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
Had to be very recent. He's rocking the same haircut he was while filming Kings.
Saying he's "a man of the times" could almost be a definition of a period character, surely?
It also depends which Bond you're talking about. The character in the novels is (based on my limited reading) a character from a quite specific moment in history. By YOLT isn't he beginning to seem a bit out of synch with the world around him?
Any way now that EON has very explicitly established parallel timelines in the series, why not have period movies and contemporary ones as they've done with the continuation novels?
Why get hung up on this? I personally think a few period films (or perhaps TV series) could be the creative shot in the arm Bond needs.
Agreed they can be lower budget as well no need for 250, maybe 70 or even less million
Bond is and has always been a contemporary character which is what is meant when referring to him as a character of the times. I understand if a 60s era is what some people want, it's a romanticised period in general; but as far as the Bond movies go, like I said the 60s came and went. If the creative stamina is lacking to make contemporary Bond films then those in charge have no business being in charge of making these films. Its all about things moving forward with the character and the films not backwards. Save that 60s stuff for the so called continuation novels.
Exactly. The hankering for a 60s film is down to a lack interest in the current iteration. It's a lazy solution to a non-existent problem.
I think it's because CR was so good, we all want to reach that kind of (relatively recent) high again.
Interestingly, I felt the same way when I watched SF. Does absence make the heart grow fonder, I wonder? Perhaps, but that can't explain why I still feel this way today when I rewatch these respective films. So it must be that the team comes back reinvigorated after a long break.
Ian Fleming was far from being greatness, but greatness shone out of his work here and there.
The 60s films had a skeleton adapted from Fleming, but all the fleshy parts have not too much in common with him, but much more with some creative filmmakers with vision and chops.
But with your last sentence, you could be correct.
Hmm, I wouldn´t be so sure about that. I let myself be haunted by SF, and pop it in every now and then, and find it rather worse than better with each try.
Anytime I watch CR, I get the exact feeling you describe. But I also find QOS extremely rewatchable.
The thing is, if the media spread a story about Bond saving the world, a lot of audiences react bored long before the film is released. So they spread stories about Bond facing a nemesis like never before or some other bs, so the average audiences think the next film must be something special, which results in a lot of people buying tickets, regardless of how good or bad the film is. It´s all about making people believe the film is great.
To be fair this is a James Bond fan site not a dedicated Fleming appreciation site. There are many Bond fans who have no interest in Fleming, only the movies. Just saying.
So bizarre. I remember feeling how retrograde and backward looking GE felt in 95. Especially after Dalton. Brosnan felt like a really bad Moore retread. I don't mean that as an insult to Rog, who i love, but GE was patently total sh*t.
CR definitely raised the bar and DC was absolutelty pivotal in that Change of gear. That's why I still give him a lot of credit and am totally relaxed about him coming back
I can appreciate that. SF seems to have polarized the fan community, as has SP. That damn Mendes!
One thing I realized on my rewatch of CR yesterday was how much of a team effort it is. Sure, Craig is marvelous in the role here, and brings an acting maturity and finesse that his predecessor wouldn't have been able to deliver, but CR is much more than that. It's a Bond film made by an entire team (writers, composer, director, producers, supporting cast cinematographer) operating at the absolute top of their game. This definitely helped Craig, and it contributed to make the film what it was.
True but imagine Brosman playing Bond. It would've been a totally different movie.
Brosnan was a brilliantly successful Bond. Some people hate him, the majority have a real affinity for him. No nonsense and visually stunning.
I cannot for the life of me understand why some people think this thread is some kind of outlet to start random, off-topic debates. Seriously. This has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Is it really changing your life that much? Christ. It's a forum for God's sake. Calm down.