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
And it's the same case of when you have such actors who had played great characters in the past and won an Oscar (Christoph Waltz and Rami Malek), but still couldn't able to elevate the material that they had to worked with (cough, cough, SPECTRE and No Time To Die).
This is the case, with the possible exception of the henchman (Kidd and Wint; although as one have said, they're more nastier in the book), the film didn't add some new flavor or color into the characters.
Why I liked Moonraker the film despite of being so outlandish compared to the book, because at least the characters in the film made it up for me, although I prefer the plot of book, but the film have something to match up with the characters (that I can safely say, are more preferable than the ones in the books), like Hugo Drax and Holly Goodhead (well, might be a personal opinion, as I prefer them over Gala Brand and the literary Hugo Drax).
With Diamonds Are Forever, there's nothing really, Tiffany Case, one of the best Fleming Bond Girls had turned into a bratish, immature, airhead (in the third act), who just there to look sexy, compared in the book where she had a lot more agency and even built a serious, deep romance with Bond (I actually liked their romance more compared to the one with Tracy five books later, which I heavily prefer in the film).
I would've accept Blofeld more if he was characterized as more of Savalas' version from the previous film, but no, it didn't, and they've had the worst offender in dressing him with a drag!
The plot wasn't that any better with diamonds and space rockets, Die Another Day could've done this better if not for the overuse of CGIs and over the top script.
I think, this film could've been improved upon the book had they made it a revenge sequel really, maybe there's a chance that it would've improved upon the book, and maybe also upon the book's plot of You Only Live Twice (to which the revenge plot wasn't handled that well either).
I'd loved to see him smoke again, why? I mean Bond is a fictional character, not everything needs to be related to real life, that's how Fleming created the character, it's like again, his sexism, his ways of womanizing, that were the traits associated to him, it's not about the endorsement, it's about him as a character, just because the times changing, he needs to change everything he has as a character?
Sure, books and films are two different things, but if that's almost the case, then might as well, align Bond with diversity culture of today (make him an Asian, Arabic, or etc.) Because that's what the standards of today are calling for.
I know smoking is not cool, but again, after the events of the Craig Era, is Bond really meant that to be cool nowadays? Are his ways cool? Booze, womanizing, sex, danger, are they still considered cool nowadays? Not.
Bond is not meant to be cool anyway, he's a blunt instrument of the Government, and the Craig Era opened up the people's minds regarding the real nature of Bond.
I mean, the Craig Era made Bond such an unlikeable character, he's now the Bond that the people wishing not to be, so, since that's happened, I don't see any reason for him not to smoke, the Craig Era changed the people view Bond, the way the public looked at Bond, he's no longer cool like the good ol' days, he's now an unlikeable tragic character working for the Government, no longer cool, so to have him smoke is fine.
Bond was cool before, but the Craig Era lessened it.
And there's no wrong with that, in fact he's really like that in the books.
I think there's still a lot of him that is aspirational, the same that it ever was- the looks, the wardrobe, the watches, the cars, the hotels, the women, the way he acts and knows what to do in sophisticated social situations etc.
When people say "ooh you're just like James Bond" they're not referring to the bits of the films where he gets tortured in basements or sweatily machine guns villainous goons: they mean you're looking sharp in a dinner suit, because that's the iconic, and vaguely everyday part of Bond, and it is aspirational.
The bits where he looks and is being cool and sophisticated are the aspirational bits, the parts where he murders people are less so (although are part of the alpha male, completely in control and unbeatable fantasy of course).
Nah; he's still cool, he just faces a bit more adversity and drama every so often. I think many people would say Craig is much cooler than Brosnan, for example, who has a slight cheesy, 'Man at C&A' vibe about him, whereas Craig felt more genuinely stylish.
Roger Moore made Bond cool in the 70's and 80's (maybe not AVTAK ;) )
Timothy Dalton went all out in putting the Pushkin scene on the map...and cool!
Pierce was cool throughout his tenure, whether flicking his head as bullets wiz past in GE or selling an invisible car in DAD.
And then we get Daniel Craig. Yeah he made Bond very cool in CR and QOS and SF and SP and again in NTTD. But to say Bond was only cool with Connery and Craig is too much of a long stretch.
I think the Craig era made him cool in a contemporary way, more than any actor perhaps since Connery. James Bond is always 'cool', but Moore and Brosnan especially were more caricature cool. Whereas Connery and Craig were more edgy, which made them officially cooler in the eyes of the general public.
Agreed.
Brosnan’s Bond had the credibility and depth to him. It was just buried in between all the goofy moments that happen in those films.
Yes, Bond had always been sort of fun cool with Roger and Pierce and all that; he did things that were cool like the Union Jack parachute or tank through the wall or whatever, but he himself was a kind of caricature of cool. But Craig actually felt different and legitimately cool: there was a reason he was often compared to Steve McQueen. Being in a legitimately good film in CR certainly helped that I think- Bond was a serious proposition again and here's a Bond who actually deserves to be on the cover of fashion mags etc.
