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
We're now coming to another crucial milestone in the cinematic Bond cycle—a change in lead actor. I know some feel all the producers need to do is follow the Fleming literary template and all will be well in the universe again. I'm not so sure. For me and many countless others, Connery is still the definitive and cinematic template you set all your standards by.
I should add that we're now living in neo-puritanical times that make the Victorians look progressive, never mind the strict movie censorship of the 60's, so accurately portraying Fleming's Bond, or Connery's Bond, will now face new hurdles and hardships that were once thought unimaginable.
Agree with pretty much all of this. I hope Bond 26 gives us an actor that embodies Connery's natural characteristics, mannerisms, tough macho charisma and humour, and a script that relies heavily on unused Fleming.
This is the perfect blend.
Of course we're not. Bond films alone have become more graphic and even more sweary over the years.
I rank Dalton number 1 too. He may not be the best cinematic version (that mantle belongs undisputedly to Connery), but for capturing Fleming, no one else comes close. He had the whole package of the literary character, the looks and the acting ability to pull it off.
And more importantly, Dalton was a huge fan of the books. It was his main focus and desire to capture the Fleming books again, and this is reflected in both his movies.
Lazenby is the only one who I can picture when I’m reading the novels. Which as others has said, is probably more down to the film he got, to be fair. But Fleming has never been the be all and end all for me (maybe because I came to the books late, after years of watching the films) so I don’t mean what I said above critically. Dalton and Craig are my favourite Bonds, despite not really matching the character I see when I’m reading the books. And the series never would’ve taken off if Connery hadn’t made it so cool, I think that was a change for the better. I like different takes on it.
Yeah but Bond can’t be sexist and racist like he was in the 50s anymore. PC gone mad.
I disagree on LTK. It’s my favourite Bond film, but what I find interesting about it is that I actually don’t think Bond is very close to the books at all.
I used to think the same, that Dalton was the closest. But the more I read and reread the novels, the less I saw Fleming’s Bond as all that cold blooded. He lets Scaramanga pray when he should execute him, he says he never killed in cold blood (or something along those lines) in FRWL, we see him struggling with the murder of that hitman in GF, which Connery just quipped about in the film. He’s hard, and he has his fair share of cold moments, but he’s not ruthless, imo. And I think the TLD short story illustrates this perfectly, with him sparing the sniper.
Dalton played that Bond perfectly in TLD. But what I love about his Bond in LTK is how they took it a step further, and had Bond snap in a way that Fleming’s character never did. I think Bond is colder and more brutal in that film than he was in any of the novels. It’s not Fleming imo, because I don’t think Fleming’s Bond ever would’ve snapped like that. Even after Tracy, he was just depressed. He took the opportunity for revenge when he saw it, sure, but he didn’t go off on a ruthless rampage looking for Blofeld. But that’s what Dalton’s Bond did in LTK. He went looking for that chance of revenge. He sacrifices his career and storms into an American 80s action movie, betraying M and even indirectly getting those fellow MI6 agents killed in the process, all for the sake of revenge. I think Bond was in uncharted territory with LTK, and that’s why I love it.
To be fair, in LALD (the book) Felix only gets mauled by the shark while in LTK Sanchez's men also rape and murder his wife. Bond's personal mission was pretty justified, as he wasn't just getting revenge for Felix but also for Della, since Felix wouldn't be able to do it himself.
Cheers @jetsetwilly. At least you get what I was trying to convey.
So you characterise the progressive as regressive. A bit silly.
I know there’s always the odd article moaning about what a relic Bond is, but I think as ever, that’s the internet amplifying the voices of a minority. The films are still doing very well, and the important parts of the character have always stayed the same imo, even as the world changes, so I don’t see why that’d be any different now. He’s just not slapping women around or making racist or sexist comments anymore, which surely is a good thing? The only change I can think of that could be taken as puritanical is the lack of smoking in the new films. But that change happened a while ago. And as someone who would’ve been treated as a second class citizen in Fleming’s day, not being able to see James Bond smoke a cigarette seems like a worthy trade off for the progress we’ve made for me. Give me the woke modern world any day.
