8 Lessons Bond 26 Must Learn From 25 James Bond Films

[00:00:00]Now, pay attention to 007. There have been 25 main James Bond films so far.

[00:00:04]And with the 26th just around the corner, apparently, there's a few lessons that I think we can learn going forward from the rest of the films in the franchise. And I just want to talk you through some of those and let's see if we can get excited about Bond 126.

[00:00:16]Again, [music] before we get into this, this is not my thoughts about who should be playing the next James Bond. I'm going to do another video about it at some point. It's the main thing that everybody's talking about. This is not what this is about. I think there have been lots of James Bond films obviously in all the different eras, different decades. We've had different characters playing them and we've had different approaches from, you know, creative decisions, directors, editing choices, and I think there are lots of things that have worked really, really well, and there are some that haven't worked so well. And I think when we're looking towards Bond 26 and what Amazon are potentially going to be doing with it, I think there's a few things that we can take away from it from the previous films. And that's just what I want to talk about today. To get straight into it, my first big big hope is that we do not have any sort of continuity. We don't try and explain previous films. We don't explain how he's died or anything like this. It's just another Bond film. We do not need to worry at all about continuity. I think when we look at the previous Bond films, we had transitions between actors going from Dalton to Broen or Moore to Dalton. And we we constantly used to as an audience different characters playing the role. And it's essentially because you couldn't still have Shan Connory for many very obvious reason. You could not have Shan Connory still playing James Bond now. So it's natural that they change the actors as they go on. It's not saying this is a different timeline.

[00:01:40]This is a different Bond. This is a different universe. We don't need to have that kind of continuity. don't think what I really do like and I appreciate as I'm watching them back um is things like on Her Majesty Secret Service, he opens the drawer and inside there's lots of gadgets, the jetpacks and things like that from previous Bond adventures and we hear the theme tunes and stuff. I don't mind stuff like that.

[00:01:58]That's a bit on the nose. But also, I'm thinking like in License to Kill when there's a reference to, you know, Bond's being married before. It just we know he's been married before cuz as an audience we've seen him being married.

[00:02:09]We've seen him been through that. But we don't need to question, oh well, is that the same queue? Is this the same M? Is that it? Doesn't need to really get into that. I think if we can just ignore the kind of structured arc of of all the Bond films and just focus on, you know, as they are. It's a it's a standalone adventure. I think that'll go a long way to helping the next Bond film. I actually feel the Daniel Craig era is quite good. I'm I'm quite happy I would call myself a fan. However, I think that the weakest aspect of that is the kind of tying everything together. Quantum is essentially just carries on from Casino Royale. It ties up some loose ends in a way. And then you've got kind of jumping ahead to Spectre. You've got characters coming back like Mr. White, you know, and it's trying to tie everything all together and trying to make Daniel Craig's thing its own little thing while at the same time referencing quite obviously to some of the older films, you know, they bring back Blofelds for example. And it's just for me that's where those films I will get this when I talk in my review, but that's where those films fall short. And I would love for the next Bond film to just not try and tell us a big overarching story. I think we should just concentrate on small adventures. So that's my first point. Let's have less of the continuity, please. My second point is story. Let's please focus on the story.

[00:03:23]I've already talked about what I want as an opening to the next Bond film, how I think we could tackle that. But I think the weaker aspect of some of the Bond films is where we've had set piece to set piece to set piece. And it's as all the producers have said, right, we've got India as a location. I'm just picking this one out of the hat. We've got India as a location. We can do these several things. Let's just think of a story that ties this together. I think the biggest example would be No Time to Die. It ended. I mean, it's a spoiler, but Bond explodes at the end. And I think they knew going in that they wanted to kill him off for whatever reason. They thought this is what we're going to do. Fair enough. They're in charge. They can do what they like. But then you're really constricting yourself as a as a filmmaker and as a producer because you think right well he needs to die. So that's that's point zed in the plot. For him to die he needs to have done this Y. So Y to zed. And [snorts] then for Y to happen he needs, you know, which is basically him saving the world.

[00:04:17]He needs to have some reason that he can't live even though he saves the world. So that's plot point X. And I feel like when I watched No Time to Die for the first time, I actually picked up on it. more so when I watched it the second time. I've only seen it two or three times, I think. I'm noticing that every single scene is a buildup to that end point. You know, they they kill off cast members. They kill off, you know, his his friends and other people that we wouldn't expect to get killed off just to kind of tie up the loose end and put a very final scene in Bon's demise. And I feel that because they've done that, it's the big set piece that they want.

