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
But there are a couple of instances when DC pulls that sort of stuff:
1. After killing Demetrios, he pats him on the cheek and sets him up in a chair,
2. He makes a comment to Quantum, via the transmitters, "I think you all need to find a better place to meet," when he clearly needed to just leave the scene.
Craig's Bond is never one to have trouble with postage.
Not the same. When he killed Dimitrios there was no one else spying on or trying to kill Bond at that moment in time.
As for the QoS scene, he made the comment while still being hidden; quantum members sitting in the audience had no clue where he was or who it was that crashed their meeting.
This is not remotely the same thing as what I've been talking about.
Is this really a bad thing? Why should Dan play all his scenes like Sean did? No sense in copying someone when your skills as an actor allow you to make your own trademarks. That kind of behavior invites comparison, and a comparison to Sean usually doesn't end well for whoever is being compared to him, especially when we're talking DN, FRWL, GF and/or TB Connery. He was the best at what he did, and Dan kicks ass at what he does. I don't see the issue.
Mr. White certainly did. ;)
In my post on the previous page, I made mention of Connery and Moore being able to make the ridiculous believable. Having recently watched a few of their films, I recognize that. This is why they both could do the serious (DN, FYEO) and the outlandish (YOLT/MR) convincingly. They could sell anything credibly. That takes a certain skill.
As an example, after Connery is on the rack in TB, he seduces Pat in the steam room. Ridiculous on the face of it, but you believe it with Connery. Same goes for Moore after Anya tries to kill him at the end of TSWLM. Who the heck would jump into bed with a woman who had a gun pointed at you a few minutes ago? That innate skill allowed their films to delve into the impossible at times and still be credible.
I don't see that with any actors since then. That's one of the reasons why I couldn't buy Madeline jumping Bond after the Hinx fight. It just doesn't work for me.
That's why I said in my earlier post that perhaps it has something to do with British actors (including Cary Grant) from that previous generation. They were inherently calm and nonchalant. Naturally unflappable and stylishly dignified in an otherworldly way.
The new chaps can't sell that as well. They are all so intense and grounded. Almost like American actors used to be. Either that or they look like they're trying too hard.
I see that moment as them saying, "We almost died, and we're lucky to even be here. Let's celebrate in the most base way possible, and just go at it." It's a very bestial love scene, fitting for the very bestial fight that'd just taken place. Bond is covered in sweat and blood, as close to death as he's come in a long time, and Madeleine is scraped up beside him, both out of breathe. It's a moment where two bruised and beaten survivors just look at each other and say, "Screw it," acting on the carnal feelings they share for each other following the brush with death they overcame.
That's how I see it...its pure relief and adrenalin after what happened,and it breaks down all the barriers and pussy-footing around......
I would honestly act the same way Bond did if I and a woman I was attracted to had faced something like that. I can only imagine what the feeling would really be like to overcome death itself with someone, and all the crazy adrenaline that would be bouncing through you, your brain's synapses firing like a thousand canons as you stare at them afterward. It makes perfect sense to me why Bond and Madeleine's foremost thought is ravishing each other; following a primitive fight to the death, their primitive desires and biological programming are next to collide. It was only inevitable.
You can tell that by the way they are sitting there,in total shock over what just happened and what it took to get rid of Hinx.
Bond was out-muscled,something he isn't used to ,and Craig does show that particular shock in his face,the disbelief that he was fighting a genuinely unstoppable force.
The same with Madeleine ,total shock that she saw Bond was helpless to stop this man,forcing her to use the gun,something she didn't want to ever use again.
That's why it annoys me a little bit when people say Daniel 'phoned in' his performance.They need to look at his facial expressions a lot more and his body language,not just his vocal performance.
I don't think he's phoning anything in during SP either. I just personally think he has limitations in what he can credibly bring to the screen as an actor, and those limitations were obviously clear to me in SP, but not prior. That's just my opinion of course.
It does deserve it yes..its sitting nicely at #12 in my rankings,so im happy with it.I actually don't think Daniel knows HOW to phone in a performance.
