It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
May be there is confusion about what 'wit' means. As well as amusing word craft, it also means the capacity for inventive thought and quick understanding - a keen intelligence.
This is what I was thinking of, rather than just specifically the one liners.
I feel Bond, particularly during the Brosnan era, lost any intelligence. Over time we've seen less and less of Bond using his wits to escape or save the day. More and more he became a generic action bore, beating the cr*p out of people and blowing stuff up for the hell of it. GE marked the start of this. "Standard operating procedure" says the Bond who thinks its cool to drive a tank through the budings of historic St Petersburg. Connery's Bond would have been disgusted by the vulgarity.
Destroying beautiful European cities was the type of thing the villains used to plan on doing, while Bond raced to stop the ticking bomb, but by 1995 Bond was doing their work for them.
The Craig era is better, but I still find some of the bruising, crunching action a bit too dumb. The use of the bulldozer in CR and the digger at the start of SF always struck me as rather crude tools, which didn't really sit well with my idea of Bond. Again, the wielding of a giant piece of construction machinery is for me the kind of thing you expect the villain to do.
It's what was so refreshing when Craig took over the role. The character of James Bond was taken a bit more seriously again and was actually made three dimensional instead of being a cardboard cut-out to hang one liners on.
I like the humour in the Craig films as it comes from the character and situation of a given scene instead of just crowd pleasing cheesy one liners.
There is a construction-site/-vehicle fetishism (of a sort) that runs throughout the Craig films, with the exception of QoS.
CR had the tough task of transitioning the audience away not only from DAD but from the excesses since 1971. This is probably why we got the good--but overlong--action sequences and the finale in the sinking building. Forster continued the lean-but-mean approach and was slammed for it. And IMHO Mendes brought those excesses right back.
For Bond 25 I'd like a new director.
@Getafix I agree with your stance on this, though outside of yourself I know those who do want those groaning one-liners to come back.
I agree with your thoughts on the Brosnan era, in some respects. I've said it before, but they play like video games in every way. Bond has an endless assortment of guns that he uses to kill endless rooms of guys like they're spawning right behind him two a second, and the melodrama is so played up it feels like the writing of a late 90s video game in its attempt to feel dramatic. Those films had to rely on big action to create tension, whereas as Connery and Craig's films could do that with only Bond speaking to another character. I feel more tension and uneasiness when Grant has Bond dead to rights in FRWL or during the SPECTRE meeting of SP than I ever would in a big blowout finale with all the crazy frills as seen in the Brosnan films. They can be fun to look at, sure, but there's nothing beneath the surface, really.
Action in Bond works best when we know why Bond is fighting, and who he's up against. When he's firing off against rooms of random guys for twenty minutes, the feeling of impact sours, whereas in other films in the series Bond's confrontations are rooted in the context of the moment where the audience understands the stakes of the fight ahead of them.
For Bond 25, I would love to see a moment like this. If we got a finale that involved Bond and his 00s or SAS members facing off against Blofeld and what is left of SPECTRE, I would shed a tear at the sight of it. Give us a rip-roaring, context filled finale that feels like YOLT does. Bond's missions had all been leading to him facing the man behind it all in his own base, and as he storms the volcano you feel that. You feel the history of him facing Dr. No and Grant and Klebb and Largo, until he's face to face with the man to rule them all. We need to see and feel that again.
I remember after DAD and with GE EoN namely BB commenting this is what the fans wanted.
Bond 25 would be the perfect opportunity for it, and it wouldn't feel out of nowhere, as you could set up Blofeld and his SPECTRE commanders. Set it around his garden of death in Japan, and boom, there you go. It could enter the great history of the franchise alongside the battles of YOLT, TSWLM and FYEO. Give us the context of high drama between Bond and Blofeld as seen in YOLT, the image of Bond and his fellow brothers in arms standing together against the enemy as in TSWLM, and mix that in with the awesome idea of Bond and the team having to infiltrate a highly secured SPECTRE outpost (the garden of death and castle in Japan, high up on a hill) just like the compound on top of St. Cyrils.
Just imagine Bond and a team of 00s looking out on the coast of a Japanese forest amidst the bright blue night sky, seeing in the far distance the SPECTRE headquarters Blofeld has now quarantined himself inside with heavy guard:
http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/jamesbond/images/9/9c/Monastery_of_Holy_Trinity.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20140514101547
They've got to scale the gigantic cliff and assure ESB's ledger is made red, along with all those who get in their way.
Come on, now. Who wouldn't want to see that?
Within the next year, I will. Me and some folks are currently doing a MI6C Bondathon on the forums until March of next year, discussing one Bond film a week, and after that ends the same group seem keen on doing a similar marathon with the Fleming books. I've read some of them, but it'll be a great chance to read all of them.
They're hopeless. The only solution is to lock the thread, which I hope happens directly.
Coming in here just to whine also does no good. Fancy that.
Get off your pretentious high horse Khan. We're here to have fun and share with fellow Bond fans.
You're not actually adding anything except insults and whining.
Anyways, news round-up as for October, 2016:
October 2016
-Naomie Harris tells HeyUGuys that she "cannot wait to get back to work with [the producers]"; restates her desire for Craig to return
-At the New Yorker Festival, Daniel Craig is interviewed for the first time in nearly a year following SPECTRE's rollout to cinemas. He notes that while no decision has been made regarding Bond 25, "If [he] were to stop doing it, [he'd] miss it terribly."
-When asked if Bond driving away with Madeleine was the end, he responded with, "Yes, at the moment in SPECTRE, that's what he thinks. But it always says 'to be continued'."
-On B25's status, he states that, "there’s no conversation going on, and genuinely because everybody’s just a bit tired.”
-Craig was also quick to adamantly deny any allegation that he had been offered $150 million to return
Thanks for the updates ...
I came across a headline recently that read "Daniel Craig would no longer slash his wrist than play Bond again." It pissed me off.
Truer words were never spoken. It's almost mass delusional interpreting anything like Craig's likely return in that interview.
If anything people should be concerned and very about "everyone is still tired".
It's not a problem, you just mention both comments for the record. That's fine. It's the cherry-picking that gets annoying.
That's what I thought. We seem to have brushed past that remark entirely.