Thank you for visiting with us — we hope you enjoy the time you spend here. Be sure to check out some of the links to our friends and colleagues. To contact the webmaster, email here.
Ian Fleming, drawn by Mort Drucker, from the collection of the late John Griswold.
Today, April 13, is the 70th anniversary publication of Casino Royale, the first James Bond novel written by Ian Fleming.
In those seven decades, Bond became one of the major fictional characters of the 20th century. The film series, produced by Eon Productions, kept that going into the 21st century.
Those first-edition copies of Fleming’s Casino Royale sell for a lot. In the mid-2010s, a friend of mine got quite a lot for his copy, part of an auction of his various 007 collectibles.
Since that book’s publication, the world of James Bond has evolved. The movie series eclipsed the literary Bond.
Still, Fleming’s originals attracted prominent fans. In the United States, that included Hugh Hefter, founder of Playboy magazine, and President John F. Kennedy (1961-63). Hefner, when Raymond Benson was Bond continuation author (1997-2002), revived Playboy’s tradition of serializing Bond short stories and novels.
Ian Fleming Publications, run by the heirs of the 007 author, is coming out with new editions of the Fleming originals. There are some alterations that are controversial.
Regardless, nobody would care unless James Bond still elicited excitement and interest.
Nature abhors a vacuum. With that in mind, here are some modest questions concerning Bond 26.
Time to lighten up? Over the past five Bond films made by Eon Productions there has been a lot of angst.
Bond losing his lady love (Casino Royale, based on Ian Fleming’s first novel). Bond out for revenge (Quantum of Solace). Bond not able to save M (Skyfall). Bond discovers his foster brother was his greatest enemy (SPECTRE). Bond getting blown up with missiles (No Time to Die).
The Daniel Craig era of Bond films (which started over from the previous 20 movies) was often very serious. That era was a big difference from the mostly escapist Eon adventures that preceded it. Should the past be the future?
Could it be time to lighten things up?
Time to reduce the budget? The Bond film series has a history of hiking production budgets and bringing them back under control.
With SPECTRE and No Time to Die, the production budgets exploded. U.K. regulatory filings in 2020 suggested No Time to Die’s budget was nearing $300 million. That doesn’t include marketing costs. Is this sustainable? Sure, delays related COVID-19 were a factor. But the film industry has, more or less, adjusted to all that.
Time to let go of the homages to past Bond movies? Quantum of Solace, SPECTRE, and No Time to Die all had homages (critics would say crutches) to previous Bond films.
No Time to Die alone had multiples homages to On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. At one point, Bond is meeting with M in London with John Barry’s theme from Majesty’s plays in the background. There are multiple references to the John Barry-Hal David song We Have All the Time in the World. And, of course, we get the Aston DB5 (in the form of newly built replica cars).
Ian Fleming, drawn by Mort Drucker, from the collection of the late John Griswold.
Ian Fleming Publications, in a statement issued Feb. 27, said alterations in new editions of the author’s stories are “something Ian Fleming would have wanted.”
IFP specifically said changes to Live And Let Die, the second Bond novel, were in line with changes made in the original 1950s U.S. edition.
“We consulted with a number of external parties but ultimately decided that, rather than making changes in line with their advice, it was instead most appropriate to look for guidance from the author himself,” IFP said.
Live And Let Die, featuring a Black villain with part of the story taking place in New York City’s Harlem, has various racial issues. The title of chapter five in the original British edition contains the n-word. It was changed to “Seventh Avenue” in the U.S. edition.
“The original U.S. version of Live And Let Die, approved and apparently favored by Ian, had removed some racial terms which were problematic even in mid-1950s America, and would certainly be considered deeply offensive now by the vast majority of readers,” IFP said.
IFP said it would apply similar standards to other Fleming stories.
“We thus decided to apply the sensibilities of the original U.S. edition of Live And Let Die consistently across all the texts,” IFP said. Racial words “likely to cause great offense now, and detract from a reader’s enjoyment, have been altered, while keeping as close as possible to the original text and period.”
