keep the films serious and realistic.

123457

Comments

  • So maybe the editor for QOS scenes in the beginning like the tunnel chase scene and boat scene was different from the one who edited the dramatic scenes of QOS?
  • Do you think Bond 24 will be serious and dark?
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    Do you think Bond 24 will be serious and dark?

    No way to know, but I doubt they will go "the Moore way" with Craig. My bet is the films will remain serious, but with some humour.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Having just read my first novel - MR - I am slightly baffled why so many fans of the books claim that the 'serious' Bonds are the closest to Fleming. Admitedly it's only one book, but I'd say that the from that one reading EON really captured the essence of the literary Bond with the early Connery films.What struck me about MR was the mix of just about plausuble reality with the fantastical. Also having read it I can see why EON felt it wouldn't make a very good film. The best part is the opening third IMO.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Getafix wrote:
    Having just read my first novel - MR - I am slightly baffled why so many fans of the books claim that the 'serious' Bonds are the closest to Fleming. Admitedly it's only one book, but I'd say that the from that one reading EON really captured the essence of the literary Bond with the early Connery films.What struck me about MR was the mix of just about plausuble reality with the fantastical. Also having read it I can see why EON felt it wouldn't make a very good film. The best part is the opening third IMO.

    I (and many) talk about how Sean's films had some Fleming too. Sean's films can be very dark as well.
  • Posts: 5,745
    Getafix wrote:
    Having just read my first novel - MR - I am slightly baffled why so many fans of the books claim that the 'serious' Bonds are the closest to Fleming. Admitedly it's only one book, but I'd say that the from that one reading EON really captured the essence of the literary Bond with the early Connery films.What struck me about MR was the mix of just about plausuble reality with the fantastical. Also having read it I can see why EON felt it wouldn't make a very good film. The best part is the opening third IMO.

    I (and many) talk about how Sean's films had some Fleming too. Sean's films can be very dark as well.

    I think what, and I'll say "we" but others may not agree, think of when "we" say Daltz and Craig are closest to Fleming, is that they are not so much similar in tone, but in character. I think Connery's films captured the escapist Fleming to near perfection (until you get to YOLT), but you didn't get a great look at Connery's Bond character. He had a great screen presence, you recognized his character and he was consistent, but the character was only great because of the stories he was set in.

    The novels have a vain of dark thoughts that run through them; Bond is at times a very depressed and dark character in the parts of the novels where Fleming really explores his character. That's something you don't see in Connery's films, but do with Craig and Daltz. I think Craig's and Dalt'z films capture a 'modern' escapist, inspired by Fleming, but of course updated to be relevant.

    So what most people mean when they say the modern Bond's capture the book Bond better, they mean they capture the internal conflict and attitude of the character, but not so much the stories as a whole.
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 11,425
    Edit- was refering to previous email before Jwestbrook.

    That's what I'm saying - that the Connery Bonds seem to me to be very close in spirit to the books. I wouldn't personally describe the Connery era as particularly 'dark' but that's your view. What I don't understand is why some see Craig as closer to Fleming. Obviously I need to read more but for me MR just 'felt' like the Connery era films. I guess the period feel is a large part of that though.
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 5,745
    Getafix wrote:
    That's what I'm saying - that the Connery Bonds seem to me to be very close in spirit to the books. I wouldn't personally describe the Connery era as particularly 'dark' but that's your view. What I don't understand is why some see Craig as closer to Fleming. Obviously I need to read more but for me MR just 'felt' like the Connery era films. I guess the period feel is a large part of that though.

    The only thing 'dark' about the books is Bond's character, which wasn't explored in Connery's run (and didn't need to be) but works well with Dalton and Craig.

    Moonraker does feel a lot like a Connery film, but in that novel the darkest moment Fleming describes is probably Bond's embrace of death
    hiding in the vents of the rocket shaft.

