_j2ayac8 wrote

>The experiment with Craig and his decades-long lusting for Vesper was... interesting? But ultimately not worth dedicating 6 (?) movies to.

five movies - and I have no proof, but I would bet a lot of money that the plan back in the Casino Royale days was NOT to have Bond mourning the girlfriend he knew for a month, for fifteen years. the movie even ends in a way that would seemingly lend itself to Bond becoming the character we know from the first 20 movies.

it just so happens that they struck gold with the Bond/Vesper relationship (and with Craig and Green's chemistry) and decided, unwisely, to keep bringing it up in the subsequent movies as part of the emphasis on making everything a Personal Vendetta™ to Bond.


ads7w6 t1_j2b5ckj wrote

I think they freaked out after Quantum wasn't really a hit and pivoted. I was a big fan of the direction they were going with those movies (even though Quantum had its shortcomings due to the writer's strike) but then really turned off by Skyfall and Spectre.


Glittering_Egg_9196 t1_j2bq7fy wrote

Quantum is a direct sequel to the Vesper story from Casino Royale. Skyfall more or less ignores that whole thing and is standalone (other than M). Spectre is where they became obsessed with continuity.


Rougarou1999 t1_j2c36zo wrote

>Spectre is where they became obsessed with continuity.

That was mainly due to the studio finally regaining the rights to use SPECTRE and Blofeld, and, rather than put time and effort into building them up as threat, they used them immediately as the antagonists, which led to the Craig-era self-referential retcons to make SPECTRE relevant.


Glittering_Egg_9196 t1_j2c6dl9 wrote

I feel like it would have been okay to use him immediately without the "author of all your pain" nonsense. Hell, even that might have been tolerable without appropriating the joke brothers twist from Goldmember as the big dramatic reveal.


Rougarou1999 t1_j2c6q5j wrote

Trying to tie the villains of Spectre back to the previous few movies was a move that I cannot understand why the writers thought it would work. It makes little narrative sense, especially when they already built up Quantum as Craig’s SPECTRE-esque organization.


nautilator44 t1_j2ea1k9 wrote

I still don't know what happened in Quantum. I'm 70% sure the camera guy was throwing punches. I still have whiplash. Whoever invented that kind of camera work needs to be slapped. Hard.


WeDriftEternal t1_j2ay3g2 wrote

Agreed on the Daniel Craig movies... they long story arc was totally unnecessary and really made at least half of his movies not feel like Bond movies, they are action rom/coms. No Time to Die wasn't even feel like a bond movie, it just happened to have a character named James Bond starring in some mission Impossible knockoff with a love story wedged in there


GetFreeCash t1_j2ayqqn wrote

when the personal relationship at the core of the story works (Bond/Vesper, Bond/Leiter, Bond/M), I don't mind the action taking a backseat to the drama. it's when it doesn't work, notably with Bond/Madeleine though they did improve it a bit in NTTD, that it feels like a step in the wrong direction.


WeDriftEternal t1_j2cc2vl wrote

Agreed here, wrong direction is a good call, it just didnt work this time


OnlyFuzzy13 t1_j2fivum wrote

The thing I love about ALL the pre-Craig movies is that every movie is essentially Bond’s 4th mission. He’s not a rookie, has no ‘origin’ story, and spends the prologue ‘finishing’ a mission, then going back to work. He is good at his job and you don’t need to know where he came from, who his family is or why they are gone.

The Craig era has been great Jason Bourne movies, but not eternal adventures.


ScarletCaptain t1_j2flbkt wrote

There was continuity of the Bond movies though, every Bond through Brosnan referenced his dead wife, thus connecting them as the same man. Craig was the first official reboot, even if it carried over Judi Dench’s M.


blue_27 t1_j2bqzwm wrote

I completely disagree. So many different people have now played Jack Ryan, that character has started to lose identity.

Harrison Ford feels like the closest rendition of the character from the book. Jim from the office is NOT Jack Ryan. He is more of a Jason Bourne. Alec Baldwin, Batman and Captain Kirk all gave us different versions of the character as well.

If there can't be continuity, then play a different character.


AndYouDidThatBecause t1_j2brcb8 wrote

If we turned it into the Bond multiverse you can have EVERY Bond you want.

Idris Elba check. CarrotTop check.


