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
A lot of Fleming gets dragged into seemingly EON moments and gets called Flemingesque, it is nothing more than a justification and only in the eye of the beholder. Craigs 007 is further away from Fleming as the 4 early SC movies were. DC's 007 is more the product of these times and cannot possible be Flemingeque, he is based upon EON's 007 and made to fit these times and what seems to be currently hot. As EON has always done.
True, DC's Bond has been adapted to modern times, yet somehow this modern era is suiting Fleming's era rather fittingly. The fact that the Bond films have been stripped back from OTT extravaganza's to more a serious tone has done wonders in reigning it back into Fleming's world.
Bond eat crunchy toast and drink coffee "strong and black"... this is a main meal of Gardener's 007. Perhaps when I revisit SKYFALL i notice more Gardener traits?
I would strongly disagree with the bolded sentence, and I'll tell you why.
Often people here will talk about how certain films - DN, FRWL, OHMSS - are "Flemingesque". But what is Flemingesque? Having recently re-read all of Fleming's stories as an adult I realize that what is "Flemingesque" about these films are the *plots* - and even then, they are changed from the books quite a bit. But in terms of atmosphere and character, the mood that Fleming created is largely absent.
One of the great things about SF is that we see touches of Fleming more clearly than in most of the other films, especially in Bond's character. The bitter, bored Bond in Turkey could have been lifted straight from Fleming. The unquestioning loyalty that even he can't understand - same thing. The touches of impatience and frustration - "Oh course he is" and "Of course there are" (as much a catchphrase for Craig as "But of course" was for Connery) are as well. The romantic, philosophical, bored Bond of Fleming who is full of self-doubt and plays the spy game out of loyalty even though he knows it's just a game - well, no actor has fully captured that Bond on screen. However, Craig certainly comes closer than any other. Even Dalton, who captured certain facets of Fleming's Bond, didn't get as close as Craig has.
Add to that some of the other aspects of the film that people have noted above and I can very much see how SF is a great modern day "Flemingesque" Bond story.
Fleming never wrote such a bad story to begin with, even if GF's ending has improved with the movie.
For me DC is the taste of the day just like Roger Moore represented his day, and Timothy Dalton did kind of fail to do so even if his last movie was a big bow towards the then taste of the day Miami Vice.
I think in hindsight a few movies along the series people will look back and see that while SF intentions may be good its final product lacks logic. But then again both The Avengers & TDKR both having similar plot ideas did do so as well, so perhaps it is the curse of these times that the stories about baddies letting themselves be caught and then rain havok on the good guys is fun. But is is in no way Flemingesque.
With the current writers I do not expect anything Fleming because they find themselves better writers apperently, MAGIC 44 really??
The Dark Knight, actually.
Completely agree, when I first saw this scene it felt like it was straight off the page of a Fleming novel.
He'd have certainly made the mechanics of Silva's plot less linear. I always felt Fleming had a great knack of making the ridiculous sound plausible. SF fails to do this IMO.
I agree. That speech had a very Fleming vibe about it.
Upon listening to the audio-book of YOLT recently the section featuring Ride of the Valkyries in the castle reminded me of when Silvia makes his entrance at Skyfall with the slightly cheesey, trigger-happy music in the helicopter.
Really? So Bond showed no emotion when M was killed? Did we watch the same film?
Come on JSW even Lazenby, the model turned actor, showed a more convincing show of emotion with the killings (Severine was an odd one) and M, whose death he was to blame, DC failed to convince me. And he is the superiour actor for G sake.
IMHO had it not been for the bloated aspects of the opening chase and the final scene (when will we ever learn that less is sometimes more) the whole thing would have been 100% Ian.
Great stuff - let's hope they stick with the direction!
Also, the moment with M is a very different moment to a newly-wed Bond cradling the corpse of his dead wife, murdered by the villain who escapes into the distance.
Bond has just spent hours in battle at Skyfall, knowing M was in danger, then throws a knife into the back of Silva before seeing an aging M's demise. There was little shock factor there compared to the tragic OHMSS scene.
There is a difference between seeing and observing, as Sherlock Holmes so many times enjoys pointing out ;) Your analysis is, in my opinion, perfect @jetsetwilly.
No, when M died that was weeping and failing Bond. I was OBVIOUSLY refering to the Dead of the two Guards and the Killing of the Wannabe Art Collector. Not to forget the Former Sex Slave, that was naive enough to Take Bonds Word for Face Value. Willi,Willi,Willi ...
SF strikes me as being very Purvis and Wade-esque.
I would go for EONesque at best.
Bond is acting for the sake of his Mission there,so i can't see what this scene has got to do with it. NONE of those he is watching passionless getting killed would get his Mission in SF failed!
I thought that was one of the best bits of acting we've had in the series. Bond felt like a man who had lost his mother/grandmother and the way he delicately covers her eyes after she goes is beautiful...that got me I'm not ashamed to admit.
Its the first time since OHMSS we REALLY felt sorry for Bond.
Yes and it showed that Bond worked for the Ministry of Defence which means he could not have worked for MI6.
Really? I will have to watch it again at some point.
By that point I was so sick of Dench's M that I was just waiting for her to die. I don't personally feel it stands up to the Tracy scene, but each to their own.
I have no shame in saying I'm going to miss her. In fact I booked tickets to see her on stage next month partly because I liked her so much in Bond.
Wonderfully acted final scene!
Anyway, agreed with the original post except for the helicopters. I think that was an Apocalypse Now reference, not an attempt at being Flemingesque.
I knew we were in trouble when during the prerelease interviews Craig and Dench were talking about how M gets more out and about this time. Really... more than QoS? More than TWINE? Oh well.