IFP said changes are “very small in number.” Some books, including Casino Royale, Fleming’s first novel, have not been changed.
IFP has taken over the publishing of Fleming novels and short stories. New e-books are out now and new paperbacks are to be issued in April for the 70th anniversary of the publication of Casino Royale.
Fleming’s “books deserve to be read and enjoyed as much now as when they were written,” IFP said. “We believe the new Bond editions will extend their pleasure to new audiences.”
UPDATE: Andrew Lycett, a biographer of Ian Fleming, weighed in via a commentary in The Independent.
“I feel strongly that what an author commits to paper is sacrosanct and shouldn’t be altered,” Lycett wrote. “It stands as evidence of that writer’s – and society’s – attitudes at a particular moment in time, whether it’s by Shakespeare, Dickens, or Ian Fleming.
“But there’s no way Bond’s character in the Fleming books can be modified to make him politically correct. Fleming created a sexist, often sadistic, killer, with anachronistic attitudes to homosexuals, and to a range of people of different nationalities. These stand as evidence of how Britons (or at least some of them) thought at a particular moment in time.”
Consider this an epilogue to the recent buzz about Bond 26 and the lack of news. Go back into events of the past decade (and longer) and you’ll see that Eon Productions signaled James Bond films wouldn’t be out as often.
Eon boss Barbara Broccoli said the following in a November 2012 interview with the Los Angeles Times:
“Sometimes there are external pressures from a studio who want you to make it in a certain time frame or for their own benefit, and sometimes we’ve given into that,” Broccoli said. “But following what we hope will be a tremendous success with ‘Skyfall,’ we have to try to keep the deadlines within our own time limits and not cave in to external pressures.”
Context: While 2006’s Casino Royale was wrapping up, Sony Pictures (which released Bond films at the time) announced that Bond 22 (the eventual Quantum of Solace) would be released on May 2, 2008. That would be less than two years after the release of Casino Royale. (Sony used to have the release online but it has been yanked from the company’s website.)
Eventually, Quantum of Solace would be pushed back to the fall of 2008. Even so, there was a lot of tension to meet the fall 2008 date, including a Writer’s Guild strike.
To be sure, in the 2012 LA Times interview, Broccoli didn’t provide details about giving into studio pressure. But given what happened between 2006 and 2012, it’s not a big leap to conclude the Quantum of Solace experience was an influence.
Undoubtedly, in the 2020s, there are more considerations in play with Bond 26. But it’s always useful to review the record of past events.
Barbara Broccoli, the boss of Eon Productions, has again tried to cool down temperatures related to Bond 26.
Last week, the LAD Bible website carried some comments from Broccoli that Bond 26 isn’t that far along.
“No, we haven’t even started casting yet,” she said. “There isn’t even a script.”
In past months, there have been stories from British tabloids such as The Sun that Eon has gotten hot and bothered about Aaron Taylor-Johnson as Eon’s Bond No. 007 to succeed Daniel Craig.
Some Bond fans have bitten on such reports. They figure there’s something behind such smoke.
Over the past year (or longer), there’s a notion that Eon is coming up with a long-range plan.
IF that’s true, that would be a change.
During the Daniel Craig era (2006-2021), Eon said Skyfall (2012) had nothing to do with Casino Royale (2006) and Quantum of Solace (2008).
But, with 2015’s SPECTRE was suddenly talked about part of an extended storyline (especially after Eon regained the rights to the character of Ernst Stavro Blofeld). That was extended with No Time to Die.
Eon *never* envisioned a five-part arc. But, as the movies unfolded, the talking points changed.
Now, we’re told that Eon is trying to come up with an extended plan for a post-Craig era. Maybe yes, maybe no.
But, as the saying goes, when the legend becomes fact, print the legend.
A former image for the official James Bond feed on Twitter
It’s inevitable. After the Daniel Craig version of James Bond was killed in No Time to Die, the Bond character will return somehow at some time.
But how?
Some possibilities follow.
Eon starts over — again: In Craig’s debut as Bond, Eon Productions did a reboot. That is, the series started all over again.