ScarletCaptain t1_j2fkzl1 wrote

Well, they didn’t intend to do that with the Jack Ryan movies. They wanted Alec Baldwin to have a whole series like Bond, but they didn’t want to wait for him to finish a Broadway run so they got Harrison Ford instead. Obviously later movies were reboots.


cstrand31 t1_j2b5bvo wrote

Wasn’t this just how it was for the first 20 bond movies? Yeah bond was the same character but there wasn’t really a bond “universe” to speak of. They were all just one-offs.


kristopherm3 t1_j2behu8 wrote

I think he means one-off actor, as in they only appear in one movie before being replaced.


Rougarou1999 t1_j2c3gvk wrote

Connery’s Bond did have an arc with SPECTRE and Blofeld, but they planned that out much better than the Craig Era.


IceLord86 t1_j2f7ios wrote

Well, they were just following the books. Even still, they adapted them out of order and in OHMSS we're just supposed to ignore they know what they look like because they've already met in YOLT.


djalekks OP t1_j2dhe1m wrote

Yeah as kristopherm3 says, I’m thinking about one off actors.


DeeJayFelix t1_j2eh5d2 wrote

The first movies were one off adventures but there was a universe that includes Blofeld and SPECTOR as tie ins.


Wonderful_Sound_1400 t1_j2b0ji6 wrote

Reboot it and set it back in the 1960s.


banstylejbo t1_j2b6q2s wrote

I second that. I’d like some period piece Bond movies.


ArgyleTheChauffeur t1_j2b7mqu wrote

I was thinking this too. Give me some good old Cold War stories.


adogcalledstray t1_j2b95jq wrote

"Operation Mincemeat" has me wondering if you could even turn the clock further back in time to WWII, and do a few episodic missions that passed through Fleming's desk, which then inspired him to make the Bond character.


GetFreeCash t1_j2bcii5 wrote

that's basically the premise of the Ian Fleming miniseries that starred Dominic Cooper from a few years ago, if you haven't checked that out.


Rougarou1999 t1_j2c3jd5 wrote

Even have a Bond origin, with him working on secret operations in the field.


rjwalsh94 t1_j2cznsa wrote

Probably the most realistic way to go about the series for the time being.

It can still have all the cool gadgets and such because that’s what it was predicated on, so the idea or thought it could be boring would be moot.

Do a 10-15 year run in the 60’s and then come back to a more present day.

Budgeting could be an issue for something of this size though to recapture 1960’s U.K. or wherever they set the piece.


Typical_Humanoid t1_j2ax7f4 wrote

Sure I'm down. I think OHMSS is one of the best and that had been a one off.


GetFreeCash t1_j2axm07 wrote

Lazenby could have done more if he wanted to, he just chose not to because he predicted the character and the series would be short-lived.


GTOdriver04 t1_j2ayeko wrote

His agent did, actually. Career suicide, but nobody figured Bond would become part of the cultural lexicon as it has.

Disappointing. Really. OHMSS was fantastic. A bit long, but that’s okay. I liked Lazenby.


stunts002 t1_j2bdtsh wrote

To be fair to Lazenby at the time there was nothing to suggest otherwise. Connery at the time WAS Bond and it's no coincidence Connery came back twice for Bond (one granted wasn't an eon bond). So in Lazenbys defence it would seem at the time the public genuinely only seen Connery as Bond and the series may not stay popular with a new lead.


Electric43-5 t1_j2ayoaw wrote

It wasn't really a one of though. Yes Lazenby did only play Bond once but that film requires you to be familiar with the idea that Bond and Blofeld have met before since it is a sequel to You Only Live Twice. In general all the Bond films from Connery to Dalton are connected. Its only until GoldenEye where the films do a soft reboot is the series interrupted.


IM_RR t1_j2c6aoa wrote

All the films up until Die Another Day are the same James Bond with loose continuity.


Theamazing-rando t1_j2b8mby wrote

The Dollop podcast on George Lazenby is a hoot! The studio were absolutely terrible to the guy, they wanted him to emulate Connery but at a fraction of the cost, so made him do all his own stunts, then refused to give him any direction at all, despite him not actually being an actor. They only had him contracted for a single film, which became a smash hit but George had become a full on hippy and refused to go along with the aesthetic, so they wouldn't let him promote it, which became a big thing when they then tried to get him to sign on for a multi film deal, with loads of conditions he wasn't happy with.

In the end, it was a combination of poor management advice (on the longevity of Bond) and his not wanting to stop being a free full bearded hippy for x number of years, then we'd likely never have had Moore as a bond. George sounds like a good dude and the most unique Bond


freezingkiss t1_j2b0x5p wrote

It would have been better if Lazenby wasn't trying to play a quasi Connery the whole time.