[00:04:51]They didn't go in thinking we've got this amazing story and it'll be even better if Bond dies at the end. I felt like they were like, "We want to kill Bond in this film. Let's just work backwards from that." And for me, it it doesn't work. I I think the best Bond films are the ones and I will talk about this in a moment again when I come to talk about stories and and the books, but I think the best Bond films are the ones that do focus on the story first and any set pieces or action scenes or you know character romances and things that come out of that to help the story are the real strong points and they are what make a really strong Bond film as opposed to the ones that feel like setpiece after set piece after set piece. So that's my next point. My third point is for them to just not try to outdo any of the other Bond films. Don't try and push it to make it bigger and and better. I feel like a lot of the Bond films have tried to outdo the stuff that's come before it and other films that are around at the time. Again, to jump into No Time To Die, it had a huge opening scene that lasted like 20 minutes or something. And it was almost like, well, we did a big, you know, opening scene in the previous one, Spectre, and we had a bigger one in in Skyfall. We need to do it bigger than that. And it just it just made the runtime go. It's almost a short film before we get to the title sequence and it it's just it's too much. I think I think they're looking at let's just outdo the last Bond film and that just for me it pulls it away from the story.

[00:06:12]You know, some of the best Bond films I've watched so far from Russia with Love, even what I've just watched, Live and Let Die, the pre-title sequences are just short. They're self-contained. They set up the story and then they get straight into it. And I think if they had tried to tack on, well, you know, with Goldfinger, we had this big explosion. So, you know, in Thunderball, we need to start even bigger and then you only live twice needs to start off even bigger than that. And they just keep outdoing each other. And eventually, we were at a point where it's really difficult to do that because the production values of, you know, the last probably 10, 15 Bond films have been so fantastic that we've had these amazing pre-title sequences. You can't really wow an audience as easy anymore.

[00:06:48]We've all seen crazy stuff, especially with, you know, the way that visual effects are and practical effects and stuff are. We've all seen really, really good stuff. And for me, the the Bond scenes that hold up to the best, again, going back to the story, they're the ones that tie into the story really well. So, I think they shouldn't be looking at, right, let's wow everybody with an amazing pre-title sequence that goes on for half an hour this time.

[00:07:09]Let's just focus on the story and not try and outdo what's come before. Let's make it its own thing and and let's just stay on target with it. I could reference several Bond films that have been guilty of doing this, but just to think of off the top of my head, Dying Other Day, I know it's not a very popular Bond film. I I do kind of like it, but it it's suffered because it was trying to outdo previous ones. The the hovercraft just at the start, it's it's good, but it's trying to do one up on what we had with the world's Not Enough.

[00:07:36]And the set pieces get so over the top and so big and so grand. You know, the not talking about the surf and stuff, but just the car chases on the ice and through the ice palace. And it's like they were just turning everything up to 11. And as a result, it's not as believable. And because it leans more into the kind of the CGI aspect of it, it loses credibility. It loses believability, you don't really accept what's going on. And you've seen it a million times in other films where I think the Bond films that are better are the ones that have kind of more grounded action scenes. So, I think, you know, if we just stay in with the story, I keep saying, I'm a broken record. If we stay with the story and not try and push everything to 11 and just just ramp in those Bond moments and those stunts as and when they're needed, it's going to be a good start. My fourth point would be not to chase movie trends. There have been kind of a lot of influences on the Bond franchise and I actually prefer, you know, decades ago when Bond was the one who was influencing other films. You know, Bond was the action hero that you would go to. Bond was the one who had a mix of comedy and action and and everything. I was going to say romance.

[00:08:39]That's ambitious, but it's it just had a mix of everything. The perfect blend for your kind of fun Hollywood blockbuster.

[00:08:45]And it influenced, you know, the scale of the set pieces, the set design, the production design, the costumes, the focus on the kind of luxurious lifestyle and the travel and everything. Bond was the one that was leading all the other films. And then for some reason kind of Quantum of Solace, it just started to take too much influence from other films. Quantum of Solace to pick it out.

