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
I notice you didn't respond to any of the points though, just concentrating on those two words.
But with a lot of the stuff I see on social media, I am a bit worried for the next generation of men and for me it is too easy to say "Well, it hasn't influenced me negatively, so there's no way for it to influence anyone negatively, ever." Don't be fooled, a lot of people point to Bond as a role model for the very toxic lifestyle they for some reason want to promote. They are wrong. But they are still doing it.
I am rambling. I just want Bond to be cool and be a role model for a new generation of men. To me he's never been a bad boy anti-hero, so I don't think they need to start now.
I think that seems a good point. I think NTTD did that pretty well in fact. He wasn't presented as perfect, but as a good man overall.
I mean, there are many different ways you can present Bond in today's world, but at his heart I'd like them to try and stick to how Fleming described him. Fundamentally he's a man with many vices but really only two virtues which are patriotism and bravery. The Craig era for all its flaws did get that about Bond.
Yes, that's my same feeling too.
He prefers France as his go-to-vacation, Bond annually visits Vesper's grave there, so he's always there.
And the fact that Fleming never stayed in the UK also proved it, he spent his retirement life in Jamaica than in UK, and the majority of his earlier life in foreign countries than in UK, travelling, out of country vacations.
TND is a slightly better performance than his others in my mind. He still seems a little green in GE, is generally pretty good in TWINE but overacts during the confrontations with Renard and Elektra, and is again good in DAD for most of it until the climax where some of the line deliveries are off and I don't think he's sure how to play it (not his fault though, it was rough). He's consistently strong all across TND.
Bond is a cynical character in the novels for sure. Same in the films to various extents, especially the likes of TLD and SF. He has no pretences about the futility of the Cold War (ie. the whole 'chasing the Red Indian' speech from CR) nor of Britain's diminishing status as a world power, and indeed the 'dirty nature' of his own profession. He's not even English.
The way I look it at it though is through the lens of SF, which again is a film I think perfectly gets this aspect of Bond's character. He and Silva are almost mirror images of each other - both are/were MI6 agents (and moreover both are not originally English, so are outsiders in this way), both went 'off grid' and were happy to be presumed dead after a mission went awry partly due to M, both have been badly injured as a result of these missions etc. Of course, Bond is the one who returned to MI6 out of a sense of duty, while Silva becomes a cyber terrorist obsessed with revenge. Silva even mocks him for this during their first encounter (ie."England...The Empire. You're living in the ruins.") There's a case to be made that without that sense of duty on Bond's part - his patriotism - he could easily have gone down a similar route. At the very least his cynicism towards his job would have taken over and he'd have just ended up a drunk wandering around without purpose. So in that sense his patriotism/sense of duty is not only a virtue in that film but is one of the only things that separates him from the villain.
Just goes to show how complex Bond actually can be as a character if he's handled right.
Yeah, good points. He doesn't get any opportunities to indulge himself a bit too much in TND, unlike the others as you say. Look at him crying over that computer monitor in TWINE- too much.
Yes that's well-put. I think a sense of duty/loyalty seem more appropriate terms than 'patriotism' in his case.
There's a passage in the novelisation of Spy Who Loved Me by Christopher Wood, which tries to make all of the silly events of the film take place in a more Fleming-ish tone, where Bond is looking out of the window of M's office reflecting on the threat that Stromberg is bringing, and it contains a bit which is something like "Bond looked out over the England he was protecting, the England that he loved" and it just felt so wrong for Bond; I never bought that Fleming's Bond felt that way.
Yes, that does seem a bit of an odd thing for even the literary Bond to think. Like I said, he's often very cynical and certainly not jingoistic.
I suppose one could argue patriotism doesn't fundamentally mean you are blind to what you see as the flaws of your country. It's just that you think its values, certain traditions, institutions etc. are ultimately the best way of life and you have that sense of devotion, loyalty and attachment to it. I mean, even Bond's sense of duty has to come from something he sees as worth protecting.
Yes and no, I think to some extent he's a soldier ant and probably doesn't think much about politics. I feel like his loyalty and sense of duty is more to M than it is the Queen (I'm obviously veering slightly more into literary here).
I suppose the way I've always seen the M of the novels is that to Bond he represents an idealised version of Englishness and what he sees as its best values. M is of course an Admiral from a War Bond would see as more worthwhile and dignified than the Cold War, he's a sort of link to the 'good old days' of the Victorian era, and Bond of course views him as resourceful, competent, probably brave, and respects him, despite his crustiness. Yeah, there's an element of the soldier ant thing with the whole 'blunt instrument' description of the character. He does love the adventure his job allows him in the novels certainly, but I wouldn't necessarily say he doesn't think much about politics or other such things. In fact arguably he often does so, just more in a disillusioned, non-partisan way (ie. calling prohibition 'the trigger of crime' in GF, the 'Red Indian' thing, the fact that he has the self-awareness to call himself a blunt instrument in the first place, his little asides about snobbish 'Old Boy' type circles at the end of TMWTGG etc.)
Anyway, getting back on topic, it's interesting to think how all of these traits could be adapted for the next era without overtly repeating stuff from the Craig one.
I don't have a dislike for strong women in films. JD was a great M, and I liked both female agents in NTTD. From a story perspective, was it necessary to replace the missing 007 with a woman? No. As I've noted previously, I very much enjoyed the Paloma scene, not the underlying message. What was thinking in writing that scene? The idea of Bond having sex with a younger woman is no longer acceptable? As with the introduction of Naomi, what did the writers want to say? Bond is old and out of touch? He's a dinosaur worthy of lampooning and easily replaceable by a woman? Replacing Bond with a woman is hardly consistent with the Bond history. What I object to is imposing social correctness on Bond. In real life, I am fine with it. Lots of posters argue that the new Bond should be reflective of today's attitudes and behaviors. What does that look like? Will Bond refuse sex because he's in a relationship? Vape? Drink club soda and eat avocado toast? Maybe be a regular church goer. Carry a taser? Listen to classical music and attend the theater? Nothing wrong with any of those things. But that isn't Bond.