Since No Time to Die, Craig has claimed it was always his intention that his version of Bond would die in the end. Whether true or not, that’s how Craig’s five-film tenure played out.
Here is an excerpt from a Craig interview with the Los Angeles Times.
“Two things, one for myself and one for the franchise,” Craig said. “One, for the franchise, was that resets start again, which [the franchise] did with me. And I was like, ‘Well, you need to reset again.’ So let’s kill my character off and go find another Bond and go find another story. Start at [age] 23, start at 25, start at 30.”
However, until Eon shows its cards, there are other possibilities.
The code name theory rears its head: The code name theory refers to a way to explain how different actors (Sean Connery, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, etc., etc.) portray a character named “James Bond” while each actually is different.
The one time this notion was used occurred in the 1967 Casino Royale spoof. There was one “real” James Bond (David Niven) with multiple agents being designated as “James Bond.”
Hard-core Bond fans mostly despise this idea. But there are general movie fans who argue it’s a wonderful idea. Until Bond 26 gets sorted out, you can expect more of this stuff.
In fact, the Screen Rant website already has come out with a version of this notion.
One potential option for Bond 26 is to continue directly from the ending of No Time To Die. MI6 would be in mourning over the loss of James Bond, but international villainy waits for no one, and a replacement must be found. This new “James Bond” would then be recruited to replace Daniel Craig’s version, with explicit references to how their predecessor died saving the world from Safin and the Heracles weapon. This scenario would help preserve a semblance of continuity between James Bond movies, and also allow EON to think outside its usual box when casting Daniel Craig’s replacement.
We pretend the Craig era never happened: Eon’s Bond series had a very loose continuity from 1962-2002. When Sean Connery first departed the series in 1967, Bernard Lee’s M, Lois Maxwell’s Moneypenny and Desmond Llewelyn’s Q remained. Connery came back in 1971’s Diamonds Are Forever but Lee, Maxwell and Llewelyn remained.
Roger Moore came aboard in 1973, with Lee and Maxwell still present. Llewelyn came back as Q for Moore’s second outing in The Man With the Golden Gun.
With Bond 26, what happens with the Craig supporting cast? You could have Ralph Fiennes’ M, Naomie Harris’ Moneypenny and Ben Wishaw’s Q without any mention of the Craig version of Bond.
Conceivably, you pick up with the incredibly loose continuity of the 1962-2002 movies. Let’s move on, chaps.
Cliff Robertson in “The Game,” a 1965 episode of Bob Hope Presents the Chrysler Theatre.
Since the start of the 21st century, the most critically acclaimed James Bond film was Casino Royale (2006). Eon Productions finally had its hands on the rights for the first Ian Fleming Bond story.
Still, Eon made one significant change: Bond and the villain Le Chiffre would duel over a game of poker (very popular at the time of production), rather than baccarat or chermin de fer. The latter, essentially is like blackjack except you’re playing to 9 instead of 21.
With the 2006 movie, Casino Royale rode the enthusiasm for poker. Stories SUCH AS THIS ONE said Eon Productions concluded poker was more dramatic than baccarat.
Earlier movies made by Eon Productions used chemin de fer/baccarat as a setting. They included Dr. No (Bond playing against Sylvia Trench), Thunderball (Bond playing against Largo), and For Your Eyes Only.
Still, before Casino Royale, other spy (and non-spy) productions utilized chemin de fer/baccarat settings. Some examples:
Climax! “Casino Royale” (1954): The first James Bond adaptation was a 1954 episode of Climax!, a CBS anthology show. It featured an American Bond (Barry Nelson) dueling with a version of Le Chiffre played by Peter Lorre.
Bob Hope Presents The Chrysler Theatre: The third-season debut of the anthology show featured Cliff Robertson and Dina Merrill in a drama directed by Sydney Pollack. A Midwestern businessman stumbles into a high-stakes game of baccarat. Pollack, in one of his early directing credits, uses dutch angles to emphasize how the lead character has gotten in over his head. The episode includes a score by John Williams.
