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
Huh, interesting points, @007HallY … I get what you’re saying with Q/Bond in GF and Q/Bond in TB. I’m going to have to watch these two scenes this evening.
Fair enough. I would say that GF honed/expanded on a lot of the stuff that the previous two films did. While there was a PTS in FRWL, the idea of it being ‘a wonderful piece of nonsense’ (as Hamilton put it) I think truly began with GF. Bond could show up with a rubber duck on his head, unzip his wetsuit to have a pristine white tuxedo underneath. Not to say it went completely in the opposite direction - there’s still a quite brutal fist fight after all, so it maintains a level of that grounded tension you see in FRWL’s (all Bond sequences have an element of it in between the ridiculousness) but they simply upped that tongue in cheek quality with those decisions. Similarly the Q scene added in the dynamic of Bond ‘taking the Mickey’ out of Q a bit more, with Q behaving a bit more like a weary Headmaster, which wasn’t quite there during FRWL’s. The Aston Martin itself was conceived as a sort of ‘supercar’, with all these elaborate gadgets added on. I mean, the film even has laser beams, that’s how much more fantasy they injected into it.
For me, the Q/Bond scene from TB is a step down. It’s not just that Bond grins and makes cheeky remarks, but he’s actively not paying attention to Q when he’s speaking, fiddling around with stuff while the poor guy’s trying to explain how to use the equipment. Bond doesn’t seem in the least bit happy to see him and comes off as weirdly childish and petty to me (why does he say ‘oh no’ when Q appears? Bond never actively disliked Q. It feels like the film hasn’t quite understood what made that dynamic work in the previous one. It feels like that warmth and tongue in cheek quality is gone, and they’ve simply upped that schoolboy/headmaster quality. I think it’s why as Llewelyn got older they defaulted more to Q being a more mischievous tinkerer than the straight laced, exasperated Quartermaster).
Guy Hamilton made DAF. We don't have to imagine an alternative universe.
Yeah we go from a tricked out briefcase to a car with machine guns, an ejector seat etc etc, and a villain who has Bond on his knees, gun trained on him, to a villain who straps him to a table with a laser beam ready to melt 007’s tender parts….
There was a nice jump from one film to the other, but these same elements that took a boost in GF, were dulled down in Thunderball (I say this as a big fan of TB).
Yes, to me Oddjob, the DB5, the laser beam, the pressing engagement etc. all feel like they're pushing the tone beyond what we saw in FRWL. I don't feel that's an unusual point of view.
Ok… but he didn’t make TB. Not sure if Hamilton would have been quite the right choice either honestly. On paper it’s a film Gilbert more likely would have done (although I don’t think he was considered or available then). Even just in terms of his directing process it seems he would have been more suited to the scale of TB. I know Young ran into problems not shooting enough footage during the final fight despite the time/budget they worked with, which is why so much of it’s sped up/there are weird jump cuts. It’s almost as if he was still in the mindset of quick set ups/shoots that had been his method on DN and FRWL. I know Peter Hunt had issues with Hamilton too over the footage he was given, although I don’t know the specifics.
I’d say TB’s my least favourite Q/Bond scene. It’s just very strange to watch. They iron it out a lot better by YOLT.
The epic and bigger style was Thunderball's legacy.
Well, it’d been heading that way with every Bond film really. GF of course involved a big scale final battle and was a much globe hopping Bond film. But I get what you’re saying. I think the issue for me is a lot of what went into TB was done much better before and after. And maybe without TB Gilbert wouldn’t have approached YOLT as he did. Still, I’m don’t think Young was suited to TB.
Fair enough but DAF or even NSNA showed that there was an alternative direction.
Yeah, DAF was the first time they took a much more distinct change in direction (within the confines of Bond anyway). It’s an important film in that sense. Not sure if I’d say the same about NSNA but you can see a similar sharper pivot with CR.
I mean, NSNA is more Goldfinger-esque than the original movie.
And DAF was Goldfinger 2.0.
They went bigger with TB but there were other directions.
DAF I think had GF in mind, sure. Hamilton’s back, America’s the main location, the villains are all much more exaggerated, and it leans much more towards a lighter tone. I know Goldfinger’s twin brother was originally planned. I don’t think it’s GF 2.0 though. Things like Grey’s Blofeld feel consciously shaped to separate him from the previous incarnations (a big reason why DAF is the way it is because of the reaction to OHMSS) and the humour/tone really veers much more towards the outlandish side, much more than even GF. It’s a very consciously crafted Bond film in that way. It’s not a YOLT/TSWLM situation where it’s effectively a loose remake of GF either (if anything AVTAK has more in common with GF than DAF study/plot wise).
Not sure I follow you about NSNA.
A Baroness Samedi I guess then.
I almost wonder if DAF was more influential outside of just Bond; it kind of spearheaded that light and breezy tone of blockbusters that the 70s saw with Smokey & the Bandit etc. I guess stuff like Butch Cassidy was heading that way too so it wasn't out on its own, but it was an early adopter if you like.
That’s pretty interesting @SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ … I’d like to see something like this explored. That’s nice thinking!
I suppose a blind villain was done in the Benson novels. And Blade Runner 2049. I didn’t think either were great honestly.
My issue with a blind villain is that it’s not really a proper character trait, and you basically know what you’re going to get. They either have heightened super senses (which is very cliched) or they’re just blind. It may feed into their backstory but after NTTD and SF I think the villain being injured/wanting to get revenge is a bit played out really.
If they want to go for a ‘weird looking’ Bond villain I think it’d be more interesting if some of their physical traits are self-inflicted. Think the literary Dr. No wearing contact lenses, stretching his spine out, altering his appearance etc. Or Blofeld with all his plastic surgery. Or Goldfinger tanning himself to literally look golden. That’d at least play into their characters/the reason for altering their appearance would tell us something about them. But definitely agree, colourful villains all the way.
I think this is a great idea. Perhaps he might have gone the transhumanist route, 'improving' his body with technology and surgery?
Thanks @peter :)
Yeah, exactly....that's what I meant. Any means possible for colourful villains or a legitimate excuse for colourful villains.
Disgustingly cool. Love all these ideas. You guys are really having great kicks.
That would be a horrifying spin on a typical Bond villain gimmick. Like, they have metal hands, or a bionic eye or whatever, and instead of them having attained these injuries or being born with some sort physical defect they go, ‘nah, cut off my own hands/tore out my own eye. I’m better and stronger now’.
It’s probably a bit too gory/dark in concept, and it could easily shift into sci fi/horror territory. But seeing a Bond villain who has consciously altered their appearance could be interesting.
Dunno how conscious you are of the last statement, @007HallY , but that’s a nice u-turn back to Fleming-Blofeld, so…… 👍🏻 👍🏻 👍🏻
Yes! Cool idea for a colourful villain too. I love that!
Yeah @007HallY I think the idea would need a director who doesn't overblow the outlandishness. One thing Fukunaga balanced in NTTD, was the grounded feel and outlandish feel. A villain like Primo (only better this time) might show up in Bond 26.
That’s true! A surprising amount of Fleming’s villains alter their appearances as well.
One idea that springs to mind/incorporates the transhuman idea could be if they wanted to recycle a villain having differently coloured eyes (as was the original idea for Zorin). Instead of it being a natural physical trait, the villain secretly wears a robotic contact lens in one eye that allows them to do things - I dunno, maybe Bond’s undercover in their presence and the contact lens snaps a picture of Bond. Similar to AVTAK this is run through a system and instantly Bond’s info shows up in front of them. Something like that. A bit too NTTD perhaps but something like that.