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
A lot of people seemed to be eying Bond in that party, including our Mikey GW.
I agree with this. TSWLM has moments of horror and darkness, but the overarching tone is brisk and light. Skyfall has moments of comedy, but the overaching tone is thoughtful and brooding.
I can take or leave the tone in the films to an extent, so long as it doesn't go too far into any extreme. We've covered the full gamut over 25 films, and I don't think it's beyond the range of any leading man and competent writers to have more than one tone over more than one film for the same Bond actor. One jokey? Fine. One Fleming-esque? Go for it. Mix and match in the same movie? Why not. Just so long as we can give up on the films needing to tie in or have continuation that then tonally ties the hands of every subsequent film. Nods are fine (like how Tracy was hinted at by Dalton in LTK, explicitly by Moore in FYEO, etc), and a Spectre-like (but not Spectre - too soon) repeating Big Bad. Just stop trying to Cinematic Universe-ify Bond.
While I don't want to dive into the FULL Roger Moore era, I would take it over another depressing film. We've had our fill of that for now with DC. Dead boss, dead girlfriend, dead Bond, and a psychologically scarred Bond girl who saw her mother and sister raped and strangled. I get it - the world Bond operates in is dark; but can we please have a film that is (whisper it...)... ...fun? It would be nice to walk out of a Bond film and feel excited and happy at what I just saw, and not needing to look up the Samaritans hotline number.
Broadly true, but you can't really have either of those films without those tonal variances (or at least neither would be as great or as gripping as they are. But that's my opinion). Same for the dramatic ideas at the heart of those films. You can't have TSWLM without the love affair between Bond and Anya/the fact that Bond killed her boyfriend, and you can't have SF without Bond overcoming his physical/psychological issues and doing badass things by the climax.
I'm fine with there being a bit of continuity. Bond films are, fundamentally, one off adventures with their own stories and styles, even if they tie into bigger narratives (ie. DN and FRWL are very distinctive films even if they're effectively sequels. Same for CR and QOS). To be fair to the later Craig era I think they maintained that individualism to each film and the tying in of everything felt pretty akin to what they did in the early Connery films and even Fleming novels rather than something overcomplicated. I'm not sure if I'd be up for a recurring big bad next time to be honest (villainous organisations even in Bond tend to just be SPECTRE knock offs, and it's rare to have recurring villains). I wouldn't mind if we got little nods to previous films in the actor's tenure (ie. specifying the amount of time that's passed between Bond's last mission and this one, perhaps what Bond has gone through in the previous story has affected his disposition - ie. in SP you can tell he's much more humorous and invigorated after overcoming his issues in SF).
It really depends on the film. Bond is escapist entertainment regardless and I don't think any have been quite as dour and depressing as some make the Craig era out to be. But as I mentioned above there can still be some quite dark/serious ideas in there even with quite breezy films, and often the story wouldn't work without them.
Vesper: Dead
Fields: Dead
Sévérine: Dead
M (Dench): Dead
Felix: Dead
Bond: Dead
Mathis: Dead
Solange: Dead
Mathilde: Fatherless
Camille: Emotionally scarred
Madeline: Widowed
CR: Ended on a downer.
QoS: Ended on a downer
Skyfall: Ended on a downer
Spectre: Ended... neutral??
NTTD: Ended on a downer
Hardly an LSD trip through Disneyland, is it? :D ;)
CR got away with it in my own personal take on things as it did it well, and the whole film was a fresh take, and I love that film, but I can see why (even if others don't agree - that's fair enough) people find DC's era to be, at worst, depressing, and at best, it's lacking in feel-good or fun.
Perfectly described. Yes, the Craig Bond movies did have some elements of fun and humor, but at least 3 (if not 4) out of his movies leave you with a bitter taste at the end. When I watch a Bond movie, I want to leave the cinema happy and entertained - despite all the thrills and emotional moments. Even LTK managed this to do so.
Nothing against a sad ending per se, OHMSS was well done for example, but I don't need it 4 times in a row, especially not with Bond movies.
QoS is a bit wistful, and NTTD is sad of course, but the others all end on a bit of a high, don't they?
