›

Did you guys really wanted this Dark Bond before it happened?

truthtellertruthteller
edited June 2015 in Bond Movies Posts: 4
Many people here are very happy that James Bond took this darker approach closer to Fleming's books
But how many of you were wishing for it before it happened?

I'm asking this because before Craig i never heard of the novels and people claiming Pierce Brosnan Roger Moore and Sean Connery are not like the guy from the books, sure i latter knew Dalton was the first who got closer to the novels but it wasnt such a big deal till Daniel Craig took over.

So how many of you were wishing for this current take to happen before it finally did ?
«1

Comments

  • PlykshowPlykshow Kent, United Kingdom
    Posts: 35
    I didn't want it to happen at the time... and I still don't like it now X(
  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,847
    I love it and always wanted it..
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Yes, a harder, gritter Bond is fantastic. :) I'm very happy with it.
  • jobojobo
    edited June 2015 Posts: 7,507
    Yes, a harder Bond has always been the right way to go for me. He is a spy with a licence to kill for god's sake, not Michael Palin!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2015 Posts: 23,883
    It's a fine line imho. Some humour is also appropriate, but not too much, but most important is the character must be credible. Some credibility was lost over the years, and it has been regained, thankfully. I think they have the balance right at the moment. Just right actually.
  • KerimKerim Istanbul Not Constantinople
    Posts: 2,629
    Yes, yes, heck yes. Dark Bond (early Connery, Lazenby, Dalton, Craig) is always better
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited June 2015 Posts: 17,801
    Kerim wrote: »
    Yes, yes, heck yes. Dark Bond (early Connery, Lazenby, Dalton, Craig) is always better

    \m/ YES!!! And bits of Brosnan!
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    Yes...

    i enjoyed Pierce's run as Bond (Die Another Day, not so much), but in it's entirety, I enjoyed him... but the films were starting to become less Bond, and more videogame - my favorite Bond film has been (for a very long time) From Russia With Love - i fell in love with it when i first saw it at the age of 14 (and mind you, this was during Pierce's heyday as 007).. something about that style of Bond film always resonates with me... so when i heard that for Casino Royale they were going to kind of go back to that style of Bond film - i applauded with joy... FRWL will always be the definitive Bond film, and the closer they stay to that, the better..
  • zebrafishzebrafish <°)))< in Octopussy's garden in the shade
    Posts: 4,341
    Did I want a Bond with more deepness after DAD? Yes, very much. Perfectly happy with where the series has gone so far. I only wish back for the one moment in each film that screams Bond, including glorious visuals and the Bond or 007 theme. The end of CR comes to mind.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    zebrafish wrote: »
    I only wish back for the one moment in each film that screams Bond, including glorious visuals and the Bond or 007 theme.

    i do too wish for more use of the Bond theme again.... i felt like it being used in SF was just a tease - it was essentially used for Bond making a right hand turn and driving down the street... i want to hear it in it's entirety over a Bond moment in an action sequence again.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    Yes. I had been hoping for it for a long time, even deluded myself that Brosnan movies were heading this way, albeit clumsily, until DAD. And I was not even a Dalton fan.
  • SharkySharky
    Posts: 266
    I definitely wanted them to get back to a more down to earth Bond after DAD, I was thinking more along the lines of FYEO, I thought they would do a more down to earth film but with little bits of silliness, so they went for it more than what I thought they would and I have been more than happy with the way they have gone. I think it worked to strip everything away and I think they got the balance pretty much perfect, it is serious but there is still humour in the Craig films but more subtle, and executed better.
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,617
    Its interesting that he is described as a dark Bond. I would prefer an description of just a more human Bond. All people have their light and dark moments. Previous Bonds seemed to have all light moments , brushing off death and violence with a smile and a quip. Having a Bond who shows negative emotions now and again just makes him human IMHO
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    patb wrote: »
    Its interesting that he is described as a dark Bond. I would prefer an description of just a more human Bond. All people have their light and dark moments. Previous Bonds seemed to have all light moments , brushing off death and violence with a smile and a quip. Having a Bond who shows negative emotions now and again just makes him human IMHO

    I agree. I don't like the use of 'dark', 'gritty', 'realistic' when talking about a lot of modern cinema. 'Human' is a much better way of describing it. 90% of films that people describe as 'dark', aren't.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    I can't really tell as I became a Bond fan in 2011, but I really appreciate Craig's harder and grittier Bond, and although Brosnan remains my favourite Bond, Craig's era is definitely my favourite one.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    I always wanted it an I am thrilled with that it is what it is now. Craig's interpretation like Felming wrote Bond to be is multi layered and complex. DC is the man!
  • PDJamesBondPDJamesBond
    Posts: 669
    Some very good points have been made here in regards to the word "darker." The films aren't necessarily "dark" - they're simply not all light.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Kerim wrote: »
    Yes, yes, heck yes. Dark Bond (early Connery, Lazenby, Dalton, Craig) is always better

