Bond 24 announced, called: SPECTRE

October 23rd 2015 in the UK.
November 6th 2015 in the US

“A cryptic message from Bond’s past sends him on a trail to uncover a sinister organisation. While M battles political forces to keep the secret service alive, Bond peels back the layers of deceit to reveal the terrible truth behind SPECTRE.”

Locations: London, Rome, Mexico City, Morocco, Tanjia, Austria.
Sam Mendes Directing
Thomas Newman Composing
Lee Smih Editing
Hoyte van Hoytema Cinematography

Aston Martin DB10 as CAR
Daniel Craig as James Bond
Christoph Waltz as Ernst Stavros Bl-I mean uh, Franz Oberhauser
Léa Seydoux as Madeleine Swann
Monica Bellucci as Lucia Sciarra
Ralph Fiennes as M
Naomie Harris as Miss Moneypenny
Ben Whishaw as Q
Rory Kinnear as Bill Tanner
Andrew Scott as Denbigh
Dave Bautista as Mr. Hinx

hnghhhhhh, I'm hype.

Christoph Waltz!

Might make up for the travesty of what they did to Blofeld in the earlier movies once they decided to show him.

Craig <3

Judging by the cast and the return to the roots with Spectre and likely gadgets, I'm rather looking forward to it's release.

Yay more Craig Bond!

i think this is the last one he's doing though :(

He signed on for 2 more after Skyfall so Bond 25 is his last.

Oh no not more CIA american Daniel Craig as bond (Yes i know the guy is british)

I simply cant stand the way they have turned Bond from an english gentleman into a American bulldog.

You should complain to Ian Fleming. Craig's Bond is as close to the novels as possible.

What does Iam Fleming have to do with the casting of Daniel Craig and the idea to make him more american?

I know Ian Flemings books have more trouble and dark Bond, but that doesn't mean he wasn't an english gentleman still.

Interested more for Christopher Waltz, hes gonna do awesome justice to Blofeilds role ... imo :)

I like those Bond girls grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

And Waltz will Waltz.

November 6th is much too far away.

No Judi Dench though. :(

Not sure why that's relevant since the movie portrayals of Bond have very clearly been not in the style of the original novels, and most people's reference is to the movies, not the books. They clearly haven't cared much for decades about being true to the novels. Why should they start now?

If you went into the Craig movies wanting to see more of the movie-style Bond, then it's a big disappointment. But for what it is, Skyfall at least was quite good.

What does it even mean to make him more "American"? Craig's Bond is just an even closer to the book version than Dalton's was and he's still distinctly British. He's very firmly rooted in the style of old Cold War-era thrillers by British writers like John Le Carre and Graham Green, only now he acts like an actual killer and not a caricature like the films before him. He still possesses the dry wit that he's always had, too and is quite a gentlemen. It's fine if you don't like the portrayal for whatever reason but it's not as big a paradigm shift as some would have you think. Certainly not some bizarre accusation of "Americanization" either considering Bond always makes more money outside of the US.

The movies have been using the book portrayals for 8 years and 4 films now, even more if you count the Dalton films.. It's pretty obvious to anyone with half a brain that this is the de-facto Bond style now and EON isn't going back to the goofiness of the pre-Craig eras. To still complain about the change of tone this far out is just dumb, it's time to get over it.

As for the second bolded, whoever had those expectations is an idiot.

I see Waltz is being typecast.

On the other hand, Seydoux. Hngg.

No Deakins makes me sad, but they got one hell of a cinematographer to replace him. Excited for this. I still think 'Skyfall' is probably my favorite Bond film, SO glad Mendes is returning.

He is definitely too obvious of a choice for the role, which is disappointing. Would have preferred just Andrew Scott.

Or Ejiofor, but I think that was just a rumor.

Again i know the story of Bond, i have read all of the books, seen all of the movies and watch what extra there is. And one thing you can be sure of and that no english gentlemen would be caught dead not having sophistication, have english class and look like he just stepped out of a armani catalogue. And that is Bond no matter what he might do or is , he would still have class particular since it wasn't a secret that Fleming put a certain "distaste" for america and the american culture in the books.

Bond is not Daniel "American" Craig who looks like he just stepped out of a John Wayne Western or óut of an oli-drill in texas. And thats what i mean with american, where England is sophistication and english nobility, america is John Wayne and roughnecks. Not that there is anything wrong with that but its the difference there is. And i can't help but feel its a bit of a F U to Ian fleming that Bond is now being americanized, but my common sense tells me its just because they think it will hit a broader audidence then having a bond like Connery, Brosnan and Moore.

Also why even mention of the absolute worst bonds besides Craig there has been? Dalton was not good.

I'd be more hyped for Spectre if the Daniel Craig films hadn't already shat all over the organisation in Quantum of Solace.

I mean, this is sounding like the sequel to Casino Royale that we never got.

I would hope that that just came out wrong, because it reeks of snobbishness and condescension.

Either way, Bond hasn't been Americanized as much as it has been Bournized.

Silly and goofy doesn't play well now.

We live in the action era of Bourne, The Dark Knight and, to a lesser extent, Taken.

Is your problem just Craig? Would you accept Casino Royale if it were played by Brosnan or Connery?

Or do you want the series to go back to the Moore era?

Hmm, if you prefer we can easily call it bournized , because that is what meant and yes of course that has a lot to do with the actor they have chosen to portray Bond, craig looks american and despite his english accent, he talks and acts very american.

He is everything i would expect to see in american action movie about CIA, he is the archetype of the hero in a Tom Clancy's spy novels not Ian Fleming. So yes i would love to see Connery or Moore or Brosnan in the movies craig was in, because they would still be british/english

But they are unfortunately too old and don't appeal to the younger generation. But there are so many other great actors who could be 007 Bourne and still maintain the demeanour of a english gentleman and not be John Wayne.

Thing have to evolve. Even spy movies.

Sure things has to evolve, but that doesnt mean it has to flip upside down and become something else.

I hate to break it to you, but espionage has changed. When the game changes, the spy must also change. The newer Bond films more accurately represent current affairs.

Eh? are we talking real spies? because it has never been anything like Bond it is afterall just a movie.

Not even today is spies anything like Daniel Craigs Bond. They are dull, hidden and never out in the sunlight.

Do people forget the terrible abomination James Bond movies had become pre-Craig?

So you think people shouldn't criticize a style they don't like just because it's sticking around? Are you retarded?

I said more accurately, not realistically.

@chessmaster1989: How did you get that from what I said? Criticize all you want but to still pine for the old goofy style years later after Casino Royale and later Skyfall proved to be massive successes is just nonsensical. EON isn't going to change back so like I said, move on and accept the films for what they are or don't watch them.

Yup. There's like 4, maybe 5 pre-Craig films that I can still watch without turning it off midway.

Well you're saying outright several times people shouldn't advocate for a style of the film they prefer. Typically people advocating the old style are simultaneously criticizing the new style while advocating the old (ie offering an alternative), so it makes no sense for you to complain when people advocate a different style but be ok with criticism.

I'm talking strictly from the business perspective of it for EON, my bad if there's some confusion. These films are wildly successful so it doesn't make sense for EON to revert to the old style - that's all I meant by that. The original post I quoted almost seemed surprised that Craig is back for another.

Oh, I agree from a business perspective. I thought you were talking about personal opinions (since that's usually what people talk about in these threads).

Any word of trailer release?

@behardy24: Joking, right???