ROTTEN TOMATOES: Bond 22 to Get Inside 007's Head?

Bond 22 to Get Inside 007's Head?

Far-flung locales, exotic babes not enough for Forster.

by Jeff Giles | January 02, 2008

It doesn't have an official title yet, but Daniel Craig's second go-round as James Bond is about to commence principal photography -- and director Marc Forster has started divulging information about what might be in store for Agent 007.

According to ComingSoon, Forster did an interview with the Swiss newspaper SonntagsZeitung, promptly translated by the fansite MI6, in which he revealed that Bond 22 starts filming tomorrow -- and that Bond's latest adventures might take place in somewhat unfamiliar territory:

"When Bond began in the Connery days, travel was a luxury not everyone could afford. Today, the world has become smaller. If Bond goes to a beach with palm trees it's almost banal now. The only interesting trip remains the journey inwards, deep in to the psyche."

ComingSoon's report goes on (courtesy of The Times) to identify London's Barbican as this week's filming location. No Daniel Craig this time -- just "a man talking on a mobile phone" -- but with a November 7 release date for the next Bond adventure, the real action is just around the corner.

Source: ComingSoon
Source: MI6
Source: The Times

Related Items

Celeb:	Daniel Craig
	Marc Forster

(1-20 of 27 posts) | Reply

dahluzz writes:
on Jan 02 2008 06:24 AM

although this doesn't sound like classic bond, it isn't really supposed to. given casino royale's sometimes sloppy bond, a guy who's still coming to terms with his own abilities and expectations, it makes sense that part 2 would deal with his psyhological maturation.

bond is cocky in CR, not self-assured as he later becomes. The introspective take could be a good way of developing him as a relatable character, kind of like Bourne, instead of an icon who somehow dodges every bullet that's shot at him. however, if forster goes too far ( a la his disaster "stay) this could ring false as a 007 picture.

normally i'd say 'no big whooop, paul haggis wrote it' but he did so under the intense pressure of a looming strike, so ya never know...

(Reply to this)

ivinhit writes:
on Jan 02 2008 06:30 AM

the former bond who used to be handsome,elegant is going far far away......

(Reply to this)

largely writes:
on Jan 02 2008 06:51 AM

In reply to this comment (#1418393)
To ivinhit: Oh you mean the the Hollywoodized superman that only exists in cold war period idealism. Where the good guys are good and the bad guys have a gaping scar on the side of their face. Who says that a Bond film has to only be pure escapism, why can't there be a Bond we can relate to not a fabricated (elegant) drone like the last million Bonds. I'm sick of not knowing who James Bond really is. I am tired of just a guy in a suit who does CG stunts, where every four movies or so they just put some other tool in the suit and he comes barreling out of a bunch explosions, unscathed (unlike Craig). Yawwwwwwn!

(Reply to this)

JUDGE DREDD writes:
on Jan 02 2008 07:52 AM

I hated Broznans bond, I hated daltons bond, i only liked Moores bond as a kid, just for the gadgets and lotus, Lazenbys one off bond was well :o
Connerys Bond was great, yet the films were on the dated side.

technically, i should not like Bond.
Now thanks to Casino Royal, i do, and i look forward to seeing the sequel. "Agent 007" would be a good name for it i reckon. Although, not sure how they would write song lyrics for that.

Be good to see bond in the swiss alps again, or somewhere like that. And at least a fancy watch or bullet proof car? Nothing too silly, but one or 2 gadgets would be nice.

(Reply to this)

Typhoon20 writes:
on Jan 02 2008 08:05 AM

I must admit, before Daniel Craig starred in CR and he was signed to star as James Bond I was skeptical, I was very ignorant at the time, I had no wisdom, I had no open-mind. I thought he was wrong for the role, I was furious...than I saw the movie and I realised, this is the best Bond ever. He's so good for the role. That shows that you always always have to have an open-mind about things, prejudices are wrong. I was an idiot, and I learned my lesson.

(Reply to this)

Daniel Aaron writes:
on Jan 02 2008 08:12 AM

i thought the last bond was lame this sounds like more of the same

(Reply to this)

Novastar. writes:
on Jan 02 2008 08:20 AM

The biggest difference with the other Bonds is that this one got serious,instead of loosing his time throwing outdated one-liners.That's what Bond is about,getting down to business!

(Reply to this)

Introducing.. writes:
on Jan 02 2008 08:52 AM

I really don't care what they do with Bond, as long as the film is just as good if not better than Casino Royale.

(Reply to this)

rt_hire_me writes:
on Jan 02 2008 09:05 AM

I get tired of watching trained soldiers pursue Bond without taking cover. Yes, I know it's only make believe, but it really undermines the sense of peril we're supposed to be feeling. Not to worry, Jimbo, this army was trained by Sgt. Bilko.