He puts 10000% into every role he takes on,he is a professional actor,a damned good one,and we are/were very lucky that he got to play Bond.
Which scenes are you referring to matey ?
In SP, I think Craig is at his best during L'Americain and with White. Those are genuine Craig.
The more I think about it, I think he missed Dench. She elevated his game, as she did Brosnan's. Fiennes and Craig don't seem to work all that well together (their best scenes in SF included Dench).
@bondjames, nobody could rip Bond a new one like her, that's for sure, and she always felt like a modern Lee M at times for me in that regard.
I think the element of a missing M is inherent in Bond's character during the film too. He tries to get along with Mallory, but I think it's clear that he misses her terribly and still counts her word as the most important and worth following, like she's his spirit guide or something. Even from the grave, Bond is leading by the example of Dench's M. He's not used to having a boss who doesn't value a bit of independence or risk, as Mallory can't stand to have him do anything without complete notice, and takes it as a personal attack on his person. Dench's M let Bond be Bond, knowing he'd get results.
Mallory is a respectable man, but he's no Dench M, and I think the film steers us in that direction at times; at least it does me. Dench M had conviction that made her become misinterpreted as a bit of a cold bitch, but she stood forcefully for what she believed in and didn't allow anyone to stampede over her. In SP Mallory is unfocused, short fused, forgettable and subtracted from a lot of what is going on around him. The MI5 merger is clearly taking up all his time, blinding him to other things he should've considered and weakening the already meek leadership he's commanded following his predecessor's death. He doesn't know Moneypenny's birthday, when Dench's M would have it committed to memory simply because she'd know the woman's background better than Eve's own relatives, to ensure she could be trusted. When beaten, Mallory feels the need to act as the dejected but honorable general at the end of a losing battle, waxing lyrical with an obscure comment about the symbolism of his job, when Dench's M would've shouted her head off and not stood for it, possibly reciting an even greater bit of lyricism or poetry (more Tennyson, perhaps?).
I find it interesting how SP has the change over from Dench to Fiennes M as a very unconscious bit of subplot in the movie that drives and effects a lot of the team, but most of all Bond and Mallory, and how they interact. I think Mendes and co. did a nice job of truly making Dench's M and Mallory feel like two completely different leaders, underscoring how different they are through Mallory's reaction to key moments that recall situations Dench's own M has been in during the past films.
It reminds me of how Brown's M was unconsciously compared to Lee's M by how he and Bond interacted with each other, underscoring the differences dividing them too. Like Dench after him, Lee's M could be stern and cold, but he ultimately respected Bond's viewpoint and often made him part of the conversation, treating him like an equal the way a naval man would to a comrade. Brown's M in comparison feels very fidgety, rambling, meek and unsure of his leadership, never seeming like he's doing the job right. This is best seen in TLD where, instead of listening to Bond's concern's regarding Pushkin and his belief that the man is being set up, Brown's M just tosses him the order to kill the man without nary a thought. Unlike Lee's M he doesn't make Bond feel equal and doesn't invite him into the conversation or respect his perspective and knowledge. In the next film, Brown is similarly dismissive of Bond even when the agent's best friend and wife are ravaged in a brutal act on their wedding night, a sensitive issue M doesn't treat as such. This M hasn't seen Bond in a pit of despair following the death of Tracy, but Lee's M did and acted as a boss would, being as supportive and empathetic as his job would allow him to be to an employee he clearly loved, though he could never express it. You feel like Bond and Lee's M could still be great friends and share a drink and a story even with the big desk and heavy title dividing them, but Brown's M never feels like anything of the sort to Bond, making them feel far more separated than any other Bond/M I've seen.
I think that's fascinating, really, how the films give us enough little moments with each Bond and M to make us able to form little ideas of how each man is different behind the desk and in how they treat Bond. It's one of the reasons I respect all the films so much, as they're all important in this regard.