LexDicicco t1_j2b0wdz wrote

just a thought, but after watching Bullet Train I'm convinced Aaron Taylor-Johnson would be a bad ass James Bond.


YoungBeef03 t1_j2bw09y wrote

He was a bit too jokey in that movie for my tastes, though I suppose that’s just from how his character was written. When I saw shot where he was clinging to the back of the train and punching through the glass, that’s when I knew he’d be a kick-ass Bond


banstylejbo t1_j2b6gwx wrote

I think they could explore other 00 agents besides 007 and use one-off actors like Tom Hardy or whoever for them (maybe if one is really popular bring them back for another). They won’t have to try and have the actor behave like Bond or be compared directly to Connery or whoever. They can embody a new character within the Bond universe and tell the story without needing to fall back on or be boxed in by the usual Bond tropes and style.

Alternatively, I think it would be cool if they remade some of the older Bond films that maybe didn’t quite hit the mark. Sort of like a reimagining of some of them with a modern aesthetic, like License to Kill or Man With the Golden Gun.


Rougarou1999 t1_j2c3bpo wrote

An anthology series following a different 00 each season sounds like a good idea.


djalekks OP t1_j2dg8ps wrote

Yes!! This is something I’d watch right now.


djalekks OP t1_j2dhay2 wrote

I love both concepts. Introducing other 00s would allow for even more exploration of themes and it could be a kind of test to see if they could spin off other characters as you said.

Remakes of older, flawed Bonds could work really well too. This could attract some left field but accomplished directors to bring a really unique approach to Bond.


banstylejbo t1_j2doi6w wrote

I think it would be super fun to have Benicio Del Toro play the Sanchez role in a License to Kill remake. Sort of a nod to the original where he plays Dario, Sanchez’s young protege. Clean up all the weird plot threads like the ninjas that were inexplicably added in and write the female characters better/more consistently. I think it would be really fun and the movie already lends itself already to a more modern style after how the Craig movies made it OK for Bond to be more gritty. And go all out and get Beyoncé or someone to remake the theme song.


xxStrangerxx t1_j2aycp4 wrote

Sure, of course

There are a few films I already consider lowkey Bond films, like TENET and even HAYWIRE and THE ROCK. Clearly KINGSMAN and MAN FROM UNCLE are cut from Bond's suits

I like the meta approach to films these days, because somewhere along the line audiences forgot that movies are movies and not real life


Owasso_Landman t1_j2azxdc wrote

Tom Hardy has the charima of a block of wood. I would prefer a one off with Pierce Brosnon.


djalekks OP t1_j2dj28s wrote

Tom Hardy has as much charisma as the role demands, and with him I was thinking a kind of one shot Bond, maybe one day, one night.


j3xperience t1_j2b81ay wrote

Do a batman beyond type thing with Bond. Someone breaks into Brosnan house and he trains him to be the next bond.


stunts002 t1_j2bdzvg wrote

Why do people keep trying to make Bond something he isn't. Just let James Bond be a spy who does cool spy stuff.


DrRexMorman t1_j2axiqp wrote

It’s a cool idea. Check out the Foreigner as a kind of elseworlds Bond film.

The catch is that the people who make Bond movies don’t have that kind of imaginative/generative wattage.


GetFreeCash t1_j2axuft wrote

and The Foreigner is also directed by Martin Campbell, who gave us two of the greatest "modern" Bond films. (he also gave us Green Lantern and his two films since The Foreigner are pretty bad, but I love him all the same.)


djalekks OP t1_j2djd81 wrote

I don’t know why I avoided this movie until now. Will watch it definitely


piratemurray t1_j2axslr wrote

Meh.... I feel we're going too far away from what Bond is. For sure it would mix things up.... but then why not just create a new character and do a spy movie? I feel Bond has to come with certain expectations and one of that is a long lived actor franchise. I think if you sign on you sign on for three minimum.

You could do something like what DC do with Joker? Parallel multi film actor franchises with different actors ostensibly playing the same character but not.


YoungBeef03 t1_j2bvfpm wrote

I agree with you. Bond has lasted 60 years on the big screen, and, call me stubborn, I don’t much wanna see that changed. Because a new James Bond movie has always been an event, I don’t want that cheapened


willbeach8890 t1_j2b0eid wrote

The bond franchise is fine the way it is?


stunts002 t1_j2bdjt1 wrote

These suggestions always come from people who don't like Bond movies.


djalekks OP t1_j2di1kq wrote

I love Bond movies in general. I’d just like to see this aspect as well.


kingcolbe t1_j2bo8z8 wrote

Before Craig they were one offs right?


djalekks OP t1_j2df9d9 wrote

I mean one off Bonds/concepts. Like an anthology of Bonds.


