BOND 22 Begins Filming Thursday

By: Jarrod Sarafin, News Editor
Date: Monday, December 31, 2007
Source: MI6

Contrary to some previous films, James Bond will not be traveling as much to exotic locations in BOND 22, says director Marc Forster. Well, unless you consider the inner psyche to be exotic. The director spoke to the Swiss newspaper SonntagsZeitung and MI6 was kind enough to translate for all of us genre fans. Here's what the director had to say on 007's next journey...

"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".

In related news, The Times is also reporting they that producers have a spot picked out for future filming, that place being U.K.'s Barbican. Here's what they had to say on the shooting..

At the Barbican, a sign has gone up giving warning that next week it will be the venue for the filming of a scene from the next James Bond film, current working title Bond 22, which again will star Daniel Craig. Relax, ladies, Craig won't be there, as far as I know; but in the Sculpture Court – so named, my informant tells me, because it was once meant to have contained sculpture but now doesn't – they will film a man talking on a mobile phone, the sign says.

BOND 22 will hit theaters November 7, 2008.

More From Mania

Bond 22 Has a New 'Quantum' Title

Creators, Craig Talk JAMES BOND 22
(Saturday, September 8, 2007)
"Bond 22" Update
(Tuesday, January 30, 2007)
Daniel Craig Updates on BOND 22
(Monday, November 26, 2007)
Daniel Craig signs on to star in THE GOLDEN COMPASS
(Friday, August 18, 2006)

See more related content

More Content By Jarrod Sarafin, News Editor

Agent Zero & Barnell Revealed for WOLVERINE
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
Amazon Producing Fantasy CHILD
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
Cameron Updates Status on AVATAR
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
Doomed JLA, More Mutants & Ant Man!
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
First Bloody Pic from LOST BOYS 2
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
IRON MAN Trailer Debuts on Feb 28 Lost
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
New Victims Ready for FINAL DESTINATION 4
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
Two More Gangsters for Mann's ENEMIES
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
Weaving Tracks After the WOLFMAN
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
BIONIC WOMAN Officially Axed by NBC?
(Thursday, February 21, 2008)

Buy These Related Products

Comments/Responses

axia777 • Dec 31, 2007, 08:46am •

Sweet! Craig is a worthy Bond. After Casino Royale I am very excited to see what comes next. I have been so bored with past Bond movies with Brosnan. That last one with the Koreans and what not was just ridiculous. Craig's Bond is so much more probable and realistic. Just his guns, fists, charm, and his wits. So damn kool!

rgtchtiger • Dec 31, 2007, 08:59am •

So you're telling me that the next Bond will feature heavy (dare I even utter the words) cuh-cuh-cuh-CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT????

Granted, Casino Royale worked because it made us truly care about Bond and Vesper Lynd, but I think that was the handywork of Paul Haggis for the most part. I expected that the new Bond sequels would have at least a little character development but focus mostly on action and plot as they have tended to do over the years. This news, I must say, is good news. I would like to see more of Bond maturing as his missions continue and see if he still carries a little of his hastiness from Casino Royale at all.

Hobbs • Dec 31, 2007, 09:46am •

Dangerous grounds....Bond tried that serious crap with Timothy Dalton and it almost killed the franshise. Granted Craig is a much better bond but they must be careful. I disagree with what they say about traveling around the world and how everyone can do it now. Ummm...as a middle class family guy I don't know about you but I've had to cancel my trips to Paris, Egypt, and Austrailia due to little things like having to take care of my family. Sounds like Forster has absolutely no clue about the real world. I'm worried about this guy doing a Bond movie.

tbones420 • Dec 31, 2007, 10:29am •

I thought Brosnan was a pretty good Bond. And I did like Die Another Day. However, I really, really enjoyed Casino Royale and think Daniel Craig has done a real good job in capturing the spirit of Bond

rudewordsmith • Dec 31, 2007, 11:25am •

I couldn't stand Die Another Day -- or really any of the bond movies in the last three decades. I dug Golden Eye, but because it seemed to go back to Bond being, ya know, a spy. Not some superhero with the world's most idiotic gadgets.

