Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
In this Discussion
Fleming's MR
I recently finished reading Moonraker for the first time and a few things really stuck out for me about the novel. The first thing I should say is that the story hasn’t really stood the test of time and is better appreciated as a piece-of-writing of its own time. The book preys on much of the doubts and concerns of 1950’s England with the re-emergence of Nazism, the threat from the Russians and the need for nuclear protection. In this regard the novel is interesting; however I found it rarely very engaging or particularly thrilling. I also found the novel to be rather slowly paced; you have to wait till Part III for the story and the thrills to really kick-in.
Where the book is most interesting is the moments where the story reflects on Bond himself and especially those opening chapters where we get an insight into how this man thinks and lives his life. Fleming’s Bond is such a curious soul; the man who treats each mission as if it’s his last, spends all his money while he has it and enjoys the finest things in life as he doesn’t really know how long he will be around for. Also something I found interesting was the talk of how the dirty business Bond is involved in has somehow corroded his soul, therefore because of his profession he has chosen be can’t be like other men. Bond seems to view himself almost as poisonous and when Gala leaves at the end he regrettably knows it’s the right thing for her. He’s a bad man to be around, death lingers around him.
It seems in the story he is almost jaded with the profession he has chosen and death wouldn’t be an unwelcome prospect. Furthermore, we see Bond use recreational drugs in the novel in an attempt to give himself a bit of a high when confronting Drax. This is a rather strange aspect of the character I found very interesting as translating the man presented in this near 60-year-old novel today and we get a really rather fucked-up individual.
There are a number of other notable achievements the book scores on including the Drax character; it’s just a shame that his plot is pretty cardboard and his demise is slightly contrived.
Where the book is most interesting is the moments where the story reflects on Bond himself and especially those opening chapters where we get an insight into how this man thinks and lives his life. Fleming’s Bond is such a curious soul; the man who treats each mission as if it’s his last, spends all his money while he has it and enjoys the finest things in life as he doesn’t really know how long he will be around for. Also something I found interesting was the talk of how the dirty business Bond is involved in has somehow corroded his soul, therefore because of his profession he has chosen be can’t be like other men. Bond seems to view himself almost as poisonous and when Gala leaves at the end he regrettably knows it’s the right thing for her. He’s a bad man to be around, death lingers around him.
It seems in the story he is almost jaded with the profession he has chosen and death wouldn’t be an unwelcome prospect. Furthermore, we see Bond use recreational drugs in the novel in an attempt to give himself a bit of a high when confronting Drax. This is a rather strange aspect of the character I found very interesting as translating the man presented in this near 60-year-old novel today and we get a really rather fucked-up individual.
There are a number of other notable achievements the book scores on including the Drax character; it’s just a shame that his plot is pretty cardboard and his demise is slightly contrived.
^ 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
I am very much looking forward to reading moonraker now, thank you for your brief little synopsis @Pierce2Daniel
Oh my mistake.
The term accidty is used in MR though, mostly in reference to Bond's guts after the night in Blades. which makes more sense.
Though the point still stands, Bond seems jaded by his profession, it seems as though this whole spying lark has cracked him and made him indifferent to the world, he dosen't really care whether he lives or dies.
The passage where he realises that he must let Gala and her boyfriend live their lives seems to sum up the man well: 'He must get out of these two young lives and take his cold heart elsewhere...He must play the role she expected of him. The tough man of the world. the Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette.'
It seems that Bond has resigned himself to an almost half-life. He can't escape and go into Gala's world as his role in the world has permanently been decided as that of him to the 'Secret Agent'. A man waiting for death.
Accidty isn't a word. Accidie or acedia, is what Fleming describes. A psychological condition that leaves you feeling pretty morose. Usually prevalent in those who spend a great deal of time alone.
As you say, it's a really fascinating aspect of the character. It's very difficult to commit to screen, amongst the now expected car chases, explosions etc. SF scratched at it, but I still think there is room in the future, to explore these kind of themes further.
Acidity: http://www.webhealthcentre.com/DiseaseConditions/acidity.aspx
It's incidental and not important to the discussion.
I agree with you it is a very difficult thing to commit to the screen. Dalton's Bond in LTK seems to mirror Fleming's character the most. Also in CR it seems we meet a much younger more idealistic 007 setting out on his path to become this gloomy morose man described in the novels as he gradually gets sucked into the dirty world of espionage. The killing affects Daniel's Bond more than he cares to admit and his only lifeline for a way of somewhat salvaging his soul is denied to him in the end setting him up to become the cold and isolated 007 we know.
