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
how come M is mad when he 'storms into an embassy and kills an unarmed man'.
Is that not like the definition of a government assassin's job?
Bond was never meant to kill the bomber. He even says: "holster the bloody weapon Carter I need him alive" before he starts chasing him. However by the time he's stormed the embassy he doesn't see any other choice. A mistake that M reprimands him for.
Yes, but why then, during Moore's tenure exclusively, did almost every villain refer to him as such. And yes, I agree, he is a detective. But he's also an assassin, yet the only jobs he's got on his record are his two to get 00 status (in the films). All the other 'assassinations' in the films are not his assignment.
I'd like to see Bond simply assigned to kill someone. Even if its just a PTS.
I think your right MD but I often hear fans refer to Fleming's Bond as an assissin.
Grant was the hit man - not Bond. The former's job was souley to kill people.
But its still part of Bond's description, and we've only see him do it in CR. I hate how the films need to justify that the villains are bad before they're killed off. That's not Bond's universe. Bond's job is whatever his government requires. It'd be interesting to see Bond have to kill off someone in a PTS, and it not be related to the film. Just to show his ruthlessness, but also have him question what he's done (and all that).
As Forster *claims* to have intended, Bond isn't always the good, and his enemies aren't always the bad. Lets see him take someone out on orders, but not justify whether they were good/bad in the world. That would add to his character, showing he's willing to do what his job dictates, but he doesn't necessarily like it. Throw in some references to his thoughts on assassinations from Casino Royale (the book).
At what point in DAF is the Fleming atmosphere conveyed DaltonCraig?
When Bond says 'We're cleaning up the world and thought this a suitable place to start'?, 'I was out walking my pet rat and I seem to have lost my way'?, when Bond is driving around in a moon buggy, when he sniffs his flower on the elevator, 'alimentary Dr Leiter'? - Shall I go on?
None of this is remotely Fleming. The only elements of DAF I would say that have a Fleming atmos is the early Wint and Kidd stuff with the dentist (pretty much lifted straight from the book) and Mrs Whistler, the Franks fight and the early scenes with Tiffany. Basically anything that happens before the film heads to America which is only about one quarter of the film.
Compare this to CR which after it arrives in Montenegro is pretty much a straight adaptation of the book. Now you may not think that Daniel Craig embodies Flemings Bond but I dont see how you can realistically argue that Sean, playing basically himself, in DAF is more like the Bond Fleming intended.
I remember reading somewhere (I think Dalton said it) that 'Bond is just as ruthless a killer as the evil ones-- he just happens to be on the side of good'. Pretty dark when you think about it!
I've heard that too. Its here:
As much as I respect Mr Dalton I'm not sure I agree with the hypothesis "Bond is bad as the enemies he faces". Yes Bond is a shady character but compared to the bad people he faces he's relitively level-headed. Look at Grant for instance, a man described in the book along the lines of having "fire in his eyes" and "the look of a psychopath" by Bond.
I always got the impression that, while Fleming referred to him as neither a good or bad guy, Bond was inherently good underneeth the cold exterior and, while Bond was unpleasent sometimes, the villains were far worse. Bond had a conscience which his enemies lacked but chose to bury it because of his job.
Just my view
Excommunicate me then, please! If all the Bond films were like Moore's and DAF I would not be a Bond fan right now, that is certain.
I´m just kidding because it´s my favorite. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Even TMWTGG deserves to be criticised if someone doesn´t like something about it.
No doubt he is inherently good. Just him questioning himself in his job proves that. There are multiple times in the novels where he considers quitting, or does. Its not necessarily that Bond is a bad man, he just has the capacity to be bad based on the needs of England. Thats his job, and all of us face that sometimes. Am I doing whats right when I drive to work? No, but its a necessary evil to burn those carbon emissions until something better comes along.
I'd love to see a PTS where Bond is assigned to take someone out, and he does. But we can obviously see he is uncomfortable. Have a scene where he looks unsteady and unsure of himself with the baddie in his sights. Then, just before he shoots, he gains his composure and kills them.
We see the good side, while also seeing his ability to calm himself and do what is necessary.
Oh, and most importantly, what is the Bond theme that plays over the gun barrel in that video? PLEASE! Its so calm, yet so deadly. Found it.
Well she didn't deserve it, and again she was too set up.
I'm saying MGM credits, boom scene just like CR's opening. Bond sent on a hit job. No questions asked.
You, sir, should read the books, and then you'll find the real James Bond.
If he read the books, it would comfort him in that idea - Brosnan made a very Flemingesque performance in DAD.
He at least shot the guy running out of the bar and nailed the guy that killed Sharkey with the spear gun (maybe that one doesn't count though). But you're right! For the hard reputation he has, he sure didn't kill too many people! I honestly can't think of any others!
In TLD when he fired the machine gun out of the plane, was he missing people on purpose or do you suppose he killed a few off-screen?
Damn, we really need a Lucas-style special edition of TLD & LTK where some more kills are inserted! (kidding)
Well, with the exception that Brosnan's movies are filled to the brim with gadgets, two-dimensional characters, only one relevant to its time plot and a Korean guy who, for some reason, believes that in order to lead Korea to reunification under the North, he needs to be British...
Oh, wait. You'll find none of this in Fleming.
Eon should find a director to stay and work on multiple installments in the franchise consecutively. (My vote being Mendes or Fiennes)
I don´t know if that´s controversial, but I certainly agree with you.
Its controversial from the status quo, or the 'norm'.
You are absolutely right as Hugo Drax from MR is actually a survivor of the war and turns out to be a German who after plastic surgery takes up the role of extremely British industrialist in order to get revenge on the British for the lost war.
:D
That would be nice to see. He just seems to know what he's doing. He has a style, but you can't put your finger on it. And its not over-the-top. Its a refined Bond, a cold, calculating look that just works with Bond material.
I wan't to see him come back when ever whoever takes up the mantle as Bond next.
Notice: Both of his PTS have Bond working with another agent. I wonder if that's his doing. Both PTS also have high-altitude stunts. Close enough.
With Casino Royale? Sounds more like you're thinking of TLD (which he didn't direct)