General Public Perceptions of Bond

Ludovico

Tracy wrote:

Hmm , I thought Blofelds plot was to take over the world himself as a quasi-Hitler in YOLT and not the Chinese , that was the impression I get when I see the movie anyway.

I used to think that as well, when I was a teenager, then I rewatched the movie and saw he was a gun for hire. He might have wanted to become the power behind the throne though. In any case, it did contribute to this false perception.

Gerard

One I've hear quite often :"The pre-title sequence has nothing to do with the rest of the movie". Well, given that those who do are in the vast majority and those who don't are in a small minority, I'd say it's quite a misconception. (in the old forum, I had posted a rebuke of that. Maybe I should do it once more).

Perilagu_Khan

timmer wrote:

My general sense of the public perception is that the Connery and Moore Bonds are the archetypes...the accepted established Bonds. These are the two that unashamedly deliver the Bond tropes. Lazenby is a mere footnote.
Bond, post-Moore, (Dalts and Broz) is somewhat experimental, relative to the Connery and Moore eras.
Craig of course is dutifully hailed as ushering in a new era.
This is my sense of public perception, not my own opinion.......which of course is that the Connery era emphatically trumps and squashes everything that has followed. :D

I think you're giving the public too much credit. The large majority of movie-going adults, I suspect, don't even know who Laz is, and probably know little more about Dalts.

Soundofthesinners

I'll say again that they do know who Lazenby is, but he's just a punchline. He's "the guy that only did one movie, and it couldn't have been very good since he only did one".

I think Blofeld was working for the Chinese in YOLT, but clearly alluded to taking over the world as a result of the chaos from nuclear war, as he had alluded previously.

timmer

Perilagu_Khan wrote:

I think you're giving the public too much credit. The large majority of movie-going adults, I suspect, don't even know who Laz is, and probably know little more about Dalts.

Well yes, that's why I say the Connery and Moore Bonds seem to be the readily referenced Bond archetypes amongst the general populace.
Craig's distinctly different Bond-take has developed comparable profile, what with all the attention his era has received.
The Brozzer era....I think the general populace are quite aware that it exists, but it lacks identity, being overshadowed by the Connery and Moore films.
Both Laz and Dalts though, are footnotes I think with the general populace.

ie most filmgoers could name you four Bonds with little prompting. They often struggle to come up with the other two names (laz and dalts) or even understand that the total is 6.
Just my perception, but it's also based on my own experience. I don't know how many times I've answered the old, "who was that other guy that played Bond?" and they are always referring to either Laz or Dalts.

Ludovico

Back in the days when we had a weekly TV schedule with our newspaper (80s-early 90s), when there was a Bond movie showing, it was always written in the movie's description "Secret agent James Bond must so and so..." when the movie starred Connery or Moore. When it was Dalton, it was "A British secret agent must so and so". Quite revealing, I think.

007InVT

Dragonpol wrote:

Yes, I've never read the full thing - only an excerpt.

Where is this except per chance?

Dragonpol

007InVT wrote:

Dragonpol wrote:

Yes, I've never read the full thing - only an excerpt.

Where is this except per chance?

The excerpt appears in Cubby Broccoli's autobiography When the Snow Melts (1998) with Donald Zec. I have some discs I bought containing every Playboy issue of the 1960s, so I will have to look it out on there, too. I'll get back to you when I find it, @007InVT.

chrisisall

The general (non reading) public perception of Bond is of a super suave, gadget-laden secret agent that can handle ANYTHING- and that's precisely why Dan's post 9-11 Bond resonated so fiercely. Here is Bond, a known commodity, treading into the dark & murky waters of the unknown country.
The general public has not nor will they ever read a Bond novel by Fleming or anyone else, but Connery is in the collective movie-history memory. A charming albeit dated version of the hero.