› ›

How should Bond die, if at all?

245678

Comments

  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    Should never die period!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    RichardTheBruce wrote: »
    And now, the end is near
    And so I face the final curtain
    My friend, I'll say it clear
    I'll state my case, of which I'm certain...

    latest?cb=20130509151620
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,343
    In heaven with 1000 virgins?
  • RevelatorRevelator
    edited August 2017 Posts: 2,921
    According to Moonraker:
    ...it was his ambition to have as little as possible in his banking account when he was killed, as, when he was depressed, he knew he would be, before the statutory age of forty-five.
    Eight years to go before he was automatically taken off the 00 list and given a staff job at Headquarters. At least eight tough assignments. Probably sixteen. Perhaps twenty-four. Too many.

    It is evident that Bond will not live to old age and wouldn't enjoy it if he did. Nor would he enjoy a staff job at headquarters. His ideal death would be the day before his 45th birthday, with nothing in his bank account, on his toughest assignment. Enjoying his greatest triumph, the savior of his country lays down his life for it. Bond will never grow old, never rot away in an office job, and never fade into everyday life. The sin Bond hates more than any other is boredom, and he would rather die than lead an everyday life.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    @Revelator-- what a wonderfully depressing, hard-hitting excerpt. I agree that's the way Bond would have to go: last penny spent and polishing the final act on his last, toughest assignment. Going out in a blaze of glory.

    That's what I love about the character. On one hand he's timeless and, no matter the beatings and tortures and close-calls (a la Moonraker), indestructible, but; in the other hand, there's this sense that he is more finite than the rest of us... Death is lurking very, very closely to him.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,331
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    In heaven with 1000 virgins?

    First: 1000 wouldn't be enough for Bond and eternity, or if they stay virgin it'd be called hell. Second, who wants virgins anyway?

    @Revelator - nail - head. Perfect.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Revelator wrote: »
    According to Moonraker:
    ...it was his ambition to have as little as possible in his banking account when he was killed, as, when he was depressed, he knew he would be, before the statutory age of forty-five.
    Eight years to go before he was automatically taken off the 00 list and given a staff job at Headquarters. At least eight tough assignments. Probably sixteen. Perhaps twenty-four. Too many.

    It is evident that Bond will not live to old age and wouldn't enjoy it if he did. Nor would he enjoy a staff job at headquarters. His ideal death would be the day before his 45th birthday, with nothing in his bank account, on his toughest assignment. Enjoying his greatest triumph, the savior of his country lays down his life for it. Bond will never grow old, never rot away in an office job, and never fade into everyday life. The sin Bond hates more than any other is boredom, and he would rather die than lead an everyday life.

    Kind of reminds me of Mitchel from QoS.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited August 2017 Posts: 9,020
    .
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    Bond should always die 'on the job'...he'd want it that way ;)
  • vzokvzok
    edited August 2017 Posts: 4,045
    STD
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,916
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Bond should always die 'on the job'...he'd want it that way ;)
    So with a lady.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,423
    vzok wrote: »
    STD

    Ah, poor Bond. Driven insane by the syphilis.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    edited October 2019 Posts: 12,837
    royale65 wrote: »
    vzok wrote: »
    STD

    Ah, poor Bond. Driven insane by the syphilis.

    The man must be a walking plague by this point anyway. Maybe the same top secret MI6 doctors who gave him all those experimental lung cancer treatments and off the books liver transplants sorted him out. I'd like to think that a lot of the tax payers money goes towards keeping James Bond alive because his lifestyle would have killed him off years ago but we'd be screwed without him so they can't spare any expense.

    Mod Edited - Watch the language @thelivingroyale
    Sorry, didn't realise this post was two years old.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I couldn t find this topic when I opened up this thread, although I had a feeling the topic had been covered before. Well, after some brainbreaking I realized where.
    https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/15536/james-bond-dies/p3

    Feel free to close mine. or merge. It isn t a popular subject, anyway.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    He wont die....thread closed
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    To answer the thread title question:

    "Not well".
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Now that we know a little about NTTD, any new views?
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    I would prefer more cliffhanger way,did he or did he not die. It should be with a fall like the one happened in SF opening bridge Scene.
  • shamanimalshamanimal
    Posts: 623
    Birdleson wrote: »
    If I was ever to find out that Bond is killed off in a film (and I will ask my friends across the pond before the next film's US release if this is the case) I will not patronize it. Ambiguous, or false deaths (ala the novel YOLT or SF) I'm fine with.

    I agree.
    If they kill him then bring him back to life in a 'reboot' then they'll just make a mockery of the whole franchise. They'll ruin it.

    Bond is not a superhero, or a zombie.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,916
    Cliffhanger is ideal. Or as much as they can muster.

    19twinejbwr.png
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,593
    Revelator wrote: »
    According to Moonraker:
    ...it was his ambition to have as little as possible in his banking account when he was killed, as, when he was depressed, he knew he would be, before the statutory age of forty-five.
    Eight years to go before he was automatically taken off the 00 list and given a staff job at Headquarters. At least eight tough assignments. Probably sixteen. Perhaps twenty-four. Too many.