Ah, I thought you said 'accidty'. I'm aware of acidity.
Yes, the arc of the stories from CR - SF has been interesting, with SF showing him hitting rock bottom. It's strange because I almost feel like the arc needs an entry between QoS and SF that shows him becoming almost invincible, giving the intro of SF and his resurrection more impact. As I've mentioned a few times before, I see the SF PTS Bond as the man we've come to know over 50 years, there's a big gap between the end of QoS and the beginning of SF, character wise. I'll be intrigued to see where they go next, I'm not sure I can take another emotional wreck, but if they want to maintain the arc they need to remember Mallory's assertion that it is 'a young man's game'.
He seems reinvigorated in the closing scene of SF so I'm not sure we'll see the 'Moonraker literary Bond' in the next, but who knows.
Oh and I agree on the Dalton comment.
Much as I disagree with your opening paragraph and analysis of the book you at least seem on the money with understanding the character, particularly in the final scene.
This scene perfectly captures the character more than any other for me in that here is an intelligent, attractive man who could have it all but due to his sense of duty has chosen a different path. It makes him a hero because he is forced to follow such a path to protect England but it also makes for a life you shouldnt aspire to. This is a mistake a lot of the films make in that sitting in the audience you feel you want to be Bond. They show all the girls, fine living and coolness of being Bond without the accidie Fleming talks about where the life chips away at your soul.
The only films to cover this aspect of the character really are TLD (where Dalton slags off M in the Audi), CR (in the scenes with Vesper after the poker match and in particular when he is staring into the mirror after the stairwell fight wondering what hes doing with his life - brilliant moment), QOS (final scene with M) and SF (where he his all washed up at the start and then at the end when he is looking out over London).
I like to think we will get more of this with DC but we have had three downbeat endings in a row now so he really deserves the girl in the next one.
When you look at these scenes it does highlight what lightweight fluff films like DAF, MR and DAD really are. And if I might go a bit Germanlady for a minute I think DC is close to being the best Bond (as Fleming wrote) ever. We certainly never get an inkling of this corrosion of the soul with any of Sean, Roger or Brozzas films.
I hope the producers keep to this angle and don't veer to strongly from this path.
Both Mendes and Dalton have referenced Fleming's view on 'accidie' for those interested in their take:
Dalton also makes reference I think to the passage from CR where Le Chiffre tells Bond that really they are one-of-the-same showing that Bond is often as bad as the villain, after all he is a murderer.
the excellent plot (substitute alqueda for Nazi and it's oven ready for today's audience) you have certainly understood the essence of Fleming's character and his tortured soul.
As a Bond aficionado who was born in the year that CR was published and who came to Bond more through the novels than the films it has often puzzled me as to why some members of this forum have not taken the trouble to read the novels in chronological order or indeed, in some instances, in any order because it's only after doing this one fully understand the evolution of Bond and Fleming's writing.
In my opinion this is essential because then you understand why claims that the literary Bond is an unbelievable fantasy are completely unfounded. Fleming went to great pains to ground his hero with all the angst of the professional assassin - albeit one that was doing it for Queen and country - and it was this juxtoposed with sex, violence and snobbery that made the cocktail so special and which gave the novels their terrific tension by making us truely care about 007 and the outcome of his glorious adventures.
Sadly, with the exception of the first three Connery outings, the two Dalton movies, the single Lazenby feature and, thank God Craig's interpretation, this has been something completely missing in the films.
I was wondering where this references to Fleming's acidie in SF were or generally any allusions that were made that could be related to Bond's difficulties from the novels? I'm having a hard time remembering.
I remember one reviewer say that Brosnan's Bond had a "core of sadness" at the heart of the character...I believe that this was in reference to TWINE. Based on the line that 006 says to 007 in GE - about all the men he's killed and women he's failed to save - I think that there was an effort to include this as part of the character for Brosnan's run. Unfortunately it wasn't used very well; Bond tracing his finger down the screen when watching Elektra's kidnap video was an instance of "overplaying" that aspect.
Pierce Brosnan is a very capable actor and a very nice guy. I've had the privilege of meeting him and I can't speak highly enough of him. That said,when it comes to Bond, the scripts he was given and eon's complete failure to reboot the character during his tenure left him in no man's land.