Though I'm no huge fan of Haggis, I dig what he was able to do with Bond in Casino Royal. He does well with adding a human element, so long as their is some one there to keep him restrained. I don't want him turning Bond into a total after school special like "Crash". Some of the traditional elements need to stay with the franchise, like island/country hopping.

Now if you'll excuse me, I must be off. I have a very banal vacation lined up that takes me to Bucharist, Prague, Cuba, Hawaii and Iceland. Exotic locals are such a bore...

gutsmgee • Dec 31, 2007, 11:41am •

C'mon guys, he wasn't saying that everyone can just stop what they are doing and can afford to just fly around the world anytime they want...All he was saying is that it is much easier to get around in the world today, as opposed to the early 60's. Travel may not be cheap, but compared to those times, it is much more affordable and more people have access to travel if they NEED to today. While I'm still a Brosnan fan( I still think he just needed better scripts to be a GREAT Bond.), I'm still very interested in this new Bond direction.

filmnotmovie • Dec 31, 2007, 02:05pm •

What made "Casino Royale" work was the
manner in which the character development
was balanced with the action. This was one
of the most well-written of all the Bond films. Dalton's Bond was much too vulnerable (THERE'S NO CRYING IN BOND!)
I think "Casino Royale" may have been a
little too lengthy, but overall a worthy addition to the franchise. Like gutsmgee,
I'm looking forward to the new direction.
As for Brosnan, he had at least one more
Bond in him before he fell into the dreaded
Roger Moore trap.

Filch • Dec 31, 2007, 06:36pm •

First off I'd like to say that every 1 who's played bond was never bad....It just depended on the movie, Lasenby was ok but the script for HMSS sucked balls same with Dalton most people dont like him, but he was one of my fav's and he was good it's just that his first movie sucked (though Licence to Kill is one of my favs) Hell the most unbelivable bond ever was Roger Moore and yet he has some of the best movies. The point is if Casino Royale sucked we would all be saying craig sucked as bond,even though He does Kick Ass!

As for Casino Royale I think a lot of credit should go to cambell. He brought back bond with Golden eye setting the look for all of Brosnens bonds. And Golden Eye is arguablly one of the best bonds ever as is Casino Royal there at least both up there with Goldfinger. And alot of that has to do with cambell's Directing.

Hobbs • Jan 01, 2008, 11:57am •

gutsmgee. It maybe easier to get around today but it doesn't mean most of the movie paying customers can do it. I still like Bond traveling all around the world going to places that I'll probably never be plus it was part of the charm of the movies. To take that out is a mistake but that's just my opinion. I'll still go see the movie when it comes out but I don't like the direction this guy is talking about.

gauleyboy420 • Jan 01, 2008, 03:29pm •

There is simply no question that it is much easier, and cheaper to travel around the world in the year 2008, than in 1968.
If you choose not to travel because you spend your $$$ on blue ray and high def tv's fine, but traveling is CHEAP! I'm more poor than a Hollywood writer, and I have traveled to plenty of places that 30 years ago would have cost tens of thousands more.
With plane tickets to Caribbean Islands for $300 round trip, and to almost anywhere in Europe for under $700 ANYONE who regularly spends $$$ on movies, comics, TV's can afford to travel. If you have obligations like children and health issues maybe not, but with a negative attitude it will be definitely not.
AND if your afraid of traveling (terrorism, puh-lease) then you have no one to blame but yourself.
Save up $1500 over a year, and you can travel to just about anywhere in the world. Thats roughly $100 per month that you willl have to save instead of buying DVD's, Games, Comics, and going to the movies. Trust me traveling to these places is better than watching them on the big screen.
I guess what I'm really getting at is this guy is absolutely correct about traveling, It's not for the upper class only anymore.

Mania is the premiere online destination for fans of science fiction, fantasy, horror, and anime entertainment. It is the largest community offering profiles, video, science fiction movies, sci fi TV, art, sci fi comics, photos, cheats, blogs, science fiction books, forums and feedback. Mania offers insider entertainment industry info and original content for science fiction, fantasy, and horror entertainment genres including: video games, comics, gadgets, movies, television, toys, music, books, DVDs and more. © Mania Entertainment, LLC. 2001 - 2008