WatchingThe Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfarehas made me excited aboutJames Bond 26for its historical potential. In the realm of espionage,the1960s stand as a golden era. A time when martini-sipping agents navigated a world of Cold War intrigue and technological marvels. Yet, in recent years, the James Bond franchise has strayed from this classic aesthetic, venturing into more contemporary settings. I think a return to the past could, while not thewildest Bond prediction, breathe new life into the iconic spy.
Inspired by the true story of the Special Operations Executive (SOE) and their daring missions during World War II, Guy Ritchie’sThe Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfareoffers a glimpse into another bygone era, the 1940s. While the film may not have been a box office sensation, it showcases the potential of a period-piece Bond adventure. By exploring the early days of MI6 and introducing a key villain from Bond’s history, a1960s-set film could offer a fresh and exciting directionfor theBond franchise afterNo Time To Die.
The Ministry Of Ungentlemanly Warfare Proves A Period James Bond Movie Would Work
Guy Ritchie’s High-Octane Spy Movie Has A Historical Setting
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfareis based on atrue story taken from Winston Churchill’s classified files, declassified in 2016. Guy Ritchie’s high-octane movie dramatizes one of the SSRF’s most daring missions. The source material,Churchill’s Secret Warriors: The Explosive True Story of the Special Forces Desperadoes of WWIIby Damien Lewis, details the WWII background. Britain struggled to stop Nazi Germany’s European takeover. London faced constant bombing, and German submarines sank supply ships. With Winston Churchill, Brigadier Colin Gubbins planned“Operation Postmaster”: a secret sabotage mission to disrupt German U-boat resupply in Spanish-controlled Fernando Po.
SOE agents Marjorie Stewart and Richard Heron left by train. Gubbins formed a ground team led by Gus March-Phillips to destroy the Italian supply ship Duchessa d’Aosta and its tugboats. This sets the scene forThe Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare,reinforcing my belief thata period setting is a great backdrop for a spy movie. While a war setting would detract from Bond’s traditional espionage plots, other decades would create a brilliant backdrop for a period Bond piece. A1960s Bond settingwould pay homage to classics, while also giving more scope to explore Bond’s backstory.
James Bond 26 Being Set In The 1960s Would Give A Clean Slate After 007’s Death
Undoing The End Of No Time To Die Would Be An Injustice
A reason to travel back in time is, of course, Bond’s death at the end of the last Daniel Craig Bond movie,No Time To Die.Reviving him with anew Bond castingand continuing his story would retcon what I think was a magnificently written ending. The next film will either be unrelated or visit Bond’s past. Classics likeGoldfingerare too beloved to be remade andthe cinematic landscape is oversaturated with remakes. It would only communicate that Bond has run out of ideas. Being the crown jewel of British cinema, the last thing Bond should be is underwhelming.
James Bond 26: Who Could Play 007 & Everything We Know
The Daniel Craig 007 era ended with the release of No Time to Die, but what comes next? Here’s everything that’s been revealed about Bond 26.
Giving Bond morebackstory from his early years in MI6would be an incredible way to bring Bond back. A patriotic appeal cannot be taken for granted anymore, so this could be a good strategy to further develop his character. More emphasis on his motivations would make him more vulnerable and relatable, as the writing and incredible performances in the Daniel Craig movies established. It would also provide the opportunity to cast an unknown, which would be a good solution to the burning debate about who should play the iconic spy next – another way to make a clean slate.
The Ministry Of Ungentlemanly Warfare’s Poor Box Office Could Make A 1960s Bond Movie Less Likely
Ritchie’s Historical Romp Was A Box Office Bomb Which Could Affect Bond’s Direction
One could argue thatThe Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare’s Box Office bomb makes it less likely that audiences will be treated to a period Bond movie. However,I don’t think it’s the period setting that lets the movie down. If anything, the generalcritical consensus onRotten Tomatoesseems to be that it’s a breezy, fun movie and that the historically-based events and setting make up for its other shortcomings. However, while its Boys’ Adventure tone would translate well to an old Bond movie, it wouldn’t translate well to a period Bond piece made today beyond fan service.
[Bringing back 006] would truly cementJames Bond 26in backstory territory while exploring a compelling dynamic.
For a1960s Bond movieto work, it needs to explore social mores of the time without reinforcing them – much like HBO’s seminal series,Mad Men. It needs to be on that level of writing to do well. I will also always argue that it needs to do what the franchise set out to do but ultimately backed out of during Daniel Craig’s tenure – that is,bringing back Bond villain006. Theearly years of MI6 with James and Alec working closely togetherwould truly cementJames Bond 26in backstory territory while exploring a compelling dynamic.
