›

Bond-films in the history of cinema

MrBondMrBond Station S
in Bond Movies Posts: 2,044
I've been in a film-class, I'm studying film-history and film-production and a question has been brewing in my head. Where is Bond in the world of cinema?

I have asked that question to teachers and read about it in books, but often the Bond-franchise has been marginalized as a "fun ,action romp". If we are going to discuss action/suspense/adventure in film-history, then we have to step back to the 1920's to the 1950's and then jump forward to the American films of the 80's. Thus, no Bond.

So before I went into the world of cinema I saw the Bond-franchise as a highly influential set of films. Now I realize that's not quite the case.. What do you think about this, is the series being somewhat marginalized in the overall history of importance?

Comments

  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,252
    To say Bond has had little influence would be a lie, but on a Bond forum I'd say we'd tend to overestimate Bond's importance in cinema. The first few films most definitely had a significant impact, beyond that not as much, but having said that, Nolan is highly influenced by Bond and there wouldn't be Indiana Jones otherwise
  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    Posts: 2,044
    Yeah, precisely. It's not odd that we are biased to the importance of Bond.
    But as it seems, Bond was a phenomenon during the 60's and thus ingrained into the popular culture. But in the case of cinema, Bond wasn't particularly influential at all. Most of the film-studies point to 'North By Northwest' or the Indiana Jones films instead.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    edited November 2014 Posts: 3,157
    Besides cinema, without James Bond we wouldn't have had Perfect Dark.
    That and Indiana Jones are the sufficient reasons to claim the importance of James Bond.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2014 Posts: 23,883
    It's marginalized to some extent probably because it's British & because it's action oriented.

    As far as I know, it's the longest running movie franchise and has succeeded independant of its lead actor. That is very unique.

    It has been imitated frequently throughout its 50 year history (most of the time very unsuccessfully, although from the 90's onward the competition has really been heating up and the gap between its excellence & the imitators has narrowed). In the 60s all of its many imitators were unbearable in comparison.

    Great directors like James Cameron, Christopher Nolan & Steven Speilberg have borrowed from its cannon.

    Its action, cutting edge stunt work, setpiece design, model work & scoring are still unparalleled (in terms of how advanced they were for its time during the 60's & 70's in particular).

    IMO it's a moviemaking benchmark, and film class must be revised to accomodate its place in history.

    Tragically & on a related note, John Barry never won an Oscar or a Grammy for his scores also probably because of its action orientation (another travesty)
  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,252
    I think John Barry not getting recognition is one of the greatest tragedies of cinema. His score have made each film individual and very rich. What is the Peter Franks fight without that brutal soundtrack? And while Lazenby is a great fighter (and Hunt a great editor), Barry completed the awesomeness. Plus he is the reason I like AVTAK
  • OHMSS69OHMSS69
    Posts: 2,341
    Bond was a phenomena in the 60's and after GF they became their own genre. By 1965 there were so many copycat imitators in the marketplace, that IMO Bond should be listed as the main influence on this period.

    If the films must be dismissed, then how can they not talk about the music? Those great soundtracks during the early years?

    I think Bond was a trendsetter in the 60's and the fact that after 1971 the films began to follow trends themselves is worth mentioning.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,800
    After 1962, James Bond influenced all other suspense & action cinema. To ignore James Bond in a film studies class would be like ignoring any other works of art [by characters or directors]. It's simple unbridled snobbery.
  • AnonAnon
    Posts: 246
    Much as I love Bond movies, I wouldn't expect an academic study of cinema to have much more than an acknowledgement of the exceptional longevity and appeal of the franchise - perhaps touching on certain iconic aspects that have secured an independent place in popular culture (e.g. the James Bond theme)

    They're just not remarkable enough in terms of pushing the art and technique of film making - so rarely would a Bond film be the best illustration of any paradigm change. They tend to follow rather than lead - using a big budget to pick the best techniques/talents around to make a spectacular and satisfying movie. A showcase for the state of the art of live-action cinema in a way.

    But that's not to say that there aren't particular aspects of particular Bond films that deserve academic discussion within the right topic; if there are glaring omissions in your studies' reference works I hope you feel free to correct them in your own submissions. If you can make a good argument it should be met with due consideration I'd hope.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    @Birdleson can share some light on this.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    MrBond wrote: »
    Yeah, precisely. It's not odd that we are biased to the importance of Bond.
    But as it seems, Bond was a phenomenon during the 60's and thus ingrained into the popular culture. But in the case of cinema, Bond wasn't particularly influential at all. Most of the film-studies point to 'North By Northwest' or the Indiana Jones films instead.

    I have read that North By Northwest is actually the first Bond film and there is a lot to be said for this notion as it ticks a lot of Bondian boxes. Although given NBN takes so much from The 39 Steps there is a case to be made that that was actually the first Bond film, and certainly Fleming was greatly influenced by Buchan.

    Contrary to popular belief Indy wasnt conceived as a counter to Bond just because Cubby turned Spielberg down. Lucas wanted something that harked back to the cliffhangers of matinee cinema in the same way Star Wars copied from Flash Gordon and others. Its true that Spielberg wanted to direct a Bond and Indy scratched that itch but theres every reason to think Lucas would have come up with Indy anyway even if Bond had never existed.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I have no interest. Either you get why we're here or you don't. Hopefully this Anon is long gone.
    Sure, I was just thinking that you teach film, and maybe share for those newcomers what relevance Bond has in your class.
  • TracyTracy
    Posts: 1,708
    Action heroes using puns were def inspired by Bond.
Sign In or Register to comment.