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
In SF the Q and psych eval sequences did the same successfully. The MP sequences less so.
Once we get past the train sequence, the film loses its humour for me, really. Everything becomes very pedestrian.
The one scene where he is quite reminiscent of Connery is at the very end of CR when he says the line.
The one scene which does remind me a little of big Sean is actually on the balcony of the hotel, when Mathis says something about melting cold hearts. Craig's expression evoked Connery to me in 2006 for some reason (and I can't quite recollect which Connery moment I'm remembering - most likely something with Kerim in FRWL when he teases him about Tatianna). It's probably more the scene than the expression that brought back the memory.
I can t agree. I see nothing like that with Lazenby, Dalton or Brosnan. They were all more or less bad at it.
--- What, you don't like "The name's Barnnd. James Baaarnd"?
In all seriousness, I agree, these three weren't all that good with delivering the line for me either.
@royale65, outside of all the CR suits beyond the final three-piece in Italy, I've been a big fan of the fashion in the Craig era full stop. No Bond has worn casual style better and with Tom Ford the suits recall the past in a way that is satisfying to me, as the palettes play to Dan's features while also giving respect to Sinclair and his team, with some suits being remakes of those Sean would wear, which I love. They keep a bit of timeless essence regardless of the styling in many way.
Some of the suits are tailored closer to Dan without doubt, but I personally think that those who call those suits tight haven't even seen a truly tight fitting suit. They're made to fit Dan, whose certain bulkiness must be catered to to make the looks work, so he's going to look different and require different tailoring than the leaner actors of course. I don't see anyone ever comment on the button stances of the suits and the styling of the waist, which I think is a far more valid concern than anything (I don't like seeing a dress shirt or tie through the buttoned suit coat).
This all being said, I am quite confident in the opinion that we haven't see casual style in Bond to this level since the beginning and these suits fit comfortably in a secondary position behind Sinclair's work for Sean outside of most of DAF where those looks are problematic in palette and styling. All the other eras have bigger humps to overcome than Dan's in the fashion department, and that's why I put him and his suits in the secondary position. Roger looked too much like an aristocrat and the horrid 70s styles ruined his look and put him in unsavory color matches, Tim wore suits that were far too big for him and as has been pointed out again and again, Pierce looked like a salesman and not a stylish secret agent. It's not enough to have a nice suit, but you also must carry the suit, and I think Dan has done that admirably. He's also the only Bond since Sean or George that's been dressed in things that suit both him and his version of the character, which is vital to an actor looking the part. If you don't feel at home in a suit, you're not James Bond.
I don't really understand what you mean. He was definitely bigger in CR, and probably bigger in QoS than he was in SF/SP, and the suits didn't seem too tight then.
I think people comment on the tightness a lot because it's something immediately noticeable, especially in the action scenes, so it sticks out.
I think there's probably less humour but it still has its moments. Even the torture scene has "the whole world's gonna know that you died scratching my balls".
I love the Madagascar sequence but I think the Bahamas stuff drags a bit. Then it gets to the plot of the novel and really picks up. I'd like CR a lot better if it was shorter and I think the Bahamas and Venice scenes (no need for the sinking house) are the bits that should have been trimmed down.
That's a problem I had with him in SP too. It felt like they were trying to turn him into that type of character. The narrowed-eyed smirk, the overdone swagger. It doesn't really suit him.
In the case of CR, they were putting unflattering and slightly baggy and ill-fitted suits onto someone who was already very built, making Dan feel too bulgy as a rsult (this is really seen with his Bahamas suit, for example) because the suits looked like they were falling off him. What I mean is that his body type is always more suited to fits that are closer to his chest, as the bagginess of what they put him in during some of CR is more unflattering to his specific figure than the tighter fits ever could be (and I think this is true for every man, really, who is of average body type).
As for the QoS/SF, SP comparison, I don't think the difference is as pronounced as some think. The material of the suits in QoS offer up a more pleasing visual, as the fabric doesn't seem to wrinkle as much, which would give them an edge over what we see in the two newest films and I think the suits realize the hourglass figure a bit better too. But the Tom Ford suits, regardless of what film you're speaking of, are attacked from the angle that leaner fits that suit Dan's body are preferable to those that hang off him in a baggy mess.
