As a Bond fan... I have decided to do my dissertation on the relationship between classic Bond and how Bond has evolved.
I really hope a few Bond fans out there can help me (please...). I'd love your opinions and if there are any of you who I could send a questionnaire to please e-mail me at
[email protected]
My dissertation mainly addresses Casino Royale and Skyfall--the films that have put Bond back on top!
How have they successfully invented themselves as new classics yet they have also evolved and changed.
I would also like some feedback on the following discussion points.
1- Are Casino Royale and Skyfall so successful because any evolving is completely offset by classic "Bondisms" (from the Aston Martin's appearance; the classic feeling theme song and strong villains to Bond's rugged charm in a tux).
2 - What are these classic 'Bondisms'?
Indeed...What makes a classic Bond? examples appreciated(the tux/the dry martini/the girls/the relationship with the villain/the opening sequence/the music...the list is endless. Which are the ones that are essential to a good Bond?
3 - Did the Bond films that failed to impress (examples appreciated ) ,fail as they tried to evolve but it was too obvious because they did NOT have a foundation of classic "Bondisms"?
Both Casino R and Skyfall are considered to go back to classic Bond roots(Do you agree?). However there are substantial evolutions(especially in Skyfall)--with M out the office, no Q in Casino Royale, minimal gadget fun from him in Skyfall, insight into Bond's childhood, and many more..... (any more examples appreciated...).
Bond films are known to follow the zeitgeist of the times-this seems well documented in the books I have read. This is not really the issue. Movie goers need some new twists and evolving characters - even if they are not aware of it, they are hardly going to put up with things like women being treated as they were in the sixties & seventies, as it would appear dated.
4- So...to get to the crunch...Is it the strong foundation(full of classic Bondisms) that enables these films to actually happily evolve and break new ground, whilst making most film goers actually feel like they are watching a true classic?
5- Is there an actual relationship between the familiar and constant change...the more a Bond film evolves and changes ...the more classic Bondisms must be thrown in to off-set it?
ALL COMMENTS WELCOME---by e-mail to
[email protected] or on the forum.
BIG THANKS in advance...AG
Comments
But if you want to take studying Bond good for you! There's plenty of good discussion online here at this community (mi6community.com) and at HMSS weblog and at CommanderBond.net
You didn't try and get a job at MI6 did you?
Biggest LOL of the day- thanks! :))
I find it funny how crap like that continuously gets free reign to be posted without punishment and yet I get flagged for responding to it in a way that pokes fun at how ridiculous it is.
It was funny. You need to up your game.
We all get flagged at one time or another- my first time I was like "WHAT!?!?!?"
Not your post, RC7, yours was brilliant. But I got flagged for a post made in a similar vein to it.
I know, I was joking. I'm in total agreement.
So to rhe OP ... Well all i can say is look before you leap mate
I am studying media production...so the Bond dissertation (bearing in mind Skyfall was a top grossing film) is relevant for the industry I want to enter...
I still think that although there is a lot written about classic Bond, and how Bond has changed---that there is a relationship between the two that has not been academically addressed.
Bond could so easily have just lost its way in the myriad of good guy/cop v baddy(from Mission Impossible to Bourne saga)--but for the roots -the 'Bondisms' that are part of every successful Bond film and have kept Bond relevant.
I think Bond is still going strong because it has successfully evolved, but the evolving is only accepted when balanced with lots of Bondisms!
But...as in every dissertation - I need to research and see how others feel --so PLEASE say you'll take part in my research ...
e-mail me at [email protected]