Yes there was an undercurrent of sadness but that was probably when he looked at the script and plot outline!
I'm sorry, but I strongly disagree with the assertion that Brosnan was a strong actor, at least when it came to Bond (though I have no doubt that he's a nice guy). People have said that if he was given better scripts then he'd have shown us what a great Bond he could have been but to me that's absolutely ridiculous. Alec's betrayal in GE, Paris' death in TND, falling for Elektra in TWINE, being tortured then cut loose by MI6 in DAD - no Bond actor was given as much emotional and character "meat" to work with as Brosnan was up until that time. Not only was Brosnan given the chance to show what he could do, he was given chances over and over again - in every one of his films.
Believe me, I do like him, but despite that I'd never say he was a strong actor as Bond. He wasn't terrible, but he was breath-takingly adequate.
I think in his Bond films he had some good "emotional" moments like the meeting between him and 006. I like his defiant yet visibly shocked expressions. I felt he did that well and I like the way he delivers some of his lines in that scene. Personally I don't think Bean upstages him in the film.
"It was the job we were chosen for"
"Hence...Janus...two faced Roman god come to life"
"Am I suppose to feel sorry for you?"
I also like the way he delivers the line M's office:
"Governments change...the lies stay the same"
The line is quite contemporary and "90s" but his delivery sounds cynical and has a gegree of "acidity" which echo's the original character. Combined with his posture and the way he's sitting its a moment when I can say "that's Bond".
BTW I've seen that Dalton interview before...very interesting and insightful.
However...
"Jill St. John was wonderful in...her part?"
Really?
I liked her in DAF but I wouldn't call her "wonderful" or imply that she was three dimensional. Towards the end she gets annoying.
but lets move away from this becoming a Brosnan thread, there are enough of them already.
One thing that has been stated here is that in SF there are shades of Fleming's accide I was just curious how people interpreted that.
Brosnan is a charisma actor, rather than a character actor. There's no harm in that, or shame. Harrison Ford is much the same, as is Connory. When he was allowed to show Bond's fragile and sad side, he did well. The scene when he finds Paris dead in TND especially, though it was then ruined by Vincent Schiavelli's horrible overacting as Kaufman and then following it up with the silly car park scene. That moment should have been allowed to linger.
Her portrayal of Tiffany is one of the worst butcherings of a character from the literary Bond committed so far! I felt truly sorry for the literary Ms. Case, and was glad she survived and ended up Bond, if only for a short time. The one on screen? I was hoping she'd get shot as soon as possible! From the first 6 books (as far as I've got), she is also by far the most rounded and well written of Fleming's female characters (Vesper, I have to say, was rather dire).
As for the actual topic, Dalton's Bond absolutely lives in the Fleming accidie, letter-perfect, except for when John Glen fails him by not shooting another take or giving a mild performance correction (hence a certain staginess at times, which the director is supposed to see and fix on the spot.)
Dalton and Connery pretty much constitute everything I'd want to see on screen in Bond, even though Connery's is pretty much its own thing while Dalton's is inextricably linked to prose Bond.
=D> Hear hear!! Well said!
Great post from trevanian with a spot on assessment of Brosnan.
Tailor of Panama, The Matador, The Nephew and Seraphin Falls are concrete examples that Pierce has the acting chops to make a success of any role. The fact of the matter is that he was very badly served by eon - crap directors, crap scripts and ridiculous invisible cars. Who wouldn't finish up looking stupid?
Theres talk here about how accidie is akin to sloth, laziness and boredom. How is this tied to Fleming' Bond?
Edit:
http://www.readthespirit.com/explore/2012/8/26/james-bond-shake-up-your-churchs-bible-studies.html
Is the quote used by Fleming here actually attributed to him? i can't find a reference.
More: http://www.visualparables.net/quantumofsolace.html
Could it be that this thread has become slightly confused and Moonraker does not deal with the subject of accidie as heavily as other Fleming books. Accide is clearly related to boredom, a sort of suicide-of-the-soul, while the Bond in MR doesn't really show signs of this. He is more a man who is coming to terms with the job he has chosen and the role he must play in life whilst the business he has chosen corrodes his soul.
I think I've gotten myself a little confused and hooked up on the meaning of 'accidie'. :S A little help from some of the Fleming aficionado would be greatly appreciated.
Exactly! Hear, hear!
Dan pulls out Barbara's chair for her, nice gesture.