R_J_K75
Legend
Seems like the Double-O's have a habit of dying pretty regularly so I can't imagine there's very many of them, they probably just recycle their code number
Who’s your vote for the next James Bond?
- Thread starter Morrus
- Start date
FitzTheRuke
Legend
I agree - there's probably a handful of them at any given time, with no need to worry about double (quadruple?) digit numbers at any given point.
I do think that it could be a compelling story, if done well, to do a James Bond story starring other double-oughts (as suggested earlier in the thread) where Bond is something of a cypher. Out there but not featured. I think that would be a great opportunity to diversify the cast, too. Maybe it would feel too much like a Mission Impossible film (assuming that the agents worked together on something), but maybe the writers would have to work hard to make sure that that doesn't happen.
Heck, Rozencrantz & Guildenstern them* into a pre-existing Bond Film (preferably an old one)!
* If you don't know what that means, it's like 'Gumping' ** , only older!
** And if you don't get that joke, ask me to explain it to you.
R_J_K75
Legend
Explain it. I think I've heard the term "Gumping" before, but it only slightly rings a bell.
FitzTheRuke
Legend
Sure. Gumping comes from Forrest Gump and refers to how they managed to take new footage of Tom Hanks and put him pretty seemlessly (a surprise at the time) into old footage of John F Kennedy and John Lennon (etc).
Rosencrantz & Guildenstern, on the other hand, is a play (and movie) that takes the characters from Hamlet, and has them on their own adventure, that only passes into and out of the scenes that they are in with Hamlet when it's appropriate to the story.
I'm more suggesting the latter. I wouldn't seriously suggest that you take old footage of, say, Sean Connery Bond and have the other agents pop into the footage... necessarily. It would probably be really difficult to pull off without being goofy (and I don't think that we'd want it goofy). But it would not be totally silly, I don't think, to set a "Double-Oh Agents work Case X" during a particular Bond adventure, one that is talked about and acknowledged as occurring during Case X.
It would solve the obvious question, "Where is Bond during all this?"
trappedslider
Legend
It's clear to me that what some people want is a spy film that isn't about Bond, yet somehow is a Bond film 
R_J_K75
Legend
Sounds like a good idea. It would be funny if they actually used old footage of all the different actors that played Bond. As an aside, think I read that Connery, or his estate most likely refused to let Mangold use de-aged footage for Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny. So, I doubt that'd be an option.
R_J_K75
Legend
I think for some people it's more about expanding the franchise rather than wanting a Bond film without Bond.
FitzTheRuke
Legend
Nah, it's just a fun thought experiment. We are far, far, FAR more likely to get a modern remake of a Connery film with a new guy in the suit. One that pleases no one, but ticks all the boxes of "what the fans want".It's clear to me that what some people want is a spy film that isn't about Bond, yet somehow is a Bond film
I’m all for the 1960s throwback, personally.
Similar Threads