(And I still think they could/should have done that with NTTD to be honest)
This basically leaves SP with the only "happy" end (and would have been the better ending for the Craig era, but that's just my opinion).
I'm not sure if I agree with how you described those endings. CR ends on a pretty high note with the Bond theme blaring, and Bond saying the iconic line. QOS ends on quite an optimistic note with Bond finding Yussief and dropping Vesper's necklace/walking away (I guess 'letting go' of her in a sense). SF has a similar ending to CR with the theme, Bond strolling into the old style of MI6 office and getting back to work. SP has a pretty upbeat ending with Bond and the Bond girl driving off (it's more or less a traditional Bond ending). Even NTTD, bittersweet as it is and the closest to being a downer, ends with Madeline and Mathilde driving off into the sunset with the memories of Bond alive and well.
I guess you can't have some of those satisfactory 'end on a high' final moments without some of the darker stuff that precedes it. But again that's just how story works. I can't really relate to any of the DC films being depressing myself. I and many people I know even watch CR and SF as go to films when wanting to unwind and watch a Bond film.
Death is pretty common for Bond stories really and unfortunately a lot of really likeable characters go that way. The sacrificial lamb Bond girls and allies which make up most of those examples are part of the Bond tradition (ie. Jill and Tilly Masterton - dead. Kerim Bay - dead. Tracy - dead. Paris Carver - dead. Leiter - maimed and widowed. The list goes on). I wouldn't even say Camille in QOS is emotionally scarred as such (no more than she was previously anyway). She just realises that revenge is bittersweet and it won't bring back the dead. If anything she likely moved on with her life. Mathilde and Madeline also get presumably a happy life due to Bond's sacrifice too (at least in the way it's depicted). But to each their own.
But the actual endings are mostly upbeat and positive: they did that for a reason. I don't think CR gives you a bitter taste walking out of the cinema at all.
I think most of the Craig era endings were great. Sometimes you just want the film to end on a strong, memorable note rather than a parrot imitating Bond to Thatcher on the phone.
They learned the wrong lessons from Casino Royale.
Instead of adapting more books they made the new Bond formula from Casino Royale.
Yes, I love TND, but it kind of just stops rather than having an ending, if you know what I mean. CR and SF have proper endings.
QOS: ended with Bond capturing Yousef (and not killing him), and telling M he never left the service. He chucks away Vesper's necklace, he didn't need it anymore.
SF: ended with Bond meeting his new M in “the classic” office, and accepting a new assignment "with pleasure".
SP: ends with him driving off with the girl.
These were all upbeat and positive endings.
Even NTTD ends bitter-sweet with Bond as myth, with stories to be told his daughter. He is now immortal…
Yeah, the end of TND isn't the best. It seems like it's trying to do a GF but even in the film it's a bit stupid. In GF they're just in a field after the crash and can presumably spare a few moments before making their way back to any sort of civilisation even without Leiter's help. In TND they're in the middle of the ocean. They'll literally die if they don't get rescued at that point.
JAMES BOND WILL NOT RETURN
Wait, wait, wait - CR ends on a high note because of one line and the Bond theme? Bond was tortured, lost the money, was convinced of Mathis' betrayal, Vesper betrayed him, died in front him, and ensured that he would be a heard hearted, heart broken, lonely man from this point on, with severe trust and commitment issues. But because of ONE line and the Bond theme, you count CR as ending on a high note?
Skyfall saw Bond's boss, mentor, and probably the closest things to a friend he could turn to, someone who he actually trusted, die. Not just in his arms, but due to his own failure to protect her. Silva didn't survive, but Bond definitely lost as well.
Both films entered the credits on a slight uptick in tone, fine, but so long as 'Ending' isn't literally talking about the 2 minutes before the credits roll, I cannot for the life of me see how these could be described in the same region as 'high note'.
