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
Fair enough ...
The thing they're getting wrong is they think tosh like the DB5, shaken not stirred etc are the character.
They really need to look back at the Rog era where they made a conscious effort not to copy Sean.
Have faith in the character and just put him in Bondian locations doing Bondian things and the iconic moments will follow.
But when you keep layering on the cliches like a 50 year old whore in an Amsterdam window layers on makeup you get the same result as she does; the sense of desperation and being over the hill that the punters can see through when they look carefully no matter how superficially attractive the goods on offer are at first glance.
Is it a coincidence that the best film of the past 30 years by some distance is the one where they cast aside the cliches and put Fleming's character front and centre?
Exactly! I like your PTS idea, BTW. Good stuff.
For me, I love the Aston Martin as much as the next Bond fan, but am completely sick of it being featured as the Bond car in EVERY film. I'd be more interested if,say, Gardner's Saab made an appearance instead, or far better yet, the Bentley.
Perhaps that's why Roger's films consistently feel so fresh to me? He had his Lotus, never uttered the words "shaken not stirred", and made his readings of "Bond James Bond" reasonably fresh and natural each time.
Good though DC is, whenever he tries to do classic Bond it doesn't come across genuine to me. He's a cynical chap in real life, and that's how he plays Bond best. Shoehorning him into 'old school' doesn't work for me. Sorry.
Pretty much sums it up. They proved it definitively with Rog.
Yes, I've often felt the reason they've stuck with broken Bond is partly to do with Craig's limitations. Craig is good at doing wounded, fragile, vulnerable Bond, but when it comes to having all cylinders firing, he's probably bottom of the pack. They kind of hide it well by limiting what he has to say to one line before the movie ends, and then cutting quickly. "The name's Bond, James Bond." Cut "I never left" Cut "With pleasure, sir. With pleasure" Cut. Craig does well with those lines to close out their respective films, but once he has to sustain that coolness for an entire scene, he comes off about as confident and self-assured as Bambi on the ice.
Yes. Brozza and Craig are opposites, just like Moore and Connery were, and Lazenby and Dalton too. More should be written about this than is, but it's funny how they seem to look for actors that completely contrast another. Brosnan could play the coolness and swagger of Bond incredibly well, but when it came to taking on more dramatic notes, he struggled - and that's the opposite problem we're facing now.
The problem is not with Aston as the brand perfectly complements the character - classy, stylish, understated but got the grunt when it matters.
The problem is the flogging to death of the 'Bond car'.
Between 62 and 89 we had:
GF - Bond car and chase with gadgets
TB - Bond car and chase with gadgets
OHMSS - Bond car but no chase or gadgets
TSWLM - Bond car and chase with gadgets
FYEO - Bond car but no chase and only gadget the car exploding
TLD - Bond car and chase with gadgets
Post 95:
GE - Bond car but no chase or gadgets
TND - Bond car and chase with gadgets and 2nd Bond car no chase or gadgets
TWINE - Bond car and chase with gadgets and 2nd Bond car with no chase and no gadgets
DAD - Bond car and chase with gadgets
CR - Bond car and chase but no gadgets and 2nd Bond car no chase or gadgets
QOS - Bond car and chase but no gadgets
SF - Bond car with gadgets but not strictly a chase
SP - Bond car and chase with gadgets and 2nd Bond car no chase or gadgets
So in 27 years and 16 films we only had the trope of the 'Bond car' 6 times and a full on gadget chase 4 times.
In the subsequent 20 years and 8 films we have had 5 gadget chases and 2 non gadget chases. Plus a 'Bond car' appearing in every single film. AND 4 films with 2 separate Bond cars FFS! This particular horse died long ago; they're flogging the f**king skeleton these days.
Just please don't go near another gadget car for another 10 years, let's never see the goddam DB5 ever again and any car chases we have should be with randomly commandeered vehicles such as in FYEO and AVTAK.
Agreed. They both had an ability to deliver the one liners with ease, class and style. Connery was just a little harder edged & rougher, while Moore was a little more refined, that's all. As I've said before, I think it was a generational thing. Both definitive imho. Chaps like Arnie and Bruce took their cues from these two when they broke out (ironically at a time when Dalton was struggling and appeared almost embarrassed to do the same).
Too fey? Pfft. Nonsense I say.
The Bond car routine has most certainly been done to death. If he is to have a gadget laden vehicle, I do miss the variety of Little Nellie, the Amazon boat in MR, or even the motorcycle in NSNA. Still, coming up something along those lines, I'd wait a few films.
Each to his own. I think Craig pulls off the sardonic wit better than anyone bar Connery and Moore. He brings his own, slightly aggressive humour, I love it. Also understand why others don't.
I agree that Craig pulls off the wit very well, and there is indeed a touch of subtle aggressiveness in his sense of humor. Whereas someone like Connery or Moore delivered the cheeky lines in a comparatively lighthearted way, Craig delivers them with a feeling of ever-so-slight annoyance at that on which he is commenting, and a sense of subtle cynicism. That's how he makes those lines work naturally for himself, and I don't think Bond's sense of humor fails to come across as genuine because of that style. In fact, I think Craig's performance in Spectre is a natural progression for the Bond character as seen in Craig's previous films... now that he has gone through so much emotional turmoil, he can laugh a bit more at the good and bad things in his profession and his life, while still acknowledging his work and the world he inhabits are highly dangerous-- something that has been, of course, highly emphasized in Craig's era, with all the physical and emotional pain his Bond has gone through.
"That all sounds lovely."
"No, I think I'll call you C, C."
"Well, then I suggest you trust me, for the sake of the cats."
"Do me a favor, will you? Throw that down the toilet. Cut out the middleman."
It didn't help that he appeared to be sneering in some instances. Like he needed to relieve himself. There's also this dismissive smirk that crops up from time to time that I found a bit annoying (it's there when he delivers the "came here to kill you" line).
Let me put it this way: I have no interest in being like Craig's Bond in SP. I did see a lot I subconsciously wanted to emulate particularly in CR & QoS. Something slightly aspirational even (I realize how crazy that sounds given Bond's behaviour in general).