I simply mean, you fit according to the person's body type and with Dan a fit that goes closer to the chest helps to bring out his body type in a more flattering way than a baggier fit would simply because baggy or loose fits make his bigger frame all the bigger. It's why you can see a clear delineation from the Brioni CR suits, like the Bahamas suit that is styled with beefy shoulders and wider arms that altogether give Dan's already beefy body even more unsightly beefiness:
https://bamfstyle.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/crgray-main1.jpg
And how the Tom Ford suits and styles improve upon this to suit Dan's type because the shoulders are smoothed out and made less protruding, the arms are slimmer to fit closer to him, the hourglass figure gives a better shape where the Brionis don't and the chest of the Ford suits leave less room for bagginess to form that also slims Dan's figure all the more:
https://bamfstyle.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/qos6brown-main.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/fa/a7/4f/faa74fd1d39498c57185759b9cfe89e4.jpg
The jump from Brioni to Tom Ford is simply better to me, as the fits and overall style of them are more suited to Dan and I think they went wrong trying to dress Dan in Brosnan type clothes at the start. Every actor must have clothes that work for them, and you won't get that by dressing them like another person or with fits that don't appeal to their type and look. This isn't to say that closer fits are always preferable, as sometimes the tightness of suits can be taken too far. I simply think that where Dan's suits in QoS, SF and SP are concerned they hit quite nicely between those two extremes with an edge towards closer fits that favor Dan.
---
Regarding the suits, just purely from my perspective there is a difference between fashion and tailoring. A well tailored suit hangs well, fits properly around the shoulders, waist, seat of the pant, has an appropriate buttoned jacket 'v' or 'x' without exposing shirt, has no bunching up around the mid section when buttoned, has a proper sleeve length, jacket collar gap and should not have sleeves wrinkling either. If it fits properly you'll know it in the way it hangs, which will be very complimentary to the wearer. There has undoubtedly been a move to a more slimmer look lately, but it's not entirely flattering on all body types. Ultimately, it's a matter of taste and one can still wear a slim fit suit which is properly tailored and meets the above critieria. It will just be cut a little closer to the body to emphasize physique. That's not what I've been seeing in the last two films. That was what we saw in QoS. Anyway to each their own. At some point we'll move on from this.
That's a problem I had with him in SP too. It felt like they were trying to turn him into that type of character. The narrowed-eyed smirk, the overdone swagger. It doesn't really suit him.
When he walks up the hotel stairs in the PTS of SP and the way he spoke to M actually made me hate CraigBond for a moment.
I couldn't put that better myself,thats exactly how Bond came across,an arrogant little shit.
I've still got it...when I bought SP on SKY,you get the trailer downloaded free,so I have the entire trailer permanently.
Not that it helps much in here though :/
Bond had no reason not to trust M, and the writers should pay closer attention to these details next time. Spectre was a mess. The entire thing was only built on visuals and tropes, not on story or screenplay. When making a film, one weighs on the script/screenplay first, not announce the appearance of a new bespoke Aston Martin then write a script based on it.
Especially if they want a story-arc ...if you want that then do it properly or go standalone.
That announcement of the car was such a silly moment for me too, and I'm a huge car nut. Better to focus on getting a tailor to cut a few bespoke suits before wasting time on yet another car (as has been rumoured on the other thread) imho. God I miss the Cold War.
Exactly. They tried to rush things with Spectre and introduce what they call "epic!" movement by shoehorning everything from every past Bond trope and every admired element from the pop culture, then squeeze it to one film based on Daniel Craig's contract who at the time wasn't willing to do another, much like Brosnan post-TWINE.
It doesn't work that way. You said it best, mate!
M is compelling Bond to give him all the detail. Bond knows better, that his utility as a double-oh is to act in MI6's (and therefore M's) best interests, sometimes in spite of his superiors. M knowing what Bond knows would them both in an impossible situation as 9 Eyes ramps up, he'd be obligated to share the Intel and be shut down with Bond at a time when they need the freedom to act. Or commit treason and be shut down.