    Not really one of the more personal exploration of Bond in the novels.
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 11,425
    I posted my reply to the previous email before seeing yours. I obvously need to read more books . I see what you're saying about Dalton and Craig. For me the screen performances are about how much I enjoy watching the actor more than anyhting else. I enjoy Dalton because I think he owns the part right the get go in TLD and mixes up the tough guy routine with a gentler side - I can see that in MR too. What I was surprised by in MR was how the girl spurns him at the end and Bond is left a sad man on the park bench. Would be interesting to see that in a Bond movie.
  • Posts: 5,745
    Getafix wrote:
    I posted my reply to the previous email before seeing yours. I obvously need to read more books.

    You should, they're all quite enjoyable. I've been reading them in order, just finished Diamonds Are Forever (easily the weakest one so far). They're are obvious dark moments where Bond's character is really explored in Casino Royale and Live And Let Die (these moments have been explored in Craig's CR and Dalton's LTK).

    I think Moonraker happens to be my favorite so far, though, because it is essentially a Bond story at it's best.
  • Posts: 11,425
    I added to my previous post, but yes I enjoyed MR, particularly the opening section at MI6 and Blades. It made me a little more sympathetic to those who argue M is justified in having a larger role. Having said that, I am looking forward to a male M again. Although not sure Fiennes is old enough.
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 11,189
    Moonraker is probably my favourite Fleming novel. The last few paragraphs are fantastic.

    M also has quite a big part in the third section of the OHMSS book.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Moonraker is probably my favourite Fleming novel. The last few paragraphs are fantastic.

    Probably the wisest thing you've ever said sir. If you want to understand the character of Bond read the last chapter of MR.

    The more I think about it the more I think Connery never comes near capturing the essence of Bond. Yes he's good in the professor Dent scene and on the train but even as early as GF he's just playing Connery. There's never a hint of the conflict and sadness you get in that closing section of MR.

    TD and DC come way closer to capturing this aspect than Connery ever does. He just benefits from having an untapped well of Fleming to work with. Give Sean Brozzas scripts and Tim or Dan DN to TB would Connery really be the undisputed number one in everybody's eyes?
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 11,189
    I see what you mean @Wizard. I think a good example is in FRWL when Bond helps Kerim kill his enemy. In the novel Fleming talks about how Bond had never killed in cold blood and didnt like watching. Bond is uncomfortable. In the film he offers to pull the trigger and finishes the scene with a "she should have kept her mouth shut". Bond is at ease. It somewhat dumbs down Flemings more powerful scene - and I say that as someone who thinks FRWL is the best all round Bond film.

    That's why I've got a new respect for the PTS of CR. It's nasty (the fight reminded me of Bonds scuffle with Krebbs in MR and also the bit when he kills the guard after pouncing on him in the OHMSS book) and Craig is visibly shaken.

    The closest Dalton came to that was at the end of LTK. Craig takes it a step further though by showing Bonds more ruthless, "cold" side in the sane scene when we are barely five minutes into the film.

    Brosnan was cheesy but even he had some nice similar "emotional" moments. I like in GE for instance when he looks down from the antenna after dropping Alec as if to say "that was difficult but it's done".

  • TD and DC come way closer to capturing this aspect than Connery ever does. He just benefits from having an untapped well of Fleming to work with. Give Sean Brozzas scripts and Tim or Dan DN to TB would Connery really be the undisputed number one in everybody's eyes?

    I think for many people, yes, he would still be number one.

    When it comes to the films the general audiences want a "movie star" Bond. Connery's presence and charisma cemented his status as an icon, not the quality of scripts he was given nor the nuance of his performance. Had Connery not played the role the way he did neither he nor the character of Bond would have been as popular.

    Now, as for the people here - oh, I'm sure that some would change their minds. Connery was always for me the undisputed King, but the more I see of Craig I could see him surpassing Connery in my opinion at some point, especially if his batting average of excellent performances goes beyond Connery's. To be fair when I think of Connery as my favourite Bond I always think of his first four films; I can see how thinking of YOLT and DAF lessens the overall opinion of him for some people.

