New 007 film to depict spy's inner demons

Isn't the bad guy going to be that psycho from "No Country For Old Men?" Javier Bardem?

Craig has done a good job so far as Bond, just hope the directors don't try to make the franchise into a head trip that requires too much brain work to figure out. Bond should be entertainment, not a social review.

I agree - Riffraff,

Apart from the last Craig films, when has Bond been a journey into the mind? Leave like it used to be with Sean and Roger - i.e. bad guys, saving planets, and a hint of naughtiness. I'm happy to be dumbed-down!!

I, for one, welcome a more multi-layered Bond. Some of the more recent (pre-Craig) Bond movies seemed a bit overly formulaic and easily forgettable.

There's nothing wrong with depth, but there's a trend to put this psychological spin on old formulas that worked. Look at the new mission impossible films. It was never about the ego of one person in the original TV series. Now with the "new" James Bond, directors feel the need to develop the character beyond the bastion of "gentle spy". Maybe it was the period in which I grew up that connected with the Moore and Connery Bonds, but the new Bond is, well, "messy" in the head. That may well reflect life's frailties, but Bond is less "normal", and more mythical to me!!!

That may well reflect life's frailties, but Bond is less "normal", and more mythical to me!!!

Good point. Sometimes we just want to go to a movie to enjoy it. We don't always want to be taught a life lesson. This is particularly true in the case of action/adventure movies. Let us have some fun.

I'm not so sure why the makers of the new Bond movies seem intent on shoehorning Bond into the psychological thriller genre. There are enough films out there already that stand alone in this genre (Momento, Psycho, etc). Bond creators have to realize they are carrying on a legacy, not just using the name to sell a repackaged version of it. Bring back Blowfelt, the Giant with the teeth that could bite through gondola cable, and the Crazy Japanese guy with the killer bowler hat!!!! That's entertainment!!!!

Personal demons, like what? Perhaps he has relationship problems, which explains why he never got married and raised a family? Perhaps he is suffering from sex addiction? Or secretly he liked the enemies better than his bosses? How about being a closet gay guy? So he is actually miserable while bedding all the beauties and really wanted their boy friends? Perhaps he has a moral problem with killing people and is haunted by his dead? Perhaps really a frustrated painter or poet and is secretly planning to get all the great artists and poets together and kill them off? Or actually was an incredible successful double agent and he has finally won it for the bad guys? Actually he wanted to take over the world for himself, and that was the real reason he killed the bad guys?

Come on any combination of these possiblities and you could run the series another hundred years.[Grin]

Pussifying Bond.

Make. It. Stop.

How about being a closet gay guy?

Haha....the possibilities are endless. Who'd want to see "Brownfinger" or "from Russell with love", though?? Not me!!

If you are into the Bond character, I say read the books, and let Hollywood take care of the eye candy: explosions, gadgets, & sexy Bond girls.

I say read the books, and let Hollywood take care of the eye candy: explosions, gadgets, & sexy Bond girls.

How about you read the books and I take care of the sexy Bond girls ;)

Times change. You can't put out the same Bond movies anymore.

The ending where he defeats the villian in a YouTube debate leaves something to be desired.

The Bond series, which is is coming up for its 23rd instalment, is still less than half as long as the longest series of films featuring the same hero, "Otoko ha tsurai yo" (Its tough for men). Both series focus upon a rootless, travelling, adventurer. Both are emblematic of the cultures from which they derive. Both feature a series of romantic liaisons, but here lies the difference: Tora-san remains chaste hoping for an idealised romantic relationship, while Bond consummates. So to leave Bond free to "consummate" again in the next offering, his wives and girlfriends are killed, one after the other, almost without fail. It is not surprising that he has inner demons. Indeed he is a demon. In Japan, being a demon is left up to the perpetual 'girls'.

I agree on both sides of this, I like the new direction, it's refreshing, but I hope it will go back to its old ways one day. I've been a fan of bond since I was little, watching every movie about 4/5 times and I'm kind of glad they are taking the character somewhere else for a change. Still, I don't really see Craig as "Bond" I see him as a "what if...?" Bond. "What if Bond was a human being?"

I don't disagree with it.

There has been a trend recently in Hollywood to "reboot" many old movie and TV franchises, with an emphasis on "humanising" rather flat charactures of the past. The Star Trek reboot, the recent blitz of super-hero movies, even the Three Stooges film tries to give depth to charactures that were previously as flat as the screen they were projected on. While some, like Bond, could use this "reality check" to give new life to dull, dead charactures. There are others that should stay "flat" like comic superheroes. Just my two bits.

SuperLib: Times change. You can't put out the same Bond movies anymore.

Farmboy: So he would reflect on all the needless conflict in the world, and how poorly we humans have been at taking care of our precious planet, before having a car chase and smashing the bad guy with a cool weapon?

I'm saying the days of firing rockets from your car then kissing the girl are pretty much over. What worked 20 years ago usually doesn't work today. Audiences know more about the world and you can't just have them assume as much and go along with it. They either have to make the plot more complex or go deeper into the character. Either way, the franchise has to evolve or else it will look silly to today's audiences.

The new Bond: In therapy for habitual steroid use and addicted to gay Internet porn. Never recovered from his infatuation over his boarding school mate. Uses his license to kill on anyone who reminds him of the chap.

Okay, but why, when we go "deeper" into a character, don't we ever find a sense of accomplishment, or a feeling of joy derived from adventure? Why must characters always be "troubled" to satisfy an audience? Can't we successfully have a happy spy?

@ Farmboy :

Can't agree more.

@Farmboy........ I agree, the Bond franchise is the wrong place to pick the psyche of the lead character apart. Bond is about entertainment and escapism. Maybe this trend is why Hollywood is having problems fielding marketable movies. I am not advocating not making “deep” movies, I enjoy them too, just as much as the action flicks, but when you mess with a formula that has worked in the past and take it too far off course, it will flop. Case in point was the Indy Jones, Chrystal Skull. It was watchable but poorly cast in an attempt to pander to the current pop crowd of movie stars.

"Skyfall promises the usual action, exotic locations, scheming villains and beautiful women"

I recommend Erika Sawajiri be given a prominent role in the next 007 movie.

He dosen't have inner demons, he's a cardboard character.