Here’s the episode:
Mission: Impossible (season 1): “Odds On Evil”: The Impossible Missions Force out-swindles a Middle Eastern dictator. The final showdown occurs between the dictator (Nehemiah Persoff) and IMF operative Rollin Hand (Martin Landau). The dictator is playing with marked cards. When Rollin has one-upped the dictator, the latter is stunned. “That is impossible.”
Rollin responds: “Your highness, in baccarat, nothing is impossible.”
Ian Fleming Publications today introduced its 70th-anniversary logo for the literary James Bond.
The Bond character debuted with the novel Casino Royale, published in 1953. The book would be adapted in the fall of 1954 on CBS, with Barry Nelson as an American version of Bond.
The rights to Casino Royale weren’t available to Eon Productions when it started its Bond film series in 1962. The novel would be parodied in producer Charles K. Feldman’s 1967 spoof. Eon finally obtained the rights and its version was released in 2006, the first Eon production to star Daniel Craig.
This year, IFP has said it will publish new editions of Ian Fleming’s original Bond stories.
Here is IFP’s tweet with the 70th-anniversary logo.
It turns out that Henry Cavill isn’t playing Superman anymore. The actor has quit The Witcher streaming show on Netflix. So does Cavill re-enter the picture to play James Bond in Bond 26?
Naturally, the blog has questions.
Is Cavill back in the picture?
I wouldn’t go banco on that.
Much has been made how Cavill, now 39, was in contention to play Bond for Casino Royale back when he was in his early 20s.
However, we know that Eon boss Barbara Broccoli was always keen on Daniel Craig playing Bond. While there were screen tests of other actors (including Cavill), they were stalking horses to show Sony/Columbia (which would release Casino Royale) that it wasn’t a one-horse race. Except, it was a one-horse race from almost the beginning.
What about the Pierce Brosnan precedent? Eon *had* signed Brosnan in the 1980s to play Bond. But the actor’s ties to the Remington Steele TV show got in the way when NBC renewed the series at the last minute. Eon would bring Brosnan back to play Bond for GoldenEye (1995).
Eon *has never* shown that level of commitment to Cavill.
Are you skeptical that Cavill had a chance this time?
Yes.
A few years ago, the conventional wisdom was Eon wouldn’t go back to Cavill because he had played Superman and appeared in spy movies (The Man From U.N.C.L.E. in 2015 and Mission: Impossible Fallout in 2018).
Now, it could be updated by saying Cavill is damaged goods by Warner Bros. rejecting him participating in future Superman movies. And don’t forget The Man From U.N.C.L.E. movie had modest box office.
Lately, Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson of Eon have talked about how a future Bond actor should be younger. Then again, Daniel Craig was 37 when cast and his first Bond movie came out when he was 38.
Henry Cavill no longer is the Man of Steel, DC/Warner Bros. said, with the actor confirming the news.
James Gunn, co-head of Warner Bros. DC Films, said on Twitter that he’s writing a new Superman film “focusing on an earlier part of Superman’s life, so the character will not be played by Henry Cavill.”
Cavill, 39, had a cameo as Superman in the recent Black Adam movie and the actor then made a public announcement he was back.
Cavill said on Instagram he had been told by the studio to make the announcement in October. Then Gunn and his fellow co-head, Peter Safran, took command of DC Films effective Nov. 1. Cavill said he was told by Gunn and Safran a change was underway.
“The changing of the guard is something that happens,” Cavill said.
Gunn said in another tweet that he and Safran “had a great meeting with Henry and we’re big fans and we talked about a number of exciting possibilities to work together in the future.”
The Hollywood Reporter said earlier this month that Cavill’s return as Superman was in doubt. Gunn, who directed Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy movies, and Safran are revamping the DC film universe.
Cavill ends his run as Superman with only one solo movie (Man of Steel in 2013) plus two other films (Batman v. Superman and Justice League) where he shared screen time with other characters. Cavill was passed over to play James Bond in the 2000s in favor of Daniel Craig for Casino Royale. And he recently quit The Witcher streaming TV show on Netflix.
The Spy Command 