  • edited February 2013 Posts: 11,189
    I must confess the line "The things I do for England" has made me quietly cheer at the screen before - and that is seen as Seans weakest performance by many.

    Audiences like Bond saying stuff like that and I don't know if DC or TD would make it work as well.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    See this newly posted article on The Bondologist Blog on keeping the James Bond films serious and realistic, when it comes to their various action sequences and set-pieces!

    http://thebondologistblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/kingsley-amis-draxs-gambit-and-reform.html
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited February 2013 Posts: 17,804
    I made a list of non-serious stuff:
    Goldfinger: The level of nonsense in having a whole town pretend to be knocked out (the logistics in such a short time frame is laughable to me) puts me off tremendously; it's not enough to make me hate the flick, but certainly enough to limit my re-watch frequency.
    You Only Live Twice: Turning Japanese, I think he's turning Japanese, don't really think so. That and the landing large spacecrafts undetected thing made Austin Powers possible, IMO. Nearly unwatchable.
    Diamonds Are Forever: The whole tone of the movie bothers me just a bit, but the 'moonwalk dudes' attempting to catch 007 in faux slow motion is a particular offense to my eyes. I can watch it, but not too often (or sober).
    Live And Let Die: As really good as this movie is, Rosey's existence and Kananga's death both entirely kill this entry for me.
    The Man With The Golden Gun: Slide whistle... I can deal with it.
    The Spy Who Loved Me: The Jaws character rubs me entirely the wrong way, but the film still sort of works for me on a totally comic book level... usually. Reading Christopher Wood's novelization & keeping it in mind helps.
    Moonraker: Whatever lattitude I grant to the former film is gone here. The second half of the movie is just a build up to frustration detonation, and then, "Here's to us" BOOM. Absolutely unwatchable.
    For Your Eyes Only: A delicatessen in stainless steel? Bibi? Thatcher talking to a parrot?? I might be able to deal except for the 80's DISCO SCORE!! Unwatchable.
    Octopussy: Playing the Bond theme for Bond was stupid, the Tarzan yell was an idiotic addition, but the rest of the movie worked so well (in admittedly uneven waves of comic book & serious espionage swells) I can deal.
    Die Another Day: A perfectly invisible car. REALLY? A Robo-Gustav? SERIOUSLY?? Throw in crap CGI & Halle Berry's not-nearly-as-good-as-Catwoman performance, and you get... unwatchable. #-o
    TD and DC come way closer to capturing this aspect than Connery ever does. He just benefits from having an untapped well of Fleming to work with. Give Sean Brozzas scripts and Tim or Dan DN to TB would Connery really be the undisputed number one in everybody's eyes?
    That would be a mostly definite no.
  • jka12002jka12002 Banned
    Posts: 188
    In my opinion Roger Moore made the 007 franchise fun, i mean come on two of the most well known henchmen came from that era as well. Almost every Bond fan has been wanting to see Jaws return one more time in a future film.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    jka12002 wrote:
    In my opinion Roger Moore made the 007 franchise fun, i mean come on two of the most well known henchmen came from that era as well. Almost every Bond fan has been wanting to see Jaws return one more time in a future film.

    I seriously doubt it! His return in MR was already a disaster (Hello Dolly!).

    @chrisisall interesting post, I don't agree with everything but most of it mirrors my feelings towards some of the entries. To me the only almost unwatchable films are MR and DAD, the latter worst than the former in my opinion.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    Sandy wrote:
    @chrisisall interesting post, I don't agree with everything but most of it mirrors my feelings towards some of the entries. To me the only almost unwatchable films are MR and DAD, the latter worst than the former in my opinion.
    There was a time I owned every Bond movie (except MR), but after reading the novels and becoming the mega-Dalton fan I am now, I sold the DVD's I know I'll never watch again... harsh, I know, but I don't want to waste shelf space.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    chrisisall wrote:
    Sandy wrote:
    @chrisisall interesting post, I don't agree with everything but most of it mirrors my feelings towards some of the entries. To me the only almost unwatchable films are MR and DAD, the latter worst than the former in my opinion.
    There was a time I owned every Bond movie (except MR), but after reading the novels and becoming the mega-Dalton fan I am now, I sold the DVD's I know I'll never watch again... harsh, I know, but I don't want to waste shelf space.