    It is evident that Bond will not live to old age and wouldn't enjoy it if he did. Nor would he enjoy a staff job at headquarters. His ideal death would be the day before his 45th birthday, with nothing in his bank account, on his toughest assignment. Enjoying his greatest triumph, the savior of his country lays down his life for it. Bond will never grow old, never rot away in an office job, and never fade into everyday life. The sin Bond hates more than any other is boredom, and he would rather die than lead an everyday life.

    Well said. I wonder if this has anything to do with Fleming possibly trying to kill Bond off in FRWL, and then keeping him alive so more books could be written?
  • IGotABrudderIGotABrudder UK
    Posts: 631
    The novel FRWL was a genuine cliffhanger at the time because none of its readers knew whether Fleming would write any more Bond novels or not. Fleming never wrote ‘James Bond will return’ at the end of any of them. He could easily have abandoned spy fiction and moved into a different genre.

    We know for a fact that he was interested in children’s stories (CCBB) and in female-centered relationship fiction (TSWLM) and he could have decided to have explored those genres more fully, or explore others, and leave Bond lying on a wine red floor.

    But the movies are different, not just because of the will-return line but also because the modern audience is very franchise-aware. Film goers know that 007 is a valuable franchise for the studio that owns it, they know that franchises never really die but because they are income-generating intellectual corporate properties they always get resurrected or rebooted. A cliffhanger ain’t what it used to be.
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    edited October 2019 Posts: 17,819
    I'm definitely against the idea of Bond dying. If there's any indication this is what they're doing with NTTD, I will ask here on the forum beforehand; I will not spend my money on a film where that happens.

    As for an ambiguous, or false death - that just feels so incredibly uninspiring to me. It's done so many times before in other films, so I wouldn't want them to do that either.
  • ThrasosThrasos
    Posts: 1,469
    I don't think Bond will ever die and should not die. He's an iconic character, almost archetypal for a gentleman spy and killer, though archetypal is too lofty a word, and so has risen above the threat of death culturally though he regularly faces it on film. He's 66 so far and remains relatively young, passed on high from actor to actor. Makes me think of a character like Sherlock Holmes--132 years young and still kicking in modern incarnations, including my fave turns by Brett, and Cumberbatch (the first two seasons anyway). Besides, what would all those beautiful sexy Bond women do without him. Not to mention tailors...barmen...chefs...croupiers.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    By making him watch DAD, the uncut version.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    shamanimal wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    If I was ever to find out that Bond is killed off in a film (and I will ask my friends across the pond before the next film's US release if this is the case) I will not patronize it. Ambiguous, or false deaths (ala the novel YOLT or SF) I'm fine with.

    I agree.
    If they kill him then bring him back to life in a 'reboot' then they'll just make a mockery of the whole franchise. They'll ruin it.

    Bond is not a superhero, or a zombie.

    I disagree personally. It's not like they've ever cared about continuity. Giving him a definitive ending like him dying then starting again with the next actor would be fine imo.

    I think it's more likely now than ever. Craig's Bond had a clear beginning and they've made sure to point out how everything since has been part of the same story. Makes sense to give that story an end. And how else do you end it at this point? He can't just retire again and I can't see them ending it with him back at MI6 full time, especially since that'd mean him replacing (in universe, obviously she's not going to take over as the hero of the films) the new black female 007. Imagine the outrage if they introduced her only to kill her off or have her quit to make way for Bond coming back.

    Not sure if they'll actually have the bottle to kill him off though. I'm thinking big explosion, funeral scene, then a shot of him watching from a distance (or a little hint that he's alive). It is technically a very similar ending to SP, him going into retirement, but everyone thinking he's dead means that he can actually stay there this time. Then reboot with the next actor. I think the Craig era is going to be its own seperate, closed off thing.
  • shamanimalshamanimal
    edited October 2019 Posts: 623
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    shamanimal wrote: »
    I disagree personally. It's not like they've ever cared about continuity. Giving him a definitive ending like him dying then starting again with the next actor would be fine imo.

    Do you think it would be okay to do it every time they have a new actor, or just the once, as a bit of a novelty?

    Sorry, but it'd be insulting to kill him, then create another Bond who didn't die. What sense could be made of that? Would it be some kind of sci-fi 'alternative universe' Bond?

    If they kill him, make it the last Bond. Till then, Bond lives and doesn't come back from the dead. It's not sci-fi, despite the invisible cars.
  • Since62Since62
    Posts: 1,650
    How about a string of films. New actor each time. Dies at the end of each and every one. After a while, the tricky difference would be to have him killed off early in the film, and then M and Moneypenny, Q and Tanner go after whoever killed Bond and complete his last assignment. After a bunch of those, make the Young Bond stories, in their original timeframe as period pictures.
  • Since62Since62
    Posts: 1,650
    Dies in the sack during sex..."He'd have wanted it that way" (Reference to YOLT, except, for real !) Actually, I think it would be pointless to kill off Bond.
  • Since62Since62
    Posts: 1,650
    Were Craig or a subsequent actor to be called upon to portray a dying Bond, it could be time to have him proclaim, again albeit slightly revised to add a letter "s": "This never happened to the other fellows !"
Sign In or Register to comment.