Just re-read the above before hitting Post and it sounds argumentative. Was meant to be more shocked/incredulous, but I'm too lazy to re-write :D In all I don't care how people enjoy the films, just glad they do. As you said:
Haha, no worries. It's like I said, those dramatic ideas all play into the film's story as a whole and give us those cathartic endings and other individual Bondian moments. In SF, for instance, we need Bond to slowly overcome his psychological and physical issues in order for him to come running into the hearing and save M from Silva, for him to unveil the Aston Martin and take matters into his own hands/whisk M off to Scotland. You can have moments like the Bond theme kicking in after his car gets destroyed and him blowing up his childhood home with a sarcastic remark because of that too. Even after M's death we get the little moment of the bulldog and the significance Bond states it has. And because Bond has proven himself to Mallory and overcome the obstacles of the story he's reinvigorated and ready to get back to work.
Not to say SF (or CR) is all rainbows and flowers. In the context of the film Bond is the only one that gets any sort of salvation, and he did indeed technically fail to protect M (although for what it's worth he likely saved many others from being killed in the process, as M worried about herself). But honestly, a film (even a Bond film) doesn't need to have everything go completely right for the characters, or be one note and lovely and optimistic for them to have a satisfying ending.
Don't want to end things on a low note ;)
* cue Bond theme *
Another way I've looked at them is:
CR: Villain dies, Bond doesn't get the girl
QoS: Villain dies, Bond doesn't get the girl
Skyfall: Villain dies, Bond doesn't get the girl
Spectre: Villain doesn't die, Bond gets the girl
NTTD: Villain dies, Bond doesn't get the girl
None of the films had both. That is what is subconsciously missing for some people. 17 of the first 20 had both.
Maybe. It's a cliché largely created by Bond to snog into the sunset so I can understand them mixing it up a bit. Replacing 'getting the girl' for 'emotional gut punch' in CR, SF and NTTD so closely released to each other is more what stands out for me.
I actually quite like QoS's treatment of Camille in isolation - she isn't REALLY a Bond girl to 'Get' at the end anyway, and is probably the most original treatment of a Bond girl seen in years. Wai Lin, Jinx, even Dr Goodhead had taken a stab at the 'Strong, not just eye candy' approaches, but always caved in to the formula eventually. I always got the impression that even with revenge fulfilled, Camille was as lost and emotionally empty at the end of the film as the beginning.
I'd put Dalton up against Craig any day as Fleming's Bond. Not jokey for sure, but better written humor needs to return.
I liked Dalton a lot. But his weakness, for me, was the stick up his rear approach. Too often, he always seemed angry. Too angry to the point of being close to unlikeable.
No matter what Fleming said, his character was likeable and he certainly was not one where he was ready to snap at everyone he came in contact with.
Craig had a better sense of when to slow down, and say, have a drink with Mathis and enjoy it, although it was business; after his win with Le Chiffre , he celebrated; using Fields for his own enjoyment, but to soften her up and manipulate her in his favour; having dirty Martinis with Madeleine… he was far more dimensional than Dalton.
I see your point. What works with Dalton best for me is the casting of d'Abo...I just *believed* their chemistry in a way that I hadn't in a Bond film in years. Her innocence played nicely against his world weariness. She didn't seem superfluous to the story, nor to Bond.
It's often the case that either the love interest overshadows the villain, or the opposite.
In LTK, I get that they were going for angry Bond, and in a weird way Dalton is more suited for that. We are basically in Lethal Weapon territory, so there isn't a lot of time for romance, and the romance/love triangle was its weakest, most forced element to me. I loved the use of Fleming in this film, though.
Absolutely...
I'd say that describes Dalton more than Craig (just my opinion though). Craig looked far more natural and relaxed during certain moments in his films for me, but Dalton's anger and broodiness worked for the films he was in. I'd also say it's more complicated than a lighter Bond having less psychological anguish or whatever. Bond as a character should have some hang ups about his job, but he often uses humour and even his vices to deflect from them.
If anything it'd be interesting seeing a more 'lighthearted' Bond with some hang ups. A sort of spin on Fleming's TB where he's drinking too much/not at his peak physically but quite reckless and nonchalant about it even though it's due to his boredom or depression (or indeed for a film maybe something that happens during the PTS). A sort of lighthearted spin on SF almost (which may well be in the cards considering how long ago that film came out, although even in SF Bond is pretty humorous when in front of other people).