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
Don't be sorry - I find movies like MR, TMWTGG and DAF much closer to Fleming than Craig's films !!
Normal service has been resumed I see Mr DaltonCraig! Seeing as CR retained about 70% of the novel I'd be interested if you could point out similar levels of Fleming source material in MR, TMWTGG and DAF.
I was simply arguing your earlier point. You tried to define who Bond was. In order to do that, you can't go by the films, but from the source material. From the inception of the character. Bond is not silly, reliant on gadgets, and out to get crazy villains. He's an SAS type commando agent doing espionage for Her Majesty! In the majority of his books, the villains aren't even after the 'big picture'. Their actions usually only have local consequences.
For those who enjoyed the books, a similar movie is preferable. But thats not to say I don't enjoy some of the more.. creative.. Bond adventures.
For me the best Bond storyline is YOLT. Though its execution wasn't all that great, it blends book and movie Bond brilliantly. FRWL also manages the same effect.
I wasn´t directning my answer at you, as I get your point perfectly. But others I have spoken to say things like "movie a is better than movie b just because it follows the novel".
I will say that my earlier point, about what Bond is, should have been "how I want Bond to be". And that I stand by.
The words of a man who is obviously extremely familiar with the books.
CR destroyed its original source, so no it it's not Flemingesque at all ! CR is not part of the franchise for me. It's not a Bond film in any way, nor is it Fleming in any way.
MR, TMWTGG and DAF have the atmosphere, the colourful characters and the benign bizarre that is a trademark to Fleming. Which makes these 3 films very similar to Fleming, IMO. When I read a Fleming novel, it's as if I put Golden Gun or MR or DAF in the dvd player, and I always picture Moore Bond in the novels.
IMO Fleming's work is much more larger-than life and dare I say funny than the Craig films. DAF, and TMWTGG really capture the spirit of Fleming's writings very well.
Call me an idiot all you want, but I find the Fleming novels much more comical than some say here... like we are not reading the same books.
Hardee har har. How would you put it?
He's a deeply complex man, who is not better than questioning his role in the politics of his nation. He has a slight weakness in women, but seems to get over them rather quickly. He's very aware of his situations, and can get himself out of many sorts of situations. He's not beneath working in a team, or with a teammate, but feels questioned when assigned one (especially a woman, per CR). He's an ex special force ex-military bad ass, fit enough to do anything his job may require.
That better?
No. Not really. Ian Flemings James Bond has no connection to the SAS and has never worked in special forces.
Commander James Bond CMG, RNVR is an ex navy Commander who now works for the Secret Service.
Shit just noticed that you wrote 'SAS type' which I missed first time round so you would have been entitled to slap me down if you hadnt followed it up with 'hes ex special forces' which he most certainly isnt.
Oops. Watching Killer Elite and they drop SAS like 1.000.000 times. Must of just blended it. My baaaaaaaaaad. We'll go with.. special forces-type ;)
And to be fair.. "former SAS-types" thats what you get for letting films brainwash you.
We are talking about CR 2006 are we not CR67 here? You know the film that once it gets to Montenegro is probably the closest we have to a straight adaptation of a Fleming novel since OHMSS?
I'll give you that DAF, TMWTGG and MR have a Fleming benign/bizarre atmosphere somewhere in their DNA but for all the good elements (Wint and Kidd, Scaramanga, Nick Nack, the centrifuge, Corinnes death) they are outweighed by laughable ones which have to place in the Fleming Bond universe (elephants playing the slots, moon buggys, Blofeld in drag, JW Pepper, Kung Fu schoolgirls, Jaws becoming a clown, that f**king pigeon, Bond in space).
Not saying CR is perfect but its the biggest dose of Fleming we've had since Felixes maiming in LTK.
I can live with 'special forces type' although we are verging dangerously close to Andy McNab territory. On this occasion I will let you off sir.
Is Killer Elite worth a watch? Heard it was supposed to be the bollocks and then it sort of got released and sank without a trace.
CR 2006 destroyed the original novel. There's not an ounce of Fleming in that film... for me it's just Bourne and Statham blended together.
I am glad CR brought new fans to the franchise - but IMO it's still the 2nd worst Bond film in the franchise.
Now don't get me wrong, as a film, I would rank CR in the top 20 films of the 2000's. As a Bond film though, it's just wrong.
It´s not a Bond film, but still a good action film. Literally of course it is a Bond film.
I also think I have a problem with the praise it gets, I mean, people praise it despite the fact that it is the least Bondian movie in the series, it obviously tries to be so tough, modern and serious and contains terrible drama.
My sister said she liked it because it wasn´t a normal Bond film, and she hates those. She also said that part of the success the movie had was because the love story interested the female audience.
Here is one thing I stand by no matter what I'm watching/reading/playing/writing: If the characters have no emotion, why are they even there? Duty alone is no reason to live.
A good example of this "bizarre" atmosphere would probably be the "Castle of Death" in YOLT. In that book a vengeful Bond is sent out on assignment to hunt down Blofeld at the "Castle of Death". A place with a poisonous garden that ultimately leads to the death of anyone who enters it.
Along the way Bond witnesses a ninja army in training. This army were each hand-picked when they were infants and their genitals were altered so that they couldn't feel pain when faced with direct contact (i.e. when someone kicked them in the groin during a fight).
In fairness YOLT is probably one of the most extreme novels but its a good example of Fleming at his most "quirky".
Craig for me is by far the least close to Fleming.
As much as I love Moore as Bond Fleming never intended Bond to be that likeable.
As did Brosnan with GE at that time.
We will undoubtely say a similar thing about the next actor.
The thing is @007RogerMoore, Bond as he was originally potrayed sometimes bled and got beaten up. In the MR book he is in fact once described as having a face "covered in blood". He didn't tell the kind of jokes Roger is well known for. As much as I enjoy Roger he wasn't really that Fleming-like IMO.
He occasionaly was very well played by Roger Moore. And true to Fleming.
Exactly. I remember reading how Bond screams (like he does in the film).
Agreed St Mark but I think those "darker" moments are probably in the minority.
I think Bond is supposed to be like Roger Moore, even if that is different from the original.
I have read the novels.. and IMO DAF and TMWTGG are 2 closest to Fleming the movies have ever got.
I'm not saying that Bond HAS to be exactly how he should be originally. If that was the case Bond would have died out a long time ago. All I'm saying is that originally Bond was most of those things you said he shouldn't be.
Instead of saying "Bond is supposed to be" I should have said "I think Bond should be like this in the movies".