Oh yeah, I’m not saying it was out of the blue or random. The film gives him real reason to snap, and him finally killing Sanchez is insanely cathartic. I just can’t imagine Fleming’s Bond defying M and storming off on a one man mission like that. He just didn’t seem like that sort of character to me (again not a criticism though, I prefer Dalton’s take).
Yes, if folks are watching these films just to see someone say that 'homosexuals can't whistle' then I think they're missing the point a bit. Your point about cigarettes is a great one: he packed that in around 1970. He had an occasional cigar after that, and fell off the cigarette wagon in '87 for two films, but that was it. If you don't like Bond changing in the modern world then you have to go back to 1971 and get angry about it.
(Vaguely interesting fact: Casino Royale is the first Bond film where no-one at all smokes)
Ironic when you think of the first line of the novel.
I started a complete re-read in March last year, and I'm on Thunderball now, (one novel every few months, if you read them one after another they melt into one, so I read a few books in between each Bond).
Anyway, the screen Bond actor that is closest to the books is Connery in Dr No, FRWL, TB and the Laz in OHMSS. Simply because the films are so close to the books. Dalton in TLD does embody the book Bond's traits, but it's the eighties and he's wearing casual eighties jackets and he's actually more cheery than I imagine the book Bond. I dunno. Dalton came after the Moore era, and we (Fleming fans) were all a little celebratory that Fleming's Bond was back. But looking at them now, I'm not sure I see him as the same assassin that reflected in a double bourbon at the start of the Goldfinger novel, (my favourite Fleming chapter).
I would agree with this, although OHMSS is a contender too.
The revenge driven aspect isn't really Fleming, I agree. The only time Fleming really ventured into this territory was the last part of YOLT, when he discovers Shatterhand is really Blofeld, although I do recall moments throughout the novels when Bond is set to avenge someone or other for killing a person (or animal) or something else, even if its just a passing thought.
But I think Bond going undercover to get close to Sanchez feels very Fleming to me, the way Bond acts throughout this movie (other than his rejection of M), the way he is deadly serious throughout, tough, ruthless, yet still finds time to smile to himself when chucking Sanchez's money out of the plane.
When Dalton utters the line `You earned it, you keep it, old buddy', this is actually more badass even than anything Craig ever delivered (and he has his moments too).
This is why I still rate LTK as the closest incarnation of Fleming on screen.
DN through TB & OHMSS... The Golden Era... So close to the era in which Fleming wrote, so styles and behaviors were likely close to parallel.
LALD: something about Moore's portrayal that captures Fleming Bond... I think it's his innate confidence mixed with spell-binding charm.
Flashes of tone can be seen/felt in FYEO and OP.
TLD: thanks to the script and Dalton's end of the rope portrayal (although as I always feel with Dalton: I wish he enjoyed the more hedonistic side of the character; I wish he sauntered into a casino and didn't look so wound up (as I perceived him in LTK); enjoy winning hands at the tables, and feeling the challenge when losing; really savor the alcohol and relish the women)
LTK: apart from the production values, the LALD & TMWTGG nods, Dalton seemed more relaxed (and therefore more conniving) in his scenes with Davi's Sanchez, elevated the visuals and gave the over all film a Fleming-type tone...
CR-SF and NTTD: I feel that Craig fleshed out what Fleming started: the idea that this spy was originally an orphan... Mixed with the blunt instrument, I feel that Craig's three dimensional tender side was born from his childhood. He's certainly the Bond that also comes closest to being the tough exterior assassin, with a soft inner self who has an instinct to protect women with a broken wing (as Molony more or less described him)... And there seems to be something a little more mythological about him (especially because of NTTD), in the same sense as Fleming's characters see Bond as being akin to St.George
Yes, I was thinking that myself. TMWTGG might be Moore's best Bond performance over all in his films. It's just a pity that it's rather wasted in a film like TMWTGG.
Yes, TMWTGG is definitely Moore's most Flemingesque performance, and FYEO is his most Fleming movie.
Yes, agreed on both points. I think him being that bit younger (relative to FYEO) makes his performance in TMWTGG that bit more Flemingesque. It also helps that he plays the role with an uncharacteristic harder edge and a rare degree of slight unlikability throughout.