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
In a perfect world there'd be no techno-content in a Bond film, but sadly that's not the world we've lived in for a long while, especially with the upscaling of technology in the past ten years around the time of CR.
Even in a film that tried to keep a traditional representation of Bond's world, we still had Bond getting jammed with a tracker, had him using surveillance software to find his targets, using passcodes for electric doors, stopping a bomb triggered by more modern detonation and using Sony phones for basically everything.
It's impossible now not to have a Bond film without technology, as depressing as that is. If Bond has to find a target, he no longer has to go to a location and work contacts to get the guy, he looks at blips on a computer screen and hacks a phone to do it. Everything is too easy, but that's the way it has to be shown done, because pretending that Bond is in caveman times would come off as wacky to audiences.
I've spoken of my lament of all this advancement before, and what it does to spy plots in general. It's no secret why so many prominent authors prefer to just do period pieces from the 20s to the 70s, where the technology of the time was in enough of an infancy to make the stories still interesting, and the challenges actually challenging for the hero in question. I very much dislike the place we are at as a species in regards to technology, not only for how illiterate and distracted it makes us in a de-evolutionary way, but also by what it does to our entertainment.
That don't think it matters if you don't place emphasis on it though. If anything, it should help Bond films become less filled with scenes of exposition regarding a persons whereabouts. Would anyone really miss those scenes. Its just boring doling out of information anyway.
I think you slightly exaggerate the potential negative effects that tech has had on the franchise. If someone using an electronically locked door is too much for you, it might be a case of just learning to live with it, so it doesn't bother you. You have to pick your battles, and the remote control car with AI woman inside is far more distracting to me than how they handled it in CR. Working out how someone like Bond fits into the modern world is something that defines modern Bond, which began with the focus on the internet with GoldenEye. That's the clear delineation between the classic films where a computer is just something that sits in the corner and someone accasionally looks at, and what we have now.
That being said, there's no reason why Bond can't still go "off-road" on a technology front. There is an inherent allure to doing things the old fashioned way, as the Craig era has championed, and Bond has always had an adventure/survivalist aspect to it, going back to the Books. He's a man that has to make use of resources in extreme situations, so ultimately it just comes down to where his journey takes him...
I do think there is potential to put Bond into environments where he is on his own with no tech etc. There is more interest in the "Bear Grylls" culture (cant stand the guy) of surviving on basics and I'm not sure if the series could tap into this. (anyone else a "Bush Tucker Man" fan?)
I agree with your list of what makes Bond, Bond, and, I think, in today's tech savvy world, we don't need outlandish equipment.
To use a smart phone to help in 007's investigations? Fine. Knives and combat tools in compartments of a car and/or briefcase? Awesome. Lasers in watches, and the like? Too outlandish for my tastes.
I would love to keep this type of thing grounded, and play up on the exotic, the sexual, the suspense and great action.
Yes, that's exactly what they need to emphasize. We can tell that a story is modern by the way it is told, ie where the focus is. We don't need advanced technology to make Bond "trendy". Bond should be cool, not " trendy". Cool never goes out of style like trends do. A man of today wants to be Connery just as much as someone in 1965 did, its timeless. I think wacky outlandish gadgets fits Mission impossible much better.
Absolutely.
I also see this type of iconic coolness at the end of CR when Bond walks the steps above Mr. White (no gadgets, but one helluva cool looking gun)...
I'm not saying all the tech is a big deal, just that it's there. All this stuff wasn't in films from twenty years ago, and so it's something that needs pointing out as it does change things.
I do think the Craig era has successfully integrated technology far better than any other spy series, so it's not something I'm negative about on the whole. We thankfully haven't had a room full of MI6 spies constantly looking at screens and shouting, "there's Bond!" like there is in at least half of every Bourne film, for example. In reflection I despise technology's use in our own reality far more than its use in any piece of entertainment, as we are only hurting ourselves in the former way.
Where modern Bond is concerned, CR and QoS especially were able to have the tech of the day without forcing it on the plot too much, and while I think SF and SP spent too much time using technology and modern advancement as a theme, those stories properly dealt with what they set out to do. And even still in SF you had Bond purposefully changing the game with Silva, taking him to a place that had no tech for him to manipulate so they could fight it out like barbarians. And SP, despite having a tech based scene, expends much energy to put Bond into locations and situations that feel very vintage and techless. SP for parts of it actually feels like it could've been made in the 60s, or even 50s. That's quite jarring to me, but welcomed.
