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
+2
And on a side note why can't they bring back the briefcase?
+3
I have a feeling FRWL is regrettably not so well known among casual fans. They probably wouldn't get the reference? I don't know...
By far my favorite gadget in the series. I'd buy that one!
That's probably the reason. It is the best and most believable gadget imo. And I still think they should bring it back in an updated version.
Speaking the Gospel
Oh, c'mon. Let Bond be Bond. With gadgets.
Bond was Bond before the crazy gadgets.
In this day and age, where I can see my entire property on my phone, James Bond doesn't need anything outlandish. I'd much rather see a hi-tech/light-weight sniper rifle, than I would an exploding watch.
The character is at his best when he relies on his wit, not some deus ex machina.
There's always the opportunity for smart, thrilling, humorous use of gadgets. Some of the best moments are when they're available and fail.
Including out gadgets at this point would be a mistake.
I find gadgets will just take me out of the film if they're not based in some kind of realism-- at this point of the films. Just me, but I hated the exploding watch, and a malfunctioning Aston.
I just don't see setting in place a lot of strictures in advance of the film proper. And I was thinking more the magnetic function of Bond Moore's watch at the alligator farm. Or the delayed fuse on the device that got Fatima Blush.
True, the gadgets do Bond's work for him to some extent, but they are just a little something to spice things up and not the "main course." When ideally integrated into a scene, they won't replace Bond's own smarts and skills. Whether they only provide a brief advantage over his enemies or help him in a larger capacity, hopefully Bond's resourcefulness in employing will still come across. I'd say that aspect has generally been handled well, even in the more gadget-heavy films. Moonraker is the exception, but it gets away with it by virtue of sheer excess. It works and quite well, but not every Bond film could be like that.
Gadgets are real world spycraft, after all. Fleming had those ideas himself during World War II.
Some things that are a little too convenient might be the glass-breaking ring, the fake fingerprint (though it is a clever idea)... the watch with a saw in it also seems too convenient for Bond to be wearing just when he needs to escape, but one can imagine it potentially having been conceived as a weapon for a fistfight, and the electromagnet is explained away in the film quite sensibly (and satisfyingly, it is not used in the exact way one would imagine it would've been used, which relates to what @RichardTheBruce pointed out). Same with the acid pen.
I like it when Bond uses gadgets in different ways. DAD is DAD, but Bond using the ejector seat to flip the car is a good moment.
Fleming was all over plotting schemes to disrupt the enemy. To me gadgets fit right in line with that.
I've got a reel lawn mower myself.
"It's like playing GoldenEye on Agent (easy) mode." =))
He gave one to M in TMWTGG. And some to SMERSH (the shoe with the dart).
Good one. Easy mode could be a regular term concerning certain Bond films.
Absolutely agree with this. I love the tension in MR the novel. In the film, there's no tension for me. Just take out your handy gadget and away we go (into outer spaceeee)... I just don't like gadgets. Real spy-wear is different than the excess the films started to bring in (and I think have no place in the DC era, at all).
Nevertheless, I've come to really enjoy the moment in spite of all that, because there is something very satisfying about seeing Bond turn the tables on the bad guys, and go from being trapped and near-helpless to shooting the crap out of them like a boss. Bond and Madeleine walking at a cool pace toward the gate of the complex, holding hands and with Bond blowing the goons away with ruthless efficiency. It's ridiculous, but fun! That contrast works very well for me, even if they pushed things too far in terms of believability. (They could've toned down the torture to make the escape a bit more believable, and saved the drill for another film, or made the escape more difficult, and saved the kickass Bond escape for another time).
And that's one of Thomas Newman's best cues for the Bond films in my opinion.
However, I'm not entirely against them. Just as with 'formula', gadgets can be very effective and impressive. Whether we like it or not, they are an intrinsic part of movie Bond expectations, and a decade of Craig's more grounded portrayal hasn't changed that. As with formula, it's all a matter of how it's done and how it's used. If used creatively and in a manner organic to the plot, or in an unfamiliar way which elevates tension, then I'm all for it. I expect James Bond to have something cutting edge. When I go back to the old films, it makes sense that he (and the CIA for that matter) would have some advanced tool which could come in handy in tight spots. It doesn't have to be overly complex, but if it's smartly conceptualized, it can resonate.
I'm with you on the DAD ejector flip as an example of an interesting use of a familiar gadget. That was neat and a highlight of that chase. The rocket projectiles were too much however and a case of overkill (trying to 'one-up' GF).
I've always liked the Rolex Submariner in LALD. We see the fancy magnet first in the post titles sequence. Yes, there's humour in it's use there, but I think it works - in a way it establishes Moore Bond's style. Then we see it being used again during an especially tense moment at Kananga's farm, and here it fails to work as intended, because of the boat being moored. Bond has to escape using his brains and that, to me, is a great subversion of expectations. Finally we see it later with the saw and this time it works again (we want it to work because of the tense sequence just prior where Bond is sliced). Ever since I saw that film (and TMWTGG, OHMSS and LTK for that matter) I've lusted after that watch. Finally, I got one a few years back, sans saw or magnet.
So ultimately for me it's not the gadget (or formula) that's the problem per se, but rather, the film maker's inability to properly use or apply such concepts and devices without it becoming a joke.