'Easily'? You say it as if a woman is inferior. I don't disagree that Nomi had little part to play in the plot, but in the story her function was to show that MI6 had moved on from Bond, of course it was. If they hadn't it would be somewhat bizarre; they shouldn't be pining over him.
Not sure what the issue is with the Paloma scene, have a look at Bibi in FYEO. Bond doesn't have to crack to any woman he meets.
Not sure what that means. I'm not sure he's been replaced before, but he's certainly met his match before, and be that XXX in TSWLM or MayDay, sometimes that's a woman.
So you do object to it? I'm not sure why there was an issue with me pointing that out, then.
No he'll turn into a ballerina and wear lipstick and go on Great British Bake-Off and lots of other mildly hysterical things we can all make up but won't actually happen.
But, back in the real world, he'll be the same character as ever, but just mildly adjusted, as he has been in every decade for the last sixty years.
You forgot Holly Goodhead? Pam Bouvier? Wai Lin?
Agreed on May Day.
I would say even Tracy was also more of Bond's equal, as she could use her own wits to survive and escape (like that of fighting Gunther with a broken bottle), like that of Bond himself, she's also an excellent driver just like Bond himself.
I don't get the saying of Anya (XXX) being Bond's equal to be honest.
Sure she's an agent like him, but she's a damsel in distress that Bond saved many times (first in the train against Jaws, I even laughed at her using a hanger to slap him, I mean why she couldn't use her skills against Jaws? At that scene, she already lost her credibility.
Then second at the climax when she's absent at the Liparus fight because she's tied to a recliner by Stromberg).
We don't even get to see her fight or at least show us what she's capable of.
Say what you guys will about Jinx, but she at least had that sword fight with Miranda Frost at the end, Anya does nothing, she just tried to intimidate us that she's tough, but she didn't showed it.
Why does nobody get that at least half the point of NTTD was to show that you in fact cannot replace Bond?
Nomi is never even close to figuring out what is going on and the one time her and Bond go head to head in Cuba, he handily beats her and walks out with Obruchev. At the end of the film she acknowledges this, gives him back his number and accepts him as the lead agent for the raid. I don’t know what you watched, but none of that is lampooning and easily replacing.
Felix has an agent on scene in Cuba and what does he do? Gets his old pal James out of retirement to make sure this actually works out. As fun and capable as Paloma seems, I don’t think anyone thinks she could have pulled this off on her own.
And that retiring men are often replaced by young women is not social correctness, that’s what is happening every day in every organisation. There are much more career oriented women today than there were when CraigBond would have started his career and it is absolutely normal that some retirees are replaced by women.
I mean if you want to you could even tell yourself that the film is a saying that Nomi is a diversity hire, that was a bad idea and they have to bring Old White James back to get the job done. I don’t think it’s a valid interpretation, but it’s closer to the actual film then to say Bond is getting lampooned and easily replaced. Again, I don’t know what you’ve watched, but James Bond is squarely and clearly the hero of that film.
And actually think that was a slight mistake; I think she should have won at least one or two early battles (much like Anya or Wai Lin did- and we didn’t feel 007’s masculinity was threatened by them) otherwise there’s nothing for James to overcome. As it was she was never in the running and ultimately a little pointless.
Like Roger’s Bond choosing not to smoke cigarettes or not to take advantage of Bibi or to do less in the way of creepy things that Connery’s did.. he’s been changing for decades- have a look at some of the old films.
And she don't want it either, remember her line in Jamaica when she told Bond that M wanted to talk to him and Nomi told Bond to "Call him yourself".
She wanted to prove herself that she's capable in the job, just like Moneypenny was doing at the Skyfall PTS, and I don't know why not so many people complaining at this, like really one really imagined that putting Moneypenny on the field would be great, but no, she failed and been put on the office, at least they've corrected this with Nomi.
And yes, Bond always won over her at every moment, and Nomi seemed to show a bit of incompetence when she arrived late after the Norway Chase when Madeleine and Mathilde are both kidnapped by Safin.
Nomi seemed to acknowledge this, and let Bond do his job at the end because she knows that the mission was very personal for Bond as Madeleine and Mathilde are compromised (and both are close to Bond), as returning his codenumber because she knows that Bond was more better at the job than her.
We even had no knowledge if Nomi was still an agent after the death of Bond, what do you guys think? Maybe she's now only working in the office like what happened to Moneypenny? We never know.
If anything, she's a bit underutilized in the film, but I do get it why (the film was more focused on Bond's personal life), but Nomi's introduction would be better for a new Bond in my opinion, like have Nomi and the new Bond be rivals, think of it like the opposite of the dynamic between Alec and Bond at the start of Goldeneye.
What creepy things did SC's Bond do?
Pulling Marie's bra over her neck in DAF feels a bit 'off' too.
And proceeds to choke her with it (though I admittedly love his "Speak up, darling, I can't hear you" line, as cold as it is).
Why does that feel “off”, but countless women in countless films kicking men in their groin just seems funny? We do live in transitional times, still filled with double standards. A criminal or a baddie is a criminal or a baddie, independently of his or hers or their gender. If I was attacked by Gina Carrano (well, a character played by her, of course), should I refrain myself and just run away. Scratch that… I’d run away, yes I would ;)
Yep. Crotch shot humor never was funny and can’t disappear quickly enough from media.