What Do the James Bond Fansites Think About Funny Bond?

by Ryan Stewart Jul 18th 2007 // 3:31PM

Filed under: Action, Comedy, Drama, Sony, Critical Thought, Fandom, James Bond, Daniel Craig

This weekend, I'll be passing the time on a long train ride by slogging through Silverfin and Blood Fever, the first two books in the highly-praised Young James Bond series, and I hope to find time to write up an assessment of how much potential is there for 'Young Bond' to be turned into a film series at some point. In the meantime, however, there's something else occupying my thoughts: I'm starting to wonder whether the two major James Bond fansites are steering clear of the current Bond issue -- the increasingly likely notion that the producers of Bond 22 are intent on steering away from the hugely-successful tough, gritty Bond vibe of Casino Royale in favor of a quip circus, a la Roger Moore. After this was first reported in a British paper -- not always the most reliable source of news -- the guys at IGN did some digging and their source is confirming that this is a reality: the plan is to go more humorous this time around. So how come Commanderbond.net and Mi6 aren't weighing in on this topic?

I do see one link on Commanderbond.net to a Dark Horizons writeup of the story, but if there's anything else, then I'm completely missing it. It could be tucked in there somewhere, so please point me to it, if so. Maybe they disagree with me and some others, who think that any shift onto a comedic foot would be the wrong way for the series to go at this point. I feel that the whole reason people were re-energized by Daniel Craig's performance in Casino Royale is that he finally seemed like a dedicated professional who took his work seriously again, as opposed to a character who knows as well as you do that he's inside a fictional universe. We can't go back to the other way now, can we?

10 Comments

Tags: blood fever, BloodFever, bond 22, Bond22, daniel craig, DanielCraig, james bond, JamesBond, silverfin

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

7-18-2007 @ 5:53PM

Brad B said...

This "funny bond" isn't everything that everyone is making it. They're not going to bring back Roger Moore- at least that's not the impression I get.

What Daniel Craig said, and what no one is talking about, is they are taking those concepts of "Octopussy and Pussy Galore" (whatever he means by that) and turning them on their heads.

It could be as simple as something like was in Casino Royale, where Bond was asked how he wanted his martini and he said he didn't care. Playing with conventions is one thing, making Bond funny is another. I believe they are doing the first- not for laugh-out-loud comedy, but for a wink to the established franchise and its history. Craig can still be the unpolished, rough Bond we want.

7-18-2007 @ 4:09PM

Dave M. said...

Guess who won't be in line to see the Bond 22 quip circus? Me and my friends. I'd rather rent the Bourne Ultimatum.

7-18-2007 @ 4:13PM

YouFaceTheTick said...

Still no real confirmation of this. Craig is probably getting a laugh at all the Bond fans getting bent yet again.

7-18-2007 @ 4:45PM

Ralph said...

"Casino Royale" was the first time in a long, long time I was excited about a new Bond film. I love the gritty relaunch. If they go back to the Roger Moore era style, I'll just start bypassing it again.

7-18-2007 @ 4:51PM

zencat said...

I'm a regular reader and contributor to CommanderBond.net and I can tell you the reason that you're not seeing the major fansites up in arms is that we've been through this too many times to take the bait. Most Bond fan veterans just don't put much stock in stories which originate in the UK tabloids. The story is an exaggeration, if not a complete fabrication. Besides, recall that during the production of Casino Royale Martin Campbell spoke many times about the importance of injecting humor in the Bond films and that CR would have humor. This didn't mean double-taking pigeons.

Enjoy Young Bond. They are excellent (especially Blood Fever).

7-18-2007 @ 5:41PM

katied said...

As someone said the last time a story was posted about this,what Daniel Craig said was taken out.of.context. From an article that did NOT originate from the Daily Express.

I love Cinematical,but it makes me sad to see you rising to the bait like this.

7-18-2007 @ 5:55PM

Martin said...

I like the idea of this being "bait". Casino Royale was so successful it makes no sense to go back to silliness.

BUT IF THEY DO...then it is a major mistake.

8-01-2007 @ 8:52PM

Deborah said...

As zencat says, nothing to see here, move along. I blogged about the conjecture (at http://www.ultimatejamesbond.wordpress.com) but it's simply not to be taken seriously.

7-18-2007 @ 11:14PM

David Lee said...

Full write up here, the first Bond site to run the story of Daniel's comments:

http://www.mi6.co.uk/sections/articles/bond_22_preprod_diary03.php3

7-19-2007 @ 10:40AM

Donna said...

I think people, including Cinematical, are going off the deep end a bit about this possibility.

Just because the next Bond film may be a little lighter in tone doesn't mean it's going back to DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER territory, for God's sake.

Personally, although I liked the more serious tone of CASINO ROYALE, I would have appreciated a bit more sass as well. After all, if 007 doesn't show a little cheek now and then, how does that make him any different from the sour-faced Jason Bourne?

So stop asking why everyone isn't running around like a chicken with their head cut off, like Cinematical is. Plenty of Bond fans are plenty comfortable with the idea of a little more humor in Craig's Bond.