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
I pretty much agree with your take on the classics, by the way. I'd include OHMSS in there, but other than that, you're good!
GP's opinion is not the point of this thread. TLD has all the elements of a classic Bond film AND is heavily rooted in Fleming. Therefore, TLD is a classic Bond film.
yes to the Bond super fans its a classic, but to the public it wasnt. In order for your Bond film to be a classic the public as to love it and be invested into it as well. And thats what Daltons movies failed at doing
Lazemby - His only film is a classic.
Moore - TMWTGG, TSWLM, MR.
Dalton - TLD.
Brosnan - Goldeneye, TWINE.
Craig - CR, Skyfall.
It's a fair point. I think if you asked the cinema-going public to name a 'Classic' Bond, I think TLD would be well down the pecking order, if at all. I think you're looking at an amalgamation of Connery and Moore entries.
If you are going with the theory of what the public thinks is a classic / films they remember it would probably be:
GF, YOLT
LALD, TSWLM
GE
CR,SF
I would say these are probably the most recognised? That leaves 16 films that are just a blur that rolls into one.
About Craig, it might be a little too early to call Casino Royale and Skyfall classics, but they are definitely well on their way. If nothing else, they'll be more fondly remembered than Quantum of Solace.
You're definitely right that the first five more than stand the test of time. Truly wonderful movies.
GL- OHMSS
RM-The Spy Who Loved Me
TD- Licence To Kill
PB- GoldenEye
DC- Casino Royale
GE has many classic elements, and is even moving in the classic list, but still feels like the first reboot to me: new M, new Bond, new director who wasn't involved in past films, new Bond, Cubby all but retired. The Craig films are still part of the current zeitgeist that they haven't achieved classic status yet for me.
Janus makes reference to the women he failed to protect, and there's a subtext of Tracy's death in The World Is Not Enough. It's one of the films many shortcomings that it didn't do more with this novel concept.
GE is the first Bond film with the producing credit of Barbara Broccoli, and Cubby is not listed. The behind the scenes also make it clear, that Cubby was in ill health and had a very limited advisory role at that point. LTK was the last film he had full involvement in and is listed as Producer (he had to be flown out even due to health issues). I suppose you could say GE is linked to the old films with the Cold War angle, but the whole point is that this is a post Cold War story: Bond in a new era. Also, by 'look', the cinematography and direction is all new (Meheux and Campbell), so if anything, this is a new interpretation of the old films. I guess I have a hard time seeing TND as a reboot, when so much of a change in production and crew began with GE: Bruce Feirstein had writing credits for both GE and TND as another example. TND also takes some elements from Bond17 such as the Chinese setting, so you could say that is also linked to the old era as well.
But I agree though in a way: GE strikes a nice balance of classic elements, while bringing Bond into the modern era, without compromising the traits that make the character. There is a Bond "feel" that is familiar.
However you, I, or anyone else may feel about CR and SF, I do think bestowing 'classic' status on them is jumping the gun. They will always be lauded as great films, but in such a canon as Bond I think you have to give the best part of 10-20 years before you can retrospectively and objectively define one as a classic. The only films that are deemed 'classic' within a year or so of release are the ones that truly capture the zeitgeist. I would say CR didn't do this, despite it's success, and while SF performed well at the box-office, it's not held in the same regard as something like TDK, which has pretty much embedded itself as a modern classic, whether people agree with it or not.
Watch out, they'll be coming for your head! ;)
They're classic Bond films, and that's what counts. The Dark Knight is an unqualified classic because it was "of the time". The Bond series hasn't been the zeitgeist since the first five Connery movies, and maybe, maybe The Spy Who Loved Me.
The Bond series is sort of like a long-lived band, AC/DC, Metallica, Sabbath, Springsteen, the Rolling Stones, Dylan, whoever. They had their chance to shape the world of music, and they ran with it. Now they can just produce damn good albums that focus on what they do best, even if it can't live up to the glories of the early years.
Like I said, though, time will tell. We're lucky that we'll get to watch the Bond series develop from here.
And with GE (typically) being the favorite of the Brosnan era for most fans and CR being one of the best in the series for most fans, I think they need to bring back Campbell - if he isn't too old - for the opening of the next Bond actor's film.
If you figure it will be in about 2020, he'll be 77. That's certainly old, but I'd really hope he could do it. Being the first director since Glen (unless Mendes does Bond 25) to get a hat trick would be special. He's more than earned it, given how amazing GoldenEye and Casino Royale were.