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
As Bond, he IS bank-- the general audience loves him in the role and go and see him in the role.
As for his other choices, from stage, to TV to films, you're comparing apples to oranges, mate.
Comparing fruit with other fruit is so lazy.
I watched Passengers yesterday, and was impressed with his work on that film.
I wasn't even aware that he did the soundtrack, but the opening track as the ship was hurtling through open solitary space was mysterious, suspenseful and caught my attention.
It seems that the only thing EON planned to do with the Craig era was show Bond becoming Bond, which they've done three times now. They completed that story arc three times, but for some reason screwed it up by starting it over after each of the first two. Their only plan from there is, "Subvert the formula. Add emotion and grittiness".
I used to think of the Bond series as being so unique because it knew to never deviate from what made it great. What made it great, what made it the icon it is today, is the formula; quips, cars, gadgets, girls, over-the-top villains, etc. It is not tired or cliched for you to use these things when you're the series that invented them.
The cause of the sudden onslaught of Craig bashing after SP is this: In an era known for it's undermining of the formula we finally got a formulaic Bond film, but something didn't sit right. The film had a lousy love story, a soap opera style personal backstory (step-brother), and an incredibly weak ending. These also happen to be the only times the film goes against the formula. We realized that the Craig era tropes of emotion, grit, formula subversion, and "this time it's personal" have grown old and tired faster that the classic tropes, which survived nearly constant use from '62 to '02, and we now dearly miss them. For the majority of Bond's first 40 years on screen, EON knew that the only thing necessary was to tweak the films and the formula to the times, while still keeping what makes Bond, Bond. In the 60s, it was the formula drenched in the class and style of the decade. In the 70s and early 80s, it was the formula cloaked in humor and camp. In the 90s and early 00s it was the formula mixed with action hero style. It worked, and we need it back. We need Bond back.
That goes for every Bond actor.Arguably the likes of Dalton and Lazenby less so because their run was so short,audiences did not have time to invest in them.
Bondsum would probably be able to give you a more accurate picture.
I don't think Dalton was uncomfortable playing Bond as much as uncomfortable with the baggage Bond as an icon brought.
ITV 4's Bond schedule is even more puzzling. "Bond Girls are Forever" has been shown at least three times this week.
You do get the sense he's having more fun in that film than he did in Bond.
One additional thought; Subverting the formula is not a bad thing to do occasionally, but when you start doing it in every film, it becomes a formula in and of itself. This has been the sole basis of the Craig era.
There is truth to your statement. The Bond at the very end of CR seems a lot more mature and focused than the Bond of QoS. I like how QoS deviated from formula...to a point (I thought he should have slept with Camille--surely they weren't suggesting that his libido was on hold until he got answers about Vesper? Plus, you know, Fields).
QoS is a bit of a bait-and-switch. Bond is not really on a revenge mission; he is on a Vesper-fact-finding mission. That's why he says, "I never left."
But I agree with you that QoS dials back Bond's evolution only to end up at the same point (emotionally) as CR at the end.
If you are nervous playing Bond this will be noticed by the audience.
Even PB I think is a little nervous in the GE PTS in parts,Sean Bean looks more at home and dominates the scene,but then PB ups his game and is fine.
SC was fine.
RM was fine.
DC was fine.
Even GL was fine in his opening moments as Bond.
That's why Dalton never sits well with me,he is the one Bond actor that couldn't handle the role and all the attention it gets.
Dalts looks awkard in some of his lighter scenes (a bit with Q and definitely with MP).
("Moneypenny be a dear", Moore could pull off a line like that...Dalton couldn't)
Ian Fleming would not have liked Skyfall.
At all.
Working class, yet pretentious.
Dear old Ian would have hated that Bond plays that common bar game, he would also have disliked Bond having a beer while relaxing, let alone a low-quality one.
But above all, the homo-erotic scene would have really pissed him off.
Don't forget Broz liked his pints too ;)
Just look at the scene where Bond first meets Saunders at the opera in TLD.The way Dalton delivers the line '' Lovely girl with the cello '' is just so wooden in its delivery and he actually looks disinterested!