What to keep and what to get rid of from the Craig era.

1456810

Comments

  • edited April 2023 Posts: 12,837
    SIS_HQ wrote: »
    Agreed with all of those you've listed @jetsetwilly

    I would also add there:

    1. Just don't make the next Bond so brooding, I'd liked to see Bond have his own personality or maybe adhere to the Connery Bond for balancing the personality of his Bond.
    I felt like Craig became too much brooding with no style or class or whatsoever, he's too much brute, I think Connery's Bond perfected it by being professional to his job and convincing as a killer, but at some point still have sophistication and class.
    There's a coolness in Connery's Bond, that Craig's Bond lacked, he almost felt like John Wick.
    Maybe that's what the modern trends clinging into nowadays, but I would be happy if they did.
    I don't liked any Dalton/Craig copy of Bond again, I'd liked the next Bond to have his own personality and balancing it.

    2. And If there's one thing I'd like to keep from the Craig Era, it's the Bond Girls like Camille or Paloma, who doesn't need to have an intimate interaction with Bond or yes, sex, that's one of the things I find better in Quantum of Solace is that Bond and Camille never got to have sex, the same for Paloma in No Time To Die, it's just a mutual relationship, as long as they have great banter and chemistry, there's no need for them to have sex, they could just work together.
    Bond could still be a womanizer but there's no need for him to have sex or bed any woman that he's with, I'm fine with mutual interactions, as long as they have great banter and chemistry, so it's probably the only thing from the Craig Era I would liked to keep.

    Yes I agree with all this too. It would be nice to see Bond smile a bit more and start enjoying life again, rather than being broody and moody all the time.

    I don’t understand the criticism of Craig’s Bond being too moody and broody. He was one of the more serious takes on it, and I know the personal drama was divisive, but I don’t see anything about his performance or characterisation that makes him broodier than Dalton or the original Fleming Bond. I reckon he actually had more Connery/Moore style humour than them. He just had a detached Mcqueen type coolness layered over the usual hedonism.

    I do think the films have gotten quite heavy and I’d like one that feels a bit lighter again, for the sake of keeping it fresh, but I don’t think the tone is necessarily the issue with that. I’d be up for more Connery style irony, but at the same time, my favourite is LTK, and that one has Bond at his moodiest. I still have a great time watching it because it’s a gripping, badass action film that doesn’t give you time to dwell on the nastiness. It’s the introspection, psychoanalysis and long runtimes they could do with ditching imo. Characterisation wise, I’m easy. I think they can make a fun film with any sort of Bond, it’s just all about how they execute it.

    Funny enough, LTK is my favourite too. Yet although Dalton had his angry moments, he still managed to have a laugh too (throwing the money out of the plane springs to mind).

    I found with the later Craig films there was too much of the darkened rooms, quiet, whispery dialogue, too much personal angst. By the end of NTTD you feel nothing but sympathy and pity for Bond, something I've never felt in any other Bond film (even OHMSS tragic ending).

    I feel in CR they got the balance right, but not in the later films.

    The later Craig films have far more moments like that than LTK though (I’d even say they went too far at times, the dad joke puns should probably stay in the past). Fair enough if you didn’t like the personal drama of the Craig films but saying he was moody all the time just isn’t true.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,179
    The Craig era wasn't too moody in my opinion. The films tried to be serious, but there were lighter moments just as well, though arguably fewer per film than in the '70s. Then again, as much as I love Victor Tourjanski's contributions, I wouldn't want them to go back to "man with bottle" comedy.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,382
    SIS_HQ wrote: »
    Agreed with all of those you've listed @jetsetwilly

    I would also add there:

    1. Just don't make the next Bond so brooding, I'd liked to see Bond have his own personality or maybe adhere to the Connery Bond for balancing the personality of his Bond.
    I felt like Craig became too much brooding with no style or class or whatsoever, he's too much brute, I think Connery's Bond perfected it by being professional to his job and convincing as a killer, but at some point still have sophistication and class.
    There's a coolness in Connery's Bond, that Craig's Bond lacked, he almost felt like John Wick.
    Maybe that's what the modern trends clinging into nowadays, but I would be happy if they did.
    I don't liked any Dalton/Craig copy of Bond again, I'd liked the next Bond to have his own personality and balancing it.