It’s all tastes and opinions, but I don’t think Bond was exactly lacking in that type of coolness you describe before Craig came into the scene. I for one believe that every Bond actor at one point has had the swagger needed for the character, and each actor nailed down at least one crucial element needed to portray the character. For me, Connery and Brosnan are the ones who best merge all the crucial elements together.
I don’t really mind if Bond films aren’t realistic. The most “realistic” Bond film for my money is FRWL, and that still has its fantastical bits at times. Heck Fleming’s Bond even fought a giant octopus at one point. It’s a fantasy first and foremost.
Playing Bond, Lazenby, Sir Roger, Pierce. As in there's not much depth or character, he's not evolving or changing he's just the same throughout. As is the producers were afraid to stray too far from the formula, and wanted Bond to be seen as cool no matter what. They push Bond to the edge for a bit and then throw him straight back in the tux like nothing happened, DAD being prime example.
Lazenby is in this category because he's not much an actor, the others are here because of the way the stories were written.
Being Bond, Connery, Dalton, Craig. They're given more meat to chew in their films and it shows Bond as a deeper, darker character who has a past and emotional scars. They're given moments to see how the situation would affect Bond. They do things that aren't always perfect and you don't always want to be in their shoes, because you see the difficulty that comes with the job.
This isn't a dig at any of the actors, it's more how their Bond's and their films were written.
I think it's a zeitgeisty sort of thing though: when I say cool I mean sort of culturally. Can I imagine a student at university having a b/w photo of Connery or Craig on their wall non-ironically? I can, but I find it harder to imagine them having a photo of Pierce pouting and squinting without it being a bit tongue-in-cheek. I'm not really talking swagger as such (and I think that's one thing that Dalton never managed, but that's another issue), I mean cool.
Yes, FRWL may be one of the more grounded, but Le Carre it ain't: it's absolute frivolous nonsense! :) It even has some baddies opening a door to find a load of ninjas training with flame throwers and things; something which went straight into Austin Powers without really needing to be be exaggerated! :)
I love that Training Camp scene, it did a real great job of setting up the threat/menace of SPECTRE in just a few short moments. It’s completely ridiculous, but it’s fun as well. There’s also the scene where all four SPECTRE boats manage to stop right around the same exact spot where Bond emptied the barrels from the speed boat, allowing him to conveniently take all four boats down at once using just one flare. Certainly a contrived, but awesome moment!
Craig is cool in the way he had expensive materials (just like Brosnan's Bond), he could wear tuxedos, go to expensive casinos and hotels, drive expensive Aston Martin sports cars and all what he can do (he could pilot a plane like in QoS, a helicopter in SPECTRE, his fighting skills, he had all the skills), but his life was not cool, sure it's made to add realism to the character, but it lessened the coolness regarding his life: "I don't want to have a life similar to him, I don't want to suffer the life that he had been through", think of the betrayals happened to him, his testicles being beaten, and getting bombed, for example.
Dalton, his gadgets were cool, his lifestyle was cool, in The Living Daylights, he's cool all around, but I wouldn't call him in Licence To Kill cool at all, it's not cool, it's not something that Bond fans would've likely to dreamed of, but the world he inhibited in The Living Daylights? Why not, but not in LTK.
Lazenby oddly was cool but also not so cool, like sure he's living a cool life of being in Casinos, being with a bunch of women in a Swiss Mountaintop Hut, his outfits, his machismo, skiing, they're all cool, but it's not cool to have a wife killed on a wedding day, like all of those adventures leading to a tragic end? Nah, definitely not what a Bond fan would've likely to dream about, even the bobsled scene (it's oddly cool but I don't want to experience it, because I know it's painful).
Connery, Brosnan and Moore, they're cool, their world, their surroundings, all of what's in their era were all a wish fulfilment for the Bond fans that they wished they were, now, for me, that's cool.
Who would liked to be driving a Lotus Esprit Submarine? Or having a mission in space? Or fighting a top of a Golden Gate Bridge, imagine fighting your villains in exotic locations with beautiful views? Being surrounded by beautiful women like in Thunderball, entering a volcano lair, skiing, driving an invisible car, having a car chase in ice, having a shootout while driving a speedboat, doing a car slide, doing Karate scenes, engaged in great motorcycle stunts, and etc. That's cool, it's the life that every Bond fan wants to have.
But that's not certainly Craig, or Dalton in Licence To Kill, or at least what Lazenby suffered in the third act (including that bobsled and that ending).
And those were not bad things, because they're in the books, Bond in the books suffered a lot more worse than the Bond of the films, though.
That used to be the case.
I'm totally in agreement that two men walked into the role that were born with a coolness that the other actors couldn't match, because it just wasn’t innate.
And I think @mtm is correct pointing out that there was a reason that Craig was compared to the King of Cool himself (and it was more than just a fleeting similarity in appearance).
Craig and Dalton, yes. Did Sean really get any meat to chew, though?
But, yes, Connery absolutely did make it look effortless. No one - literally, no one - could have matched him in those films. IMO, obvs.
Agreed!