YoungBeef03 t1_j2bw7dd wrote

Only one, George Lazenby’s On Her Majesty Secret Service


Rougarou1999 t1_j2c43cm wrote

Some had a loose arc to them. Connery’s Era had a buildup to SPECTRE, post-Lazenby Bonds (Moore, Brosnan, Dalton) each referenced Tracy’s death, and Diamonds are Forever’s cold open makes a lot more sense after On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. However, with the exception of For Your Eyes Only’s cold open, all of the Bond movies before Craig worked as stand-alones.


insane__knight t1_j2c6y0k wrote

I would love a Bond movie set in the 60's given what we know and what transpired. They could have some real fun.


djalekks OP t1_j2demtf wrote

Me too! That would be a great palate cleanser, it could be also cool with a younger Bond in this era.


beast_unique t1_j2ckth8 wrote

If it is a one off then let Nolan do his version (probably Bond race with time)


rjwalsh94 t1_j2d03l7 wrote

With Nolan wrapping on Oppenheimer, I wonder if that will line up with them announcing who’s Bond and director for the next one if he’s so chosen. Can’t do it yet to deter from Oppenheimer, but will want to announce after, especially if it’s a success.

I can only imagine they’re champing at the bit to get something rolling again, especially Amazon after spending the money to acquire the rights and having sat on NTTD for over a year. The gears have to be spinning by now on what the direction will be or at least a basic blueprint.


skrybll t1_j2cx8qh wrote

Bond has always been an actor takes over type role. I like Your idea. I liked the idea of a young Henry cavill playing a fresh out of the Academy bond. And I could see these working in kind of a kings man styled movie, where blunders were more common. Although it would sullie the bond name. It would be an interesting change in pace for bonds across the board.


PresentDelivery4277 t1_j2ddd9m wrote

I would love to see a good director/writer's take on a Bond movie set in the 60's. Make it a proper period piece with some homage and a bit of deconstruction and just a good singular vision for one standalone movie.


theBonyEaredAssFish t1_j2bl9qa wrote

I'd actually like to see it done in their original period. For example the Coen brothers do a proper adaptation of Diamonds are Forever, set in 1953/4, with maybe Michael Shannon playing the Spang brothers. It'd be a major improvement over the official EON version at least.


djalekks OP t1_j2dfzn3 wrote

I like this idea a lot! An unexplored timeline, a uniquely dark (with twangs of twisted comedy) take on Bond, and Shannon is an inspired casting. Who would you as Bond?


WWDB t1_j2c0w14 wrote

I’d love to see a Bond origins movie.


ObiJeffKenobi t1_j2c32lr wrote

Well it did Work for George Lazenby. He did a pretty good Bond while Sean Connery wasn't available.


Dc_awyeah t1_j2c6qsw wrote

I'd love to see a Tom Hardy Bond. Basically any Tom Hardy where he isn't invited to do his terrible R rolling American accent anymore. I loved his vibe in Inception, but he's been leaning into the character / creepy actor thing for so long I fear he was running hard from being typecast as 'handsome, capable English gent.'


teutonic_order33 t1_j2cc63o wrote

I mean they kind of did that for “on her majesty’s secret service”


BabyBatterBaller t1_j2cgysh wrote

I'd love an old man bond with them bringing back Bronson


Pithecanthropus88 t1_j2ci8af wrote

Of course they could. None of the Roger Moore era Bond movies are particularly linked.


AirbagOff t1_j2cjxc7 wrote

Never Say Never… Again.


nothing_in_my_mind t1_j2cr74q wrote

Why not make original spy movies at that point? The point of having a franchise/series is that you have consistency.

I'd much rather watch an original action/spy movie with Tom Hardy than Tom Hardy as Bond in an one off Bond movie.


djalekks OP t1_j2debak wrote

I dunno, it’s just something that popped into my mind and wanted to see what people thought. It’s true that original spy flicks might just be better, but I also think that Bond has some aspects that haven’t been explored and that would be best expressed to him (or her) rather than original IPs.


hiricinee t1_j2ejwkj wrote

Taron Egerton imo! Basically already was Bond.


