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
No he's not....Craig's Bond is a re-boot ,a totally different time-line...he is nothing to do with any of the other Bonds.
I would pay £100 for it. It is a "Cannot put down" book. The information within is a goldmine. I gained a better understanding of the franchise, and a more grounded perspective. Sometimes Bond fans in their fervour inadvertently insult Cubby. They should have supported him with the Dalton era, and given things a chance. Where were the fans when Cubby needed them?
And Cubby has a story in the book when a fan says he refuses to see TLD based on critics writing. Cubby says to the man, but you should make your own mind up and not follow a critic.
Because SF was helped by the critics giving their approval of Bond, after denigrating the character many times over the years.
With each Bond actor, Cubby never short-changed anyone and was always looking for new ideas to build the franchise.
I wish the late Harry Saltzman had an autobiography. My goodness would I love to read that, but it never was to be.
It is supposed to be a fresh start and intentionally so, as Craig did not want to play the traditional James Bond straight away. He accepted the role on the basis that they start from scratch.
So, fine and dandy, but then why did Martin Campbell say that we see how he becomes the Bond we all know and love. And the Aston DB5? What the hell was it doing in CR, when it is a totally different time-line. Connery's car was of its time.
And the revised history of how he acquired it was ludicrous. It jars with Goldfinger, arguably the most famous and well-known Bond film of them all!
I will say this again, but having the DB5 in a more serious film like CR, would be like having the Adam West Batmobile in Batman Begins. It detracted from Craig, by invoking the legacy of Connery.
When I see the Aston DB5 in a non-Connery film, who am I going to think of? Kind of defeats the purpose of start from scratch and Bond as if the other films had not existed.
I second that.
I much prefer how they went with Lotus for Moore. That was one of the many things they did to make the Moore era different from Connery, and it worked, at least in my view. I actually prefer the white Esprit to the DB5 and always have, although my absolute favourite of all is Laz's DBS.
Thank you. A serious Bond aficionado once told me, that by having the DB5 in the film, it screams that Connery is still the best Bond!
Moore ran a mile from anything associated with Connery's legacy. And Broccoli/Saltzman were wise to give the 70's Bond a new audience and fresh appreciation.
Incidentally, I love the OHMSS Aston and that is fine, as that model is different to Connery's. Same for Dalton in TLD. I am all for Bond having a new Aston, just like he must have the tuxedo.
OHMSS and TLD Astons have similar designs.
Pisses me off, no end. And that f*cking azure sea in CR? What does it think it is, TB?!
Bond, it is true has been inconsistent. For example Charles Gray is an ally of Bond in YOLT and then Blofeld in DAF.
But, the Craig era did not need those distractions like the DB5, particularly as it was sold as a serious attempt to explore the character without the baggage of the past. And if it was a sincere reboot, then why reference the past. This is why Nolan's Batman films threw the past out. Christian Bale was his own man, with not a nod to Keaton and the others. And it added to the tone they were going for.
And I feel Craig lost so much of who he is especially in SP, by the producers trying to make him into a Connery/Moore composite. It didn't work. They got greedy with the success and pulled a fast one on all the goodwill of the more seriously minded fans.
He is not an actor that works best when they are trying to make him assume traits of someone else.
I think you are missing the point entirely. Most reasonable posters here have never made ridiculous assertions like that. But fans of the series can blatantly see when something is out of place or does not belong.
Reboot means reboot. Just like Brexit means Brexit.
Me too. What a waste the last 30 years have been.
Here's a new controversial opinion: the bringing back of the DB5 wasn't misused until Skyfall.
With GoldenEye, the world had been deprived of a new Bond for six years. Bond needed to be brought back in a BIG way. So during the early stretch of the film, we get a fun, slightly tongue-in-cheek car race against a mysterious dame where Bond is now driving the classic DB5 as his personal sporting car. Absolutely nothing wrong with this, especially since there was nothing overtly wink-wink or fourth wall breaking about the scene. They played it straight. Fun, but straight. Good on Campbell and company.
Tomorrow Never Dies and TWINE? Blink and you'll miss it cameos with the DB5 again, consistently that is, featured as Bond's personal ride. Most audiences apart from the hardcore fans probably didn't even realize Bond was driving the classic Aston. Nothing amiss here.
Die Another Day. No DB5. And moving on...
Casino Royale. Again, Campbell was required to bring Bond back in a BIG way after the extravagance of DAD and a 4 year absence. Classic Bond tropes were slowly and playfully being teased and reintroduced in fun and rewarding ways throughout. Having Bond win the DB5 in an early poker game against a scummy minor villain was both appropriate to the film's narrative and appropriate to the approach they were taking in reintroducing classic Bond elements. It's also consistent with the new timeline as this very obviously isn't the Goldfinger car. As with GoldenEye, it's played straight and it's fun.
Quantum of Solace. No DB5. And moving on...
Skyfall. Here is where I leave you. I cannot and will not defend the treatment of the DB5 in Skyfall. My thoughts on the scene are well documented elsewhere on this board and I'm not going to exhaust myself going through it all again. Fourth wall breaking, timeline obstructing, painfully unfunny, terribly misplaced at the key turning point between acts two and three. Quite possibly a contender for THE single most poorly thought out and constructed scene in the entire series. And Sam Mendes gleefully takes full credit for it. No, the DB5 itself hasn't been a problem in the modern Bond films. The DB5 in the hands of Sam Mendes has been the problem.
One could argue that its appearance in SF was within reason as well, since it played to the 'old' vs. 'new' high tech message in the film.
Unfortunately, he received such overwhelming cheers for the moment when that car appeared in SF (in every viewing of the film I saw in the theatre), that this perhaps led him to overplay it in SP. Give the people what they want, he must have thought. In retrospect, I'm not sure if the cheers were for the car or for the Bond theme, although there were laughs when he threatened to eject M as well.
I understand that symbolism on a film theory level, but there are so many more literal and technical reasons why the Aston Martin was a total goof-up in Skyfall that I cannot abide by how it was used. There probably was a way, however, to intelligently include it without ham-fistedly cocking up timeline, tone, and narrative pacing alike.
I see where you are coming from. However for me it was borrowing ideas from the Brosnan era. Because it made sense in Goldeneye, though it was used as a wink ta the audience that classic style Bond is back. And GE was not a reboot. The past is referenced.
For CR it took me out of the film. It is Bond from the beginning, hence there is no past.
It felt rehashed in the Craig era, where it is supposed to be fresh. And to use it in three of his four films, feels like a creative crutch.
The old adage - use sparingly.
There was no need for it to be in SP.
I cannot criticise DAD for winking to the past too much and then be OK with it in the later films. That is hypocrisy.
The DB5 in CR is done and dusted before the real nitty gritty. If you're still distracted by the time the real shit goes down your priorities are skewed imo.
Come up with something original, like the Connery era did.
So no YOLT?
Did the DB5 make CR better as a film?
And logically, what was a previous Bond's car doing, if CR is his first mission?