[00:09:07]The editing choices on it is very much edited like rapid fast shaky cam stuff which has drawn influence from a far superior film that the kind of the born identity the born supremacy and and so on where you have really really you know stylish fights going on that fit that kind of gritty world and Bond was obviously just drawn from that and for me that kind of it's a it's a low point in the series because I felt like Bond was now like the other film stars. He was like the other action heroes and he was trying to catch up with them. And for me that was quite disappointing. I felt like Bond, you know, he is the guy.

[00:09:39]He shouldn't be trying to be like Jason Bourne. Skyfall is another example. It's a really really good Bond film. I really really like it. But for me, it felt like, you know, the bad guy was was too much like kind of Heath Ledger's Joker.

[00:09:50]You you've even got the big escape scene where, you know, he's in prison and he plans a big elaborate escape and he's one step ahead of the the police all the time. It was very similar to watching Batman. And you know, just the scale of the film, it just felt like it was it was trying to be big. It was trying to be epic. And it was trying to do for Bond what, you know, Nolan did for the Batman franchise. And I don't think it needed to do that. Skyfall is a case where it actually worked out. But then, you know, Spectre and No Time to Die, we we were trying to do that same thing. We were following that kind of new blockbuster kind of style. Not as successful. Bon should just stick to Bond. You know, Bon's amazing. you know, it's even the weaker Bond films are still a hell of a lot more fun than some, you know, serious action films that we've had. So, just stick with it.

[00:10:38]Have confidence in the franchise and just go from there. My next point is about the plot, the kind of the evil genius scheme. Let's not try and make it too topical. Let's not make it about AI because Mission Impossible's just done that. Let's not make it about, you know, a pandemic or a virus cuz kind of No Time To Die has just done this. Let's just make it something fun, something new, and let's just look forward. You know, I think I always hold high regard for Tomorrow Never Dies because although it wasn't, you know, the best film when it came out, it's a personal favorite of mine, but it wasn't the best received film when it came out. When you look at the villain's plot, it seemed quite far-fetched and a bit over the top back then when it came out, but now it seems like really relevant. You know, media corrupting the headlines and making, you know, a war essentially for the profit of the media. It's a really cool scheme and it it was just it wasn't really, to my knowledge, based on anything that was happening in the world at that time. It was just this is a bad guy's plan. This is what he's going to do. He's evil.

[00:11:29]Let's just roll with it. And I think we need to go back to this sort of stuff. I think, you know, with Goldfinger was a really good one where, you know, his plot is, you know, radioactive gold. Or we have, you know, on a magic secret service where he's brainwashing the ladies and he's going to make them go back to England and release kind of, you know, chemicals that is going to, you know, kill livestock and stuff. Just all this kind of just creatively just let's just have a bad guy be a bad guy. He doesn't need to have a big, you know, dram dramatic background. You just need to have a personal vendetta against Bond. Let's just think of some really cool quirky quirky is not really the best way to describe an evil scheme.

[00:12:02]Let's just think of a really cool original evil scheme and just go from there, you know, just try and have fun with it. If it feels too real and if it feels too on the nose, you know, I don't want to I don't want to know about AI going to take over and all this sort of stuff. And I don't want to know about I'm I'm a Bond film. I I just want to relax. I want to enjoy it. I want to switch my brain off. It doesn't need to be too serious. It can be farfetched.