However, I don't think that Mallory is such a stickler. He allowed the breadcrumbs to go ahead in SF after all, essentially sanctioning a completely off the books scenario.
Even in SP, I got the impression he was ok to an extent with Bond going off the reservation, but was just concerned about being in the loop due to the heat on him from that weaselly 'c'. Bond, perhaps to protect him, kept him out of the loop.
Having said that, the standoffishness between M and Bond at the start of SP is a bit difficult to take. They had better camaraderie even in SF. I don't think it's Fiennes's fault though, but rather Craig's. He comes across as strangely crabby & peevish in that office encounter, which he wasn't in SF.
I agree that the briefing could've been handled much better though, from a writing standpoint and a performance one too. Mallory needed to be stern without raising his voice, something Lee trademarked, and Bond shouldn't have been so audacious as to speak back. I understand the points of both men, however, but also where they fail in argument. Bond can't complain when Mallory doesn't agree with how he went about his job, as he didn't share the information with him, but Mallory shouldn't have retorted to unprofessionalism with more unprofessionalism.
I guess I'm just used to hearing Dan's Bond talk back to literally everyone, but I see why some don't like the scene/how it was written and how Bond and Mallory addressed each other. I also agree that if Sean's Bond has spoken like that to Lee's M on a day he was meeting with the Ministry to oversee a dramatic program change, he'd have walloped the spy with his name plate and hung him out to dry on the coatrack for Moneypenny to see. The scene definitely needed a moment where Mallory firmly but fairly drew a line in the ground between them, and cemented himself as the man Bond must bend to. Something along the lines of, "You may've been able to get away with talking like that to her, but you won't me, Bond. I'm your boss now, and you answer to me. Not to a bloody message on a disc."
At the end of the film you see Bond and Mallory meet in the middle again after Mallory ends up trusting Bond's judgement and sees why he was so secretive before, but I wanted more. They never feel as important a pairing as Lee and Connery or Dench and Dan did, but I guess that's only fair considering they've had so little time together in their roles.
That's what I see in that scene. Bond is protecting his boss. Plus it's the independence, sometimes at a price, that energizes him as a double-oh.
@RichardTheBruce, that's a trait that defines Craig's Bond in a nutshell for me, really.
M: "Bond, what're you doing?"
Bond: "Something dangerous that I can't tell you about because if I do you'll try to stop me, and we both know that's not a good idea. Just tell your superiors I'm off the deep end. By the time they know what's up my business will be done."
Bond's life, and especially the life of Dan's Bond, is all about him doing what he knows is right while everybody drags him down and stops or distracts him from doing it; it's an uphill climb for him every time. One of the things I dig most about the current Bond is that he acts without any concern for consequence, because his duty is his duty. He'll take being called a traitor or a rogue, because the alternative is him doing nothing and the bad guys getting away. He's the best kind of maverick in that way and as you say, he does what M can't, as he's tied up by bureaucracy and a hierarchy that makes him answer to higher powers. As a foot solider, Bond is afforded more wiggle room. And a gun. A gun helps loads.
I was watching 'The Thomas Crown Affair' again the other day and was impressed by the duels-in-words in that film. The writing is just very good (even though of course the film has glaring plotholes). The dialogues just add up, and they don't really in SP. As I've said before; it's thanks to the actors that scenes still work, but I find it amazing that the best scene (the trainfight) is completely word-less.
@bondjames I think you are missing some 'joie de vivre' expressed by a generation af actors who, in themselves, lived in a time where hardship was common. I've been to many places now where life is a lot more difficult in the West and noted this joy in living, which makes for the exact scenes like the grape picking. I see it with one of my friends too who's lost so much in life (and was close to finding his own run short) that he too goes by the adage of 'pick the day'. It's hard to pinpoint but I guess you can't play that if your life hasn't had such hardship. Both Conners and Moore had lived through real hardship before becoming well- or even decently payed actors. Craig just hasn't lived through that (afak) and that in itself is a good thing, but I don't think you can radiate that joy in life if you don't have it in yourself as a person.