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
;)
Look man, my two favourite Bonds are TLD & LTK, so I'm not in it for the jokes, but IF you're gonna silly it up, then I'm not gonna judge a film by Dalton or early-to-mid Connery standards.
Y'all heah me BOY?? :))
:))
I agree with you on that. Batman and Robin's bloody hilarious. Doesn't make it a good film though.
With Connery they were looking for a style and with GF they found the formula and yet they never had Connery down, the movies fluctuated in strength.
Which indeed makes the Moore run a more steady and consistent one.
CONNERY
In DN Connery's Bond was jittery, prone to impulsive actions that his later Bond wouldn't do (the murder of the guard in the swamp is one example).
In FRWL, through GF and TB we see Bond's laconic charm, easy manner and less pronounced menace come to the fore, but it's a casual, slow change and it doesn't effect his performance one iota. He is the same man, but if we compare Bond in DN and TB we see two almost different characters.
But it's a character who is growing and changing as we all do through life. We all find more confidence in what we do.
I do not subscribe to the idea that Connery was 'bored' in YOLT. The film introduced more action, a faster pace than previously, and Connery's natural understated performace and easy manner doesn't fit quite so well. The film often shoots past him in a blur.
Yet, watch Connery in the quieter moments - with Tiger or Dikko - he is no different to normal. Just as charismatic and cool as ever. He isn't bored or tired. It's a bandwagon that everyone jumps on without watching the film closely.
In DAF his Bond was the same, just.....larger.
MOORE
In LALD and TMWTGG we have a rather pensive, quietly dangerous, manipulative Bond. He trusts no one. This is Moore trying not to be Simon Templar. And he gives more considered performances as a result.
By the time of TSWLM Moore has abandoned this, and The Saint is back, smirking at the ladies, raising the old eyebrow, the gentleman spy all over.
Now, he does maintain this persona pretty well throughout SPY to AVTAK, but the mixture of gently sending himself up in one scene and the more hard edged Bond in the next isn't always comfortable on the eyes.
CONCLUSION
Connery's Bond evolves slowly from the tetchy, cruel Bond of DN to the weary, hard nosed Bond of DAF.
Moore simply changes his performance from TMWTGG to TSWLM to suit the new, stripped down and rebuilt films which would suit the late 70s.
<font color=blue size=7><b>The fatherly relationship of Dr. Kaufman with Stamper is poorly sold in TND.</b></font>
I wish they had shown more of that and far less of Jack Wade (who never fails to bug me).
Fully agree. They could and should have exploited the two characters jointly!
But that relationship was better explored. We even see Zorin pat Mortner affectionately on the head, we see Mortner shout desperately as his "creation" struggles to get a grip on the bridge, there are multiple scenes when we see them together. I buy the "Frankenstein and his monster" relationship.
Yeah you're right. The Stamper Kaulfan relationship was thrown away really in one line: "he was like a father to me".
Agreed.
One of TND weaknesses is it's handling (and lack thereof) of character relationships (I.e. Paris and Bond).
About the present question- SO WHAT?? We didn't SEE Stamper getting a father influence from Kaufman so it's not valid? Did we SEE Vader being Luke's father before he said it to him on the antenna array? Please, let's NOT demand extra scenes to explain EVERYTHING! ;)
<font color=blue size=7><b>Bond's computer savviness in CR could make Wishaw's Q slightly redundant as an ally.</b></font>
Or do any of Q's computer wizardry when tracking down Silva's evil plot hidden in the computer (granted, Q gets beat here, but that's mostly for plot convenience).
Yet he can just randomly pluck the word 'Granborough' from an impenetrable list of letters and order Q to use it as a password.
But as you say - plot convenience.
Disagree: We all have a certain level of computer knowledge! Then you have hacker types who think outside the box!
Regarding this current debate, I agree that so far Bond has displayed equal to or superior "computer savviness" as the new Q. My evidence behind this being that, as others have mentioned, a) Bond successfully hacks into M's computer in Casino Royale, and b) Bond easily one-ups Q in discovering Silva's passcode. For his own part, computer-wise, Q creates some cyber "breadcrumbs" for Silva to follow up to Scotland. (Still have no idea what that looks like in real world terms; I just chalk it up to: "An easy way for us to get to Act 3.")
But I don't think there will be any question of Q's redundancy/relevance as we move forward, since I really do believe (or at least hope) Q will take on more of an innovative armorer-type role—à la Lucius Fox, who himself was essentially Q in Gotham form. Q's gadgets can be really high-tech and he can have a really high-tech research lab that resembles an Apple store (with more explosion marks), but I doubt we'll see him Skyping with Bond on his iPad the whole film.