Current_Focus2668 t1_j2enp8o wrote

I think the broccolis are worried about diluting the Bond brand but I would love to see them expand the Bond franchise universe. It would be cool to see spin off or one off movies about different 00 agents.

You could make a totally different character to Bond that exists in his world with the same supporting cast (M,Q, Moneypenny, Tanner and so on). I think it would be a great way to tell different kinds of stories in that world without messing with the classic bond formula.


The-Curious-Sofa t1_j2f343e wrote

I don't see what the point of that would be or why that would be an interesting concept.


GM_Jedi7 t1_j2bnczv wrote

NTtD ends with Madeline telling the daughter stories about a man named James Bond. All future movies can just be stories Madeline is telling daughter. So Bond can be interchangeable.


YoungBeef03 t1_j2burkq wrote

It’s sure is a possibility, after hearing how rough Daniel Craig had it in Spectre and No Time To Die, I wouldn’t be all that surprised if the next Bond only wants to stay for one movie.

But, given that the casting of James Bond is such a massive announcement, and usually shapes the next few years of Bond movies, and I suppose contractual obligations, any one-and-done actors would probably make it clear before hand

George Lazenby wasn’t supposed to be a one-off, he just left early at the terrible advice of possibly the worst acting agent to have ever been in the business. Lazenby was offered a 6 or 7 film deal after OHMSS, and when Timothy Dalton only did 2 movies, it was because his contract expired and wasn’t renewed for Goldeneye.


Revolutionary-Tree18 t1_j2cl4p4 wrote

I heard there was some kind of labor strike that shortened Dalton's run, which is a pity as I consider him the best Bond.


elcornholioporque t1_j2c22qp wrote

>offered a 6 or 7 film deal

not even Moore (an established actor) was offered more than a 2-3 films contract yet Laz claims he was offered 7 , im not buying it. Laz , like Burt Ward , likes to tell tales


YoungBeef03 t1_j2c2eqn wrote

It could’ve been a smart move, financially. Lock him in at the salary of an unknown actor, instead of paying exorbitant amounts of money like what they had to do to get Connery back


elcornholioporque t1_j2c9jy3 wrote

>smart move, financially

for Cubby and Harry , perhaps not so much for Laz


Embarrassed_Mud_127 t1_j2bz7er wrote

I for one am looking for the origin stories of each Bond girl. I want the Pussy Galore or Domino Derval backstory. Hell, I would even take a Christmas Jones movie.


djalekks OP t1_j2df3q7 wrote

An animated show like Harley Quinn with all Bond girls poops into my mind for some reason.


suzer2017 t1_j2d7xei wrote

So, at last blush, 007 was a handsome fierce black woman. Now THAT would be grand. Something nobody expected.


Futur_alliance t1_j2az9gb wrote

I stopped watching bond until Casino Royale, which introduced Craig. Only because of the direction they brought Bond in, with Daniel Craig, that I get really back into it.

But a one off? Might work if stories are stand alone as well.

Then again closes the story real fast. No sequels to have fans look forward to.


neuronamously t1_j2bg0k8 wrote

You're proving OP's point. If they had stopped after Casino Royale, it would forever be legend. The other 3 movies were just OK but not what Casino Royale was.. I could live without Spectre.


djalekks OP t1_j2dj9h9 wrote

Yeah I could’ve definitely done without Spectre, I hated that movie. Dumbest plot, incompetent villain, and pretty bad acting considering the talent.


Revolutionary-Tree18 t1_j2clgpw wrote

They went back on all the ground they broke in Casino Royale. He was jacked for that movie. He doesn't care if it's shaken or stirred, he doesn't play baccarat, he shoots a Glock (anything but that piddly PPK) with TWO hands... and then they went right back to all the stuff they used to do. It was really a disappointment.


theyusedthelamppost t1_j2be0m6 wrote

idk but if they are gonna make a female Bond movie it better be called Octobussy (the male antagonist is immune to her feminine charms)


WAwelder t1_j2c24s9 wrote

I want to see Tom Holland as a young Bond in the SAS.


djalekks OP t1_j2df1b4 wrote

I don’t know about Tom Holland, but SAS Bond would be cool, to see that brutality that turned him into a killing machine. How do you train the worlds best spy? I’d watch.


[deleted] t1_j2b02v2 wrote

Take the Batman approach.

Give Nolan a trilogy.

Micheal Cain is a retired 00.

Idris Elba is the active 007.

The first movie = Cain gets killed and Elba goes on a revenge mission. At the end he’s assigned a trainee.

Second movie = training the new guy.

Third movie = new guy takes over.