I just miss the days where Bond faced a man with nothing but a gun, and where he didn't have to use a smartphone to give him all his data. He had to go and get that information himself, via contacts, files or direct spying. That can't really happen anymore, unless every new film puts Bond in a mountainous terrain with no signal or a villain causes a blackout to jam his tech in every finale. Tech doesn't have to overwhelm the series, of course, but its mere existence is not something I relish. I hope EON will show the restraint that they did in CR and QoS, instead of making the tech so much of the story as other modern films had. It would be refreshing to see Bond put in situations where it was like he was back in the 60s, through a new terrain or plot by a villain. He should take on less tech-based villains, and more with a focus on weapons and arms, or the modern concerns of geopolitics and current threats.
@Thunderfinger, haha, exactly!
M: "Goddammit, 007! We've lost the target and it's all your fault."
Bond: "Don't fret, sir. Q was on the job and apparently our man has just used his credit card at a local diner to purchase a heart attack on a bun the locals call a 'meat danish.' I'll just take a stroll on over and say hi...."
M: "Bond, how could you be so incompetent?! That was our last chance to get our target and you've cocked it all up!"
Bond: "Don't fret, sir. Q called our man on his mobile pretending to be a traveling agency giving him a free holiday to the Caribbean, and he's tracked the device's signal to an apartment a few blocks from here as he was stalling him for time. I'll just take a stroll on over and say hi..."
M: "Dreadful work, 007. You've killed the target and now there's no way to know the password we need to get into his damned computer."
Bond: "Don't fret, sir. Although the data on the computer is encrypted, Q quite handily invented the software our man was using and is busy in the offices breaking right into the device like a man with a special key to every door. I'll just take a stroll on over and say hi..."
Sadly this is exactly the approach they have been taken for the last two films.
So if we have a plot where he is on the run or similar, we get into some kind of First Blood scenario (dont get me wrong, a great film) but hard to imagine Bond in that kind of scenario. The other issue is, (unless the movie is set 100% in the context), transferring from that environment to the traditional Bond settings is hard (just look how they tried in DAD - the hotel foyer scene just fails IMHO).
Tech is so omni-present in Western society that it would be a very clever script that frees us from it.
@Milovy mentioned a plot where Bond would be hunted, and I suggested that it'd be interesting to see part of a film where Bond fights for his life on an island against a man who wants him dead and where he'd have to use only his wits and brawn to survive,Most Dangerous Game style. The only issue with ideas like this is that they can only be used once, and they're done. If a script always puts Bond in a situation where technology isn't open to him, that becomes too predictable as well.
Just needs cleverly applied innovation, like the time I saw OO7 use his phone to take an image from a thumb fingerprint scanner, reverse it optically, then feed if back to gain door access.
And not to be overused, it's good for the story when a gadget is mildly useful then fails.
Lastly, I like the original rules wherein gadgets are introduced and explained early in the mission. Then the suspense for the audience naturally comes from waiting for HOW it will be employed. Easy.
Wouldn't this be the case for every major franchise, though?
Or any film in existence.
@thelivingroyale, Tom Cruise could have a cameo as the hidden leader, too. ;)
You do stumble upon something I'd be interested in seeing though, @thelivingroyale. I've always thought that Haggis would write a great script with a nasty and evil SPECTRE in it, because he's so familiar with egotistical, spooky and downright creepy organizations that tell their members they are saving the world and doing great work all while doing horrible things in secret. It's the kind of outlook I think SPECTRE members have, where they join up for the perks and bump to their ego, wearing the rings, loving the connections, etc. I think Haggis could write a very great, strong modern day SPECTRE that piggybacked off what we already saw in SP, which I thought was perfect. That Rome meeting is just amazing.
I would love to see another Bond film where the villain's presence seems to permeate the whole thing. The trouble would be finding a modern composer who can write a song/score the way that Barry did.
The movie would be named after the villain: Dr. No, Goldfinger, The Man with the Golden Gun. Something like Shatterhand or Blofeld would be perfect, either for the next film or for reintroducing SPECTRE in 10 years (if they drop the current continuity).
Imagine if SPECTRE itself had a theme tune (Radiohead's song perhaps?) used throughout the score in Spectre. Man, that would have been great.
While I completely understand that the name Shatterhand lures fans of Flemings very strongly, it would also bring the need with it to have to rename not only the movie's title, but also the main villains name for the German speaking part of the world, since the name Shatterhand is now and forever tied to a main protagonist of the German world of adventure literature.
I'm wondering for decades how this supposed coincident came to happen, since it's not really a household name anywhere in the world. I don't know it for sure, but I'm quite convinced for myself that Fleming at least had heard of the books and since he (as Kennedy) was quite a fan of German traits, I wouldn't put it behind him to have actually read them.
I would love to see another Bond film where the villain's presence seems to permeate the whole thing. The trouble would be finding a modern composer who can write a song/score the way that Barry did.
[/quote]
No movies are scored that way today.