    You've no interest in buying the Blu-Ray boxset then? It probably costs less than buying the ones you like individually. Or would owning MR be like a constant elephant in the room. A Bondian poltergeist.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    RC7 wrote:
    You've no interest in buying the Blu-Ray boxset then?
    I'm old school- my ancient DVD's do me just fine.
    For now. ;)
    MR would not be allowed to exist in my home in any form, though.
  • Posts: 15,125

    Now, as for the people here - oh, I'm sure that some would change their minds. Connery was always for me the undisputed King, but the more I see of Craig I could see him surpassing Connery in my opinion at some point, especially if his batting average of excellent performances goes beyond Connery's. To be fair when I think of Connery as my favourite Bond I always think of his first four films; I can see how thinking of YOLT and DAF lessens the overall opinion of him for some people.

    That is pretty much how I feel about Connery: he is the best partially because the first four Bond movies are for me the core Bond movies, in quality and as icons. But it is because I don't count his last two (or three counting the dreadful NSNA). Similarly, Christian Bale is the best actor to play Batman, even they were suddenly asking him to play in a Batman directed by Schumacher. Not that it will happen, but still.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    chrisisall wrote:
    MR would not be allowed to exist in my home in any form, though.

    I assume you'd be horrified that that this original poster sits atop my fireplace?

    1307b376504211e180c9123138016265_7.jpg
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    It is a good poster, whether one likes the film or not :)
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    RC7 wrote:
    chrisisall wrote:
    MR would not be allowed to exist in my home in any form, though.

    I assume you'd be horrified that that this original poster sits atop my fireplace?

    1307b376504211e180c9123138016265_7.jpg
    Sandy wrote:
    It is a good poster, whether one likes the film or not :)

    L-) What Sandy said!
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    chrisisall wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    You've no interest in buying the Blu-Ray boxset then?
    I'm old school- my ancient DVD's do me just fine.
    For now. ;)
    MR would not be allowed to exist in my home in any form, though.

    I'm a Fleming fan but you have to lead a pretty miserable existence not to be able to enjoy MR. Top notch epic entertainment. Open a bag of popcorn, crank up the speakers and sit back and enjoy a nice thick slice of Rog at the top of his game on your plasma in luscious Bluray.

    Lovely stuff.
  • RC7 wrote:
    chrisisall wrote:
    MR would not be allowed to exist in my home in any form, though.

    I assume you'd be horrified that that this original poster sits atop my fireplace?

    1307b376504211e180c9123138016265_7.jpg

    That's a great alternative poster. All mine are the classic original posters you see in Sir Rog's last book, in this case mine is the blue one with Rog in the space suit leaving Earth's orbit.

  • Posts: 11,425
    chrisisall wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    You've no interest in buying the Blu-Ray boxset then?
    I'm old school- my ancient DVD's do me just fine.
    For now. ;)
    MR would not be allowed to exist in my home in any form, though.

    I'm a Fleming fan but you have to lead a pretty miserable existence not to be able to enjoy MR. Top notch epic entertainment. Open a bag of popcorn, crank up the speakers and sit back and enjoy a nice thick slice of Rog at the top of his game on your plasma in luscious Bluray.

    Lovely stuff.

    Have to agree. I do sometimes wonder why those who cringe at Rog are Bond movie fans at all. The cheese and humour originates in the Connery era and Rog just layed it on that much thicker.

    I'm all for a bit of seriousness and realism in Bond but the irony for me is that this is something Moore did so well. He transitions from comedy to high tension seamlessly. He defines (a certain type) of Bond and without him and his movies Bond would never have survived.

    Personally I still actually enjoy Roger's performances almost more than any others. At his best he's unbeatable and even his weaker films have many enjoyable moments. It was a golden age.
Sign In or Register to comment.