By the time of the scene with M at the restaurant, M has understood these things. He's no longer trying to keep tabs on Bond and hamstring them both. He started with good intentions and decent expectations of Bond as his superior. Now he's learned to trust Bond.
This makes perfect sense to me as good storytelling, showcasing the value of OO7. And it's standard formula for Bond to be treated like a red-beaded stepchild, even in films like THUNDERBALL. It's not supposed to be easy.
Your reasons do make sense... but they don't display it in the film that way.
I found the SP experience somewhat contentious and abrasive in tone. It was a little jarring.
One of the sane voices RE: SP, @RichardTheBruce.
In a general sense, I see that scene as a testament to Bond's loyalty and also his uncertainty. He gets a tape with a mission from his old boss, really his true boss, even beyond her death, and so he's naturally conflicted about just what he must do. Clearly M and her wishes are important to him and because he cared for her so much he's going to honor her intel and request and look into Sciarra the best he can. Was it right to do so behind Mallory's back? That can be argued, but I can't really blame Bond. Sure the two have eased off their initial rockiness together but Bond by no means views Mallory with even a tenth of the respect or admiration as he did Dench's M nor has he had the time to build such a dynamic. Bond is caught between the old boss he respected and trusted and the new one he barely knows, so of course Dench's M wins out.
Mallory was also lost amidst the MI5 merger at the time and Bond certainly wasn't going to pile onto him with news of M's secret video cryptically commanding him to go after a man he knew nothing about until that point. What exactly would Mallory have done then? Call Bond a nutter who was crazy enough to go after a man just because his dead boss said so? Or maybe he'd lock Bond's wrists up and put him off active duty because he couldn't trust Bond's allegiance to Dench M and couldn't count on him following his orders as his new superior. On top of that, maybe Mallory wouldn't even believe that Sciarra was a red target or anyone worth seeking out. In the end, I think Bond had to go it alone and keep things mum simply because he's more familiar than any other Bond about how much bureaucracy and superiors hold you back from doing the right thing. He tried to do the right thing in QoS and they tied his wrists and other governments tried to silence him from standing against corruption, so he's played this game before and knows that it's best to travel in secret and at times circumvent red tape.
People are critical of Bond's attitude in the meeting-I personally think he was just dryly dismissive as Sean could be and Tim's Bond went at his M way worse with fire and fury-but I don't think Mallory was quite professional either. Shouting Bond down when the man saved an entire stadium of innocents from being blown up isn't exactly the reaction I'd expect for such a commitment. SP quite softly but nicely plants the idea that Mallory is an awkward leader, and not entirely focused on what's important or on the people who serve him. He is so lost in the job that he is oblivious to Moneypenny's birthday and his short temper with Bond and his inability to see his agent's side of things shows that he's not as objective a leader as he could be.
There's so many ways in which Mallory fails where Dench's M would've risen to the occasion, and that is made obvious by the script. An important moment proving this comes when the 00 program is closed down and all Mallory can say to everyone around him is a regurgitation of a meek French proverb. If Dench's M was in the same situation and her credentials and work was being threatened she'd have given a scathing and cursed ridden diatribe about bureaucrats and the duty of spies like she did in SF, accept this time the eloquence of a Tennyson stanza would be replaced by the anger she felt for the good of the people being sabotaged. It's no wonder Bond isn't as easy to jump on with Mallory post-Dench M. What leadership is he intended to follow behind, exactly?
Previously in QUANTUM OF SOLACE, Bond can't be defending himself at every turn--when it does appear he's killing every contact he meets though he isn't. Instead he focuses on the mission while everything's in turmoil at the home office, moves forward. And he does not stop, even when he's literally handed over his Walther and "in custody" of a group of agents.
That's what I see in SPECTRE. There's a reason Bond comes into his own in the field, and there's a reason M is stuck at the home office with the bureaucrats. I definitely see mutual respect between them, understanding, I saw it established. Now that that's set, more elements of the traditional film formula will play out in BOND 25.