silverfin Tagged Articles at Cinematical

With only two more films left in the Harry Potter series, could Daniel Radcliffe be eying another franchise? No, I'm not saying the boy wizard is going to replace Daniel Craig as an adult James Bond, but some folks (like the ones talking to JoBlo) seem to think Radcliffe is the number one target to star in a crop of new films revolving around the super spy as a kid. And, well, I kid you not. The films would be based on a series of books written by Charlie Higson, all of which follow a young James Bond while he's attending Eton College. It's there that he winds up getting himself into a whole mess of trouble. Although this isn't the first time someone attempted to tell the story of a young Bond (there was one book published in the 1960s, as well as a television series in the early 90s), it's believed that Higson's series (which kicked off with Silverfin back in 2005) has become popular enough to warrant a film ... or several.

But there's a problem with this whole thing. When we're first introduced to Bond in Silverfin, he's only 13. I know he's attending Eton College (as in, "Dude, he's 13 -- how is he in College?), but the school takes kids between the ages of 13 and 18. So, unless they're going to take some liberties with the books and jack up Bond's age, there's no way Radcliffe can pull off a 13 year-old kid. Especially after he's finished completing the next two Potter films (which, in case you're wondering, will put him at about 20 years-old in real life). And if they plan on following Bond through a number of films while he ages up, becomes smarter, stronger -- the whole nine -- then I imagine they'd have to find a kid, like they did with Radcliffe for Potter, that could grow up with the series ... and have it all make sense. But who even knows if they'd want to touch a young Bond now that the new and improved Bond is doing so well at the box office. So, chalk this up as a big ol' rumor and we'll see what happens in the months to come.

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?