    This. Being a spy and an assassin is a brutal and harrowing business. I want to see that reflected in my Bond movies and Bond himself needs to be a well trained, lethal killer and not some COD bullet spraying joker. Early Connery, OHMSS, the Dalton flicks, CR and QoS have been the best in conveying this well embraced, perfectly dark tone.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    edited June 2015 Posts: 2,138
    I describe it as a smiling shaped crack in a broken mirror. Fleming and Dans interpretation are of a man who has put all of the angst and rage (of his parents death and a tought child hood going to school with posh kids who treated him differently for not coming from proper money, then the further rage whether it be the death of Vesper or Tracey) and thrown himself into to his employment, which has overtaken his life. MI6 used that and created the necessary monster to do the jobs others fear or would fail to do because they don't have the stealy nerve to pull it off, because Bond himself feels he has nothing to lose. He shows disregard for his own life because part of him would welcome death. The job keeps him stable, the job encourages indulgence and its a vicious circle he can't get out off. The good part of him hates injustice and the bad part of him justifies some of his action with telling himself it's just his job or duty. As I said so many layers and so complex. There was a vulnerability to Flemings Bond, Lazenbys Bond and Dan's Bond I admire. Behind the the cold hearted ruthless spy is a good hearted boy who was handed a bad hand in life, and you get little glimpses or that and it makes Bond more than just a bland action adventure hero.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I love it and always wanted it..

    My thoughts exactly!
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Kerim wrote: »
    Yes, yes, heck yes. Dark Bond (early Connery, Lazenby, Dalton, Craig) is always better
    This exactly.

    Granted, it takes a great actor to pull off this kind of interpretation. We are very lucky to have Craig these days.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,801
    SirHilaryBray wrote: »
    I describe it as a smiling shaped crack in a broken mirror. Fleming and Dans interpretation are of a man who has put all of the angst and rage (of his parents death and a tought child hood going to school with posh kids who treated him differently for not coming from proper money, then the further rage whether it be the death of Vesper or Tracey) and thrown himself into to his employment, which has overtaken his life. MI6 used that and created the necessary monster to do the jobs others fear or would fail to do because they don't have the stealy nerve to pull it off, because Bond himself feels he has nothing to lose. He shows disregard for his own life because part of him would welcome death. The job keeps him stable, the job encourages indulgence and its a vicious circle he can't get out off. The good part of him hates injustice and the bad part of him justifies some of his action with telling himself it's just his job or duty. As I said so many layers and so complex. There was a vulnerability to Flemings Bond, Lazenbys Bond and Dan's Bond I admire. Behind the the cold hearted ruthless spy is a good hearted boy who was handed a bad hand in life, and you get little glimpses or that and it makes Bond more than just a bland action adventure hero.
    Wow, this is SO well written it should be published somewhere! Awesome @SirHillaryBray!!!
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    I just think DC is the big reason as to why Bond is back again and so strong!
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,801
    Of all the so-called 'dark Bond' films, IMO Dalton's got him just right. Early Connery's and Craig's not far behind.
  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    Are we talking about Craig's portrayal of Bond or the tone of the films themselves? Because in tone, even the 'dark' Dalton film has way more in common with Moore than Craig. Do a OP/LTK/SF mini marathon and tell me which is the odd one out as far as tone.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    Sark wrote: »
    Are we talking about Craig's portrayal of Bond or the tone of the films themselves? Because in tone, even the 'dark' Dalton film has way more in common with Moore than Craig. Do a OP/LTK/SF mini marathon and tell me which is the odd one out as far as tone.

    That's very true. That's why I am never convinced when people say Dalton's movies were the darkest, grittiest, most realistic. The sole portrayal of Bond by Dalton does not make the whole Bond universe and the surrounding is far lighter.
  • eddychaputeddychaput Montreal, Canada
    Posts: 364
    HASEROT wrote: »
    Yes...

    i enjoyed Pierce's run as Bond (Die Another Day, not so much), but in it's entirety, I enjoyed him... but the films were starting to become less Bond, and more videogame -

    I can echo this sentiment. My parents introduced me to Bond at a very young age, perhaps 9 or 10 years old. I grew up watching a lot of them and GE was the first one I saw in theatre. By 2002 I was just barely entering adulthood and still liked Bond quite a bit, but what they were doing with the Brosnan films lessened my interest a bit. In fact, the 4 year wait between DAD and CR went by without me really giving Bond much thought. DAD kind of put my interest on ice (pun most definitely intended). I think that in my gut I wanted something grittier.

    2006 comes around with CR, I'm a slightly (SLIGHTLY) more mature adult and I freaking love CR. So yeah, I guess I was clamouring for a darker Bond too.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    And it's not only the darker aspects I had been wanting back. It's the other things we had lost since the 1960s: the continuity, the recurring adversaries, the plots that are not remakes of either GF or YOLT.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    truthteller wrote:
    Many people here are very happy that James Bond took this darker approach closer to Fleming's books
    But how many of you were wishing for it before it happened?

    I'm asking this because before Craig i never heard of the novels and people claiming Pierce Brosnan Roger Moore and Sean Connery are not like the guy from the books, sure i latter knew Dalton was the first who got closer to the novels but it wasnt such a big deal till Daniel Craig took over.

    So how many of you were wishing for this current take to happen before it finally did ?

    All my favourite films are of the darker variety......DN, FRWL, OHMSS, CR, TB, LTK etc. Brozzers films got worse to the point of parody with DAD. The change was welcomed with open arams by me.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    edited June 2015 Posts: 1,731
    Yes. But since SF it seems EoN are not following through with what CR and QoS built up.
Sign In or Register to comment.