(Reply to this)

CowboyMovieJunkie26 writes:
on Jan 02 2008 10:53 AM

This sounds like its going to pick up where CR left. If you're diving into his head then everything is fair game as to what they can do as he tries to find himself as an agent and deal with the lose of the only woman he ever loved. Should make for a very interesting Bond flick.

(Reply to this)

Hamboner writes:
on Jan 02 2008 11:01 AM

Pre CR, Bond is a truly boring character. The only way he has remained viable through the years is through MGM's PR hype-machine, long absenses during which we forget how bad the last film was, and switching the actor to hint at a possible change.

They can do no wrong with Bond if they continue in this direction, because he was a parody of himself before CR and and it took a jarringly different movie to change that. Moore, Brosnan, et al would just mail it in movie after movie. Thank god for this. Even if they lose the identity of the character altogether in one of these movies, who cares. Bond didn't have an identity anyway, just a series of one liners and a dictionary-thick litle black book.

(Reply to this)

muffin7 writes:
on Jan 02 2008 11:41 AM

Novastar, I loved Casino Royal but felt like it was missing one thing. Up until this point I just couldn't put my finger on what that one thing was. Now I know. It was the one-liners. Damnit, how much better everything would be if one-liners were spouted out every couple of minutes.

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Jan 02 2008 11:51 AM

Forster sounds like he has the right approach. It really isn't that impressive going to exotic locales anymore since 200 action movies do this every year with the fancy type-writer text showing the "Monaco" or "Buenos Aires" over a flyby of the city.

(Reply to this)

blank blank writes:
on Jan 02 2008 01:41 PM

stay was incredibly ambitious and even though the plot wasnt exactly great, the camera work and the look of the movie alone makes it worth watching for me.

even though forster is not an action guy, i am EXTREMELY interested to see what he does with bond. craig was great but i still think connery is the best bond. brosnan was also great, but he got saddled with a crappy supporting cast/writing/villain/director in everything except goldeneye.

(Reply to this)

damvbat writes:
on Jan 02 2008 03:04 PM

WTF

(Reply to this)

T45Red writes:
on Jan 02 2008 05:15 PM

I really enjoyed the first one and am looking forward to watching this next installment. I think that Craig is a good Bond and his performance was great in this movie.

(Reply to this)

RUM0R writes:
on Jan 02 2008 06:04 PM

I too was leary when I saw Craig was casted as the new Bond. After having seen CR, I've been pleasantly surprised with Craig as the new Bond. I'm definitely looking forward to this one.

(Reply to this)

JazzX writes:
on Jan 03 2008 09:15 AM

They took a real chance on the last film - that would've been the very last Bond film if it hadn't done well, so they made sure it was done the way it should be.

As for one-liners Muffin7:

* ("how was your lamb?")

"'Skewered'. One sympathises."

* "That last hand ... it nearly killed me."

* "The whole world's going to know you died scratching my balls"

* ("If all that was left of you was your little finger, you'd still be more of a man than anyone I've ever met")
"That's because you know what I can do with my little finger"
("I've no idea")
"But you're just aching to find out ..."

* "Vodka Martini"
("shaken or stirred")
"Does it look like I give a damn?"

* "Champagne and Caviar please"
("Will that be for 2 sir?")
"No. For one."

I could go on - but I'll let someone else add more great lines on. There were more good lines in this film than the previous 3 Bond films put together.

(Reply to this)

Havokdx writes:
on Jan 03 2008 10:27 AM

I loved the new serious level they put into this film especially it seemed to me that Bond was more badass in this film then any other which I think is the way its supposed to be. And jazz good call on the one-liners I died laughing with the "scratching my balls" one. I really can't wait for 22.

(Reply to this)

BowieSwimmer writes:
on Jan 03 2008 06:43 PM

While no one can stop Connery as the best Bond...
Craig came pretty damn close. No joke, very very close.
He's superb, and while I never questioned him [I'd been a fan since Layer Cake was first released, so I knew he could pull it off. Go rent it by the way; a very well done drug/crime thriller], I was still presently surprised by his excellent performance. And the one-liners were truly superb in CR. Plus, he, plus the great buzz for CR, pulled in so newbie fans, which always helps.

I'm definitely looking forward to Bond 22 [reportedly to be titled simply 007]...
And I have extreme faith in Marc Foster. Just as long as he doesn't turn in back towards the weird campy vibe seen towards the end of Brosnan's run. Just continue to darker vibe of CR, and things will be stellar.

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Quantum of Solace

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links