[00:12:22]just feel free to just push the boundaries a little bit more because that's what Bond is all about. My sixth point again is talking about not necessarily continuity but just the timeline when it's set. Feel free to just go back and set a film in the Cold War. You know, don't have a huge villain, you know, just just make it a spy on spy classic. Look at From Russia with love. It's a really good film because it has a really really good story. You know, I'd be quite happy with them making a film set in the ' 50s or ' 60s or '7s and and just just go with that. Go with the tech at the time. give him some gadgets that really stands out at that time period because you know there's there's gadgets all over the world now you can get on eBay and so on and everything is there just go back to time when none of that stuff existed and you know he's got a cool device or whatever he's got a cool watch or something you know and and just just make a period film that that's really cool just just just pick a pick a period of time when there was this spy stuff going on and it was more you know exciting perhaps and and more mysterious and it's kind of got that exoticness to it and you know go for I'd be totally behind that. My seventh point would be look back at Ian Fleming. Look at the novels. Go back to the novels. I think two very successful Bond films for me are On Her Majesty Secret Service and Casino Royale. And I think, you know, lots of people would hold them probably in the top five or 10 Bond films potentially. And I think the reason why they hold up is because they did just go back to the novels. They are focused on the novels. They follow the story very, very carefully. If you look at Casino Royale, for example, they took the original story, they kept all the key elements of it, and they did bring it right up to date. They they modernized a lot of it. They changed locations and and slight plot points and so on, but they did keep that essential story and the structure, the characters, and everything's all there. And it's just such a successful film because of that, I think. And I think when you look at a secret service, for me, that film really closely follows the book. It's it's hard to think what was in the book and what was in the film. They're kind of interchangeable. They they tell the same story. I think there's a whole treasure trove of Bond novels, not even necessarily Fleman ones, although I am I am talking about Fleming now, but there's a lot of Bond literature out there that's ripe for making a film about. I I've mentioned that I would love to see the Horowits trilogy produced into film. I think that would work really well. In fact, Bond 26, if it was going in that direction, I'd be really happy. But if not, go back to Fleming. Moonreaker is my favorite novel and the film is completely different.

[00:14:37]You could just make Moonraker, set it now, just make that film. It would be absolutely fantastic. I would absolutely love it. I know there's lots of people out there that would love it and the general public would love it because it's a really good story. So, you know, if you don't know what you're doing with the script and you're hitting any hurdles, if the producers are watching this, please just look at Fleman's novels and just go back there. That's absolutely great. It's a good start.

[00:14:58]You're going to be all right. My final point today would be about Bond himself, the character of James Bond. Now, I personally, I know lots of people are really, really keen on this. I personally do not care what Bond looks like. He just needs to be Bond. He needs to have those characteristics. You know, for me, he's been portrayed by lots of different actors and in lots of different ways. We've had, you know, Conry is quite serious and a little bit jokey and, you know, a little bit unlikable perhaps. We've had Roger Moore bringing a kind of more charismatic air to the character, a bit more comedy.

[00:15:28]We've had the darker tones of, you know, Dalton and and Craig and Broen kind of a mix of everything really. And and I think although they've been portrayed very very differently by all these different actors, they do all come from the same DNA. They all do come from that trait of Bond. The the way that he was written in the novels, you know, he's he's a dark killer. He's he's a womanizer. He's, you know, an absolute expert. He's very professional. He's all about, you know, for England. He'll do everything for his country. His dedication to the job. He's a loyal guy.

[00:15:56]He's loyal to his friends. He's loyal to his uh outfit, you know, MI6. He's a lover of luxury. You know, he likes to indulge in food and drink and cigarettes, tobacco, all this stuff. It all comes from the novels [snorts] and all the different characters interpretations have been based loosely upon that DNA, that structure. And I think they really need to look at this character of Bond and just make sure that he still does tick a lot of those boxes. And I think we will be in a good place regardless of who plays him. So that's it. Eight ideas, thoughts I've had that, you know, could be carried forward into the next Bond film. But what are your thoughts? These are just some of my thoughts. They're not necessarily structured or well thought out yet. They're just ideas that I've had knocking around in my head that I would like to see in Bond 26. Everybody has their own favorite James Bond actor.

[00:16:42]Everybody has their own favorite James Bond film. Everybody's going to want a different thing essentially when we come to Bond 26. But I think there are a lot of things in common that we all would like from this film. And I'm just trying to work out from what we've had the 25 films, what can we draw that's going to help the next Bond film? And what mistakes have previous films made that we can dodge when we come to making Bond 26? because Amazon is in charge of they're a huge company. If anybody can pull this off, this should in theory be able to pull it off. And they can also royally mess up by not listening to us, to you, the the fans. They need to get this one right. I think they will. I'm going to be confident. I'm going to be quietly confident and happy that they're going to do this correctly. But what do you think? I would love to hear your own tips, your own thoughts. Things where Bond films have gone wrong, things where Bond films have done things right. What do you want to see in Bond 26 if and when it comes out? I would love to hear your thoughts down in the comments. And please do give me a subscribe. I'm doing reviews of all the Bond films and I'm doing little discussions like this. The next Bond film I'm reviewing is my least favorite Bond film. It's The Man with the Golden Gun. So, let's see how that goes. But I will be back soon because James Bond will return