    2. And If there's one thing I'd like to keep from the Craig Era, it's the Bond Girls like Camille or Paloma, who doesn't need to have an intimate interaction with Bond or yes, sex, that's one of the things I find better in Quantum of Solace is that Bond and Camille never got to have sex, the same for Paloma in No Time To Die, it's just a mutual relationship, as long as they have great banter and chemistry, there's no need for them to have sex, they could just work together.
    Bond could still be a womanizer but there's no need for him to have sex or bed any woman that he's with, I'm fine with mutual interactions, as long as they have great banter and chemistry, so it's probably the only thing from the Craig Era I would liked to keep.

    Yes I agree with all this too. It would be nice to see Bond smile a bit more and start enjoying life again, rather than being broody and moody all the time.

    I don’t understand the criticism of Craig’s Bond being too moody and broody. He was one of the more serious takes on it, and I know the personal drama was divisive, but I don’t see anything about his performance or characterisation that makes him broodier than Dalton or the original Fleming Bond. I reckon he actually had more Connery/Moore style humour than them. He just had a detached Mcqueen type coolness layered over the usual hedonism.

    I do think the films have gotten quite heavy and I’d like one that feels a bit lighter again, for the sake of keeping it fresh, but I don’t think the tone is necessarily the issue with that. I’d be up for more Connery style irony, but at the same time, my favourite is LTK, and that one has Bond at his moodiest. I still have a great time watching it because it’s a gripping, badass action film that doesn’t give you time to dwell on the nastiness. It’s the introspection, psychoanalysis and long runtimes they could do with ditching imo. Characterisation wise, I’m easy. I think they can make a fun film with any sort of Bond, it’s just all about how they execute it.

    Funny enough, LTK is my favourite too. Yet although Dalton had his angry moments, he still managed to have a laugh too (throwing the money out of the plane springs to mind).

    I found with the later Craig films there was too much of the darkened rooms, quiet, whispery dialogue, too much personal angst. By the end of NTTD you feel nothing but sympathy and pity for Bond, something I've never felt in any other Bond film (even OHMSS tragic ending).

    I feel in CR they got the balance right, but not in the later films.

    The later Craig films have far more moments like that than LTK though (I’d even say they went too far at times, the dad joke puns should probably stay in the past). Fair enough if you didn’t like the personal drama of the Craig films but saying he was moody all the time just isn’t true.

    :-bd
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    The aspirational aspect seems more like an invention by the films. For example, it’s in the Goldfinger novel that Bond’s caddy Hawker points out all the cheating mechanisms and places his foot on Goldfinger’s missing ball. The film of course switches those roles because Cinematic Bond has to be on top of everything because he’s just that good.

    I remember what a big deal it was when CR depicted Bond recovering at a hospital after a lengthy torture because that kind of thing was so common in the novels but you never see that in film. DAD almost did it, but then immediately subverted that by having Bond instantly recover and shave his beard off as if none of the last 14 months of torture had an impact on his body.
  • Posts: 4,139
    Bond is certainly more human in the novels, often getting injured, prone to melancholy, and indeed even outright making mistakes. For better or for worse the cinematic Bond has traditionally been a more 'polished' version of that character. Even in the Craig era to an extent.

    I would say that the 'aspirational' aspect is there even in Fleming's novels though. These stories are by their very nature escapist, and there's always going to be an element of stereotypical 'male wish fulfilment' with a character who drives fast cars, travels to exotic location, seduces women etc.

    Still, you can do a lot with a lot of interesting things with such a character.
  • Posts: 1,985
    @MakeshiftPython. I've never quite gotten how long Bond's recovery took in CR. But I agree his hospitalization was atypical. Yet another reminder how CR got so much right followed by four films that never quite lived up to the opening act. The Craig series did a good job of showing his cut and bruised, and he grunted a lot when taking a hard fall. But like so many fights in films, the punishment inflicted on bodies strains credibility.

    Though quite different for obvious reasons, the scene in Thunderball in which Bond is shot in the back of the leg has always impressed me as a bit of realism that spoke to Bond not being invulnerable. Not that the injury seemed to hamper him in later scenes.



  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited April 2023 Posts: 16,382
    The aspirational aspect seems more like an invention by the films.

    To an extent. He's certainly a bit more sharply dressed in the films: book Bond has a few quality items in his wardrobe but not all that much really, together with a couple of quite shabby items by the sounds of them!
    But the 'Every man wants to be James Bond and every woman wants to be with him' line is attributed (possibly erroneously) to Raymond Chandler, who died three years before the films started being made, so the aspirational idea seems to be there beforehand. And Fleming's books are not critical of how this man lives his life, they celebrate him just as much as the films do, with his scrambled eggs and ringed cigarettes being portrayed as the right thing a man should do.
    Even in his moments of 'accidie' and self-reflection and the like, it's that kind of manly introspection which just makes him seem tougher and sexier- like Sly Stallone clenching his jaw and staring out to sea. It's not really proper vulnerability or weakness.
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Though quite different for obvious reasons, the scene in Thunderball in which Bond is shot in the back of the leg has always impressed me as a bit of realism that spoke to Bond not being invulnerable. Not that the injury seemed to hamper him in later scenes.

    Yeah that's my issue with that: he's basically Wolverine and heals instantly. Other times he's injured, like TWINE or SF, actually have a bit of an after-effect.

  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 942
    One of the things that annoyed me the most in Spectre was the way Bond bounced back from the torture.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited April 2023 Posts: 16,382
    One of the things that annoyed me the most in Spectre was the way Bond bounced back from the torture.

    Yes it was a bit of a cheat: I don't think you should tell the audience a new fact (i.e drilling right there erases your memory) and then just have it turn out that the character telling you that was mistaken. That's not really fair and breaks the trust a bit.
    And in fact I was actually quite excited by it: I thought it was taking us somewhere new and exciting- what happens when James can't remember her? But it just didn't happen.
  • edited May 2023 Posts: 3,327
    One of the things that annoyed me the most in Spectre was the way Bond bounced back from the torture.
    Easily one of the worst moments in the Craig era, and probably the entire franchise.

    It’s right down there, along with Bond’s death, double taking pigeons, CGI surfing, Tarzan yells and invisible cars.
  • edited May 2023 Posts: 1,078
    Like a lot of situations in novels that migrate to movies, the SP torture scene wasn't nearly as effective as Amis' version. But I didn't find myself cringing at the quick recovery like I do at the Tarzan yell/pigeon/death/tits zoom and other miss-steps. I think it's because there's always the chance he was faking the agony.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,028
    One of the things that annoyed me the most in Spectre was the way Bond bounced back from the torture.

    It wasn't even the bounce-back. It was the totally pointless torture. There was nothing that Blofeld expected to be revealed by that drilling into Bond's cheeks, or I missed something (I may be forgiven, since SP has had the least re-view value for me among the Craig films). The Le Chiffre torture at least had the goal of obtaining the code to the bank account. This one was torture because someone thought there had to be torture in that movie.
  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    Posts: 693
    The torture scene was originally supposed to be a dinner sequence with Bond and Blofeld. Not sure why it was changed. Maybe they just wanted Blofeld to look as sadistic as possible.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    I thought he tortured him for the pleasure of it.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 2023 Posts: 16,382
    Like a lot of situations in novels that migrate to movies, the SP torture scene wasn't nearly as effective as Amis' version. But I didn't find myself cringing at the quick recovery like I do at the Tarzan yell/pigeon/death/tits zoom and other miss-steps. I think it's because there's always the chance he was faking the agony.

    Yeah I think the problems are overstated, and it is a scary scene. But I do think it’s a cheat: we are told his memory will be erased if the needle goes in, and as an audience we have to take information on faith- we have no way of proving otherwise. Imagine if the nuclear bomb in Goldfinger had counted to zero and it turned out that it was just a microwave oven pinging: that would be a cheat. We’re told it’s a bomb so we have to believe it is: likewise we’re told this drill will wipe Bond’s memory so we have to believe it will as those are the stakes presented to us. To have it just fail to do so is a bit of a cheat and breaks the trust of the audience- I do agree that it is a misstep.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited May 2023 Posts: 6,296
    mtm wrote: »
    Like a lot of situations in novels that migrate to movies, the SP torture scene wasn't nearly as effective as Amis' version. But I didn't find myself cringing at the quick recovery like I do at the Tarzan yell/pigeon/death/tits zoom and other miss-steps. I think it's because there's always the chance he was faking the agony.

    Yeah I think the problems are overstated, and it is a scary scene. But I do think it’s a cheat: we are told his memory will be erased if the needle goes in, and as an audience we have to take information on faith- we have no way of proving otherwise. Imagine if the nuclear bomb in Goldfinger had counted to zero and it turned out that it was just a microwave oven pinging: that would be a cheat. We’re told it’s a bomb so we have to believe it is: likewise we’re told this drill will wipe Bond’s memory so we have to believe it will as those are the stakes presented to us. To have it just fail to do so is a bit of a cheat and breaks the trust of the audience- I do agree that it is a misstep.

    Perhaps something like one of Blofeld's goons has the surgery done on him and he's kind of a zombie? It's not the worst scene in the movie, but like the rest of the film it feels underbaked.

    I do feel, had the script gone through a few more revisions (hopefully someone would have nixed Brofeld), it could have been a worthy follow-up to SF. And had they kept Madeleine cold/defiant much longer into the film--she played that angle well. Maybe show glimpses of her vulnerability, as in the drunk scene. She too quickly becomes an ally, then even worse, a damsel in distress.

    SP is so frustrating a film because they were maybe 60% there, as opposed to other films in the franchise that would have required a page-one rewrite (TMWTGG and AVTAK, I'm looking at you).
  • edited May 2023 Posts: 4,139
    echo wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Like a lot of situations in novels that migrate to movies, the SP torture scene wasn't nearly as effective as Amis' version. But I didn't find myself cringing at the quick recovery like I do at the Tarzan yell/pigeon/death/tits zoom and other miss-steps. I think it's because there's always the chance he was faking the agony.

    Yeah I think the problems are overstated, and it is a scary scene. But I do think it’s a cheat: we are told his memory will be erased if the needle goes in, and as an audience we have to take information on faith- we have no way of proving otherwise. Imagine if the nuclear bomb in Goldfinger had counted to zero and it turned out that it was just a microwave oven pinging: that would be a cheat. We’re told it’s a bomb so we have to believe it is: likewise we’re told this drill will wipe Bond’s memory so we have to believe it will as those are the stakes presented to us. To have it just fail to do so is a bit of a cheat and breaks the trust of the audience- I do agree that it is a misstep.

    Perhaps something like one of Blofeld's goons has the surgery done on him and he's kind of a zombie?

    Maybe if Bond had managed to in some way compromise the weird 'mind wipey' torture machine thingy it would have worked? Maybe he could have stolen something and jammed it into the machine without Blofeld noticing, thus making it less efficient? I dunno...

    Either that or Blofeld could have more explicitly stated that the procedure requires two separate punctures to the brain in order to work. Only one will just disorientate Bond. It's a wee bit clumsy from a script perspective (I'm not a fan anyway as it makes Bond less proactive and relies a bit too much on dialogue) but perhaps it could have been better.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited May 2023 Posts: 3,152
    When Blofeld says he was the architect of all Bond's pain, I always wish Dan had scoffed 'Yeah, right' and just dismissed it as a lie. Can you imagine how infuriated Franz would've been if Bond had just swatted aside the big reveal? Given the lack of consequences from the torture, I've also wondered if Blofeld's description of the possible effects was a lie just to ramp up the fear and he was actually just getting off on making Madeleine watch him drill into Bond's head! Gives 'headcanon' a new slant, I guess.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,382
    echo wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Like a lot of situations in novels that migrate to movies, the SP torture scene wasn't nearly as effective as Amis' version. But I didn't find myself cringing at the quick recovery like I do at the Tarzan yell/pigeon/death/tits zoom and other miss-steps. I think it's because there's always the chance he was faking the agony.

    Yeah I think the problems are overstated, and it is a scary scene. But I do think it’s a cheat: we are told his memory will be erased if the needle goes in, and as an audience we have to take information on faith- we have no way of proving otherwise. Imagine if the nuclear bomb in Goldfinger had counted to zero and it turned out that it was just a microwave oven pinging: that would be a cheat. We’re told it’s a bomb so we have to believe it is: likewise we’re told this drill will wipe Bond’s memory so we have to believe it will as those are the stakes presented to us. To have it just fail to do so is a bit of a cheat and breaks the trust of the audience- I do agree that it is a misstep.

    Perhaps something like one of Blofeld's goons has the surgery done on him and he's kind of a zombie? It's not the worst scene in the movie, but like the rest of the film it feels underbaked.

    I do feel, had the script gone through a few more revisions (hopefully someone would have nixed Brofeld), it could have been a worthy follow-up to SF. And had they kept Madeleine cold/defiant much longer into the film--she played that angle well. Maybe show glimpses of her vulnerability, as in the drunk scene. She too quickly becomes an ally, then even worse, a damsel in distress.

    SP is so frustrating a film because they were maybe 60% there, as opposed to other films in the franchise that would have required a page-one rewrite (TMWTGG and AVTAK, I'm looking at you).

    Yes I totally agree: there's a lot of good ideas in there, they just don't quite come together.
    I don't even dislike the cuckoo stuff- at least on the page anyway. Bond going after Oberhauser's killer (as in Fleming's Octopussy), the killer turning out to be his son, who also resented Bond- those aren't terrible ideas. Making him Blofeld.. well probably a little too much on the silly side I guess, but forgivable.
    007HallY wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Like a lot of situations in novels that migrate to movies, the SP torture scene wasn't nearly as effective as Amis' version. But I didn't find myself cringing at the quick recovery like I do at the Tarzan yell/pigeon/death/tits zoom and other miss-steps. I think it's because there's always the chance he was faking the agony.

    Yeah I think the problems are overstated, and it is a scary scene. But I do think it’s a cheat: we are told his memory will be erased if the needle goes in, and as an audience we have to take information on faith- we have no way of proving otherwise. Imagine if the nuclear bomb in Goldfinger had counted to zero and it turned out that it was just a microwave oven pinging: that would be a cheat. We’re told it’s a bomb so we have to believe it is: likewise we’re told this drill will wipe Bond’s memory so we have to believe it will as those are the stakes presented to us. To have it just fail to do so is a bit of a cheat and breaks the trust of the audience- I do agree that it is a misstep.

    Perhaps something like one of Blofeld's goons has the surgery done on him and he's kind of a zombie?

    Maybe if Bond had managed to in some way compromise the weird 'mind wipey' torture machine thingy it would have worked? Maybe he could have stolen something and jammed it into the machine without Blofeld noticing, thus making it less efficient? I dunno...

    Either that or Blofeld could have more explicitly stated that the procedure requires two separate punctures to the brain in order to work. Only one will just disorientate Bond. It's a wee bit clumsy from a script perspective (I'm not a fan anyway as it makes Bond less proactive and relies a bit too much on dialogue) but perhaps it could have been better.

    Yeah not bad thoughts; they would have worked. Maybe have Bond remember Madeline through force of will whilst the procedure is happening- focusing on her face and using the power of his love to beat Blofeld's machine. Perhaps even have him do a Harry Palmer and assert his own name to himself to make sure he doesn't lose it- "The name's Bond.. "

  • edited May 2023 Posts: 4,139
    mtm wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Like a lot of situations in novels that migrate to movies, the SP torture scene wasn't nearly as effective as Amis' version. But I didn't find myself cringing at the quick recovery like I do at the Tarzan yell/pigeon/death/tits zoom and other miss-steps. I think it's because there's always the chance he was faking the agony.

    Yeah I think the problems are overstated, and it is a scary scene. But I do think it’s a cheat: we are told his memory will be erased if the needle goes in, and as an audience we have to take information on faith- we have no way of proving otherwise. Imagine if the nuclear bomb in Goldfinger had counted to zero and it turned out that it was just a microwave oven pinging: that would be a cheat. We’re told it’s a bomb so we have to believe it is: likewise we’re told this drill will wipe Bond’s memory so we have to believe it will as those are the stakes presented to us. To have it just fail to do so is a bit of a cheat and breaks the trust of the audience- I do agree that it is a misstep.

    Perhaps something like one of Blofeld's goons has the surgery done on him and he's kind of a zombie? It's not the worst scene in the movie, but like the rest of the film it feels underbaked.

    I do feel, had the script gone through a few more revisions (hopefully someone would have nixed Brofeld), it could have been a worthy follow-up to SF. And had they kept Madeleine cold/defiant much longer into the film--she played that angle well. Maybe show glimpses of her vulnerability, as in the drunk scene. She too quickly becomes an ally, then even worse, a damsel in distress.

    SP is so frustrating a film because they were maybe 60% there, as opposed to other films in the franchise that would have required a page-one rewrite (TMWTGG and AVTAK, I'm looking at you).

    Yes I totally agree: there's a lot of good ideas in there, they just don't quite come together.
    I don't even dislike the cuckoo stuff- at least on the page anyway. Bond going after Oberhauser's killer (as in Fleming's Octopussy), the killer turning out to be his son, who also resented Bond- those aren't terrible ideas. Making him Blofeld.. well probably a little too much on the silly side I guess, but forgivable.
    007HallY wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Like a lot of situations in novels that migrate to movies, the SP torture scene wasn't nearly as effective as Amis' version. But I didn't find myself cringing at the quick recovery like I do at the Tarzan yell/pigeon/death/tits zoom and other miss-steps. I think it's because there's always the chance he was faking the agony.

    Yeah I think the problems are overstated, and it is a scary scene. But I do think it’s a cheat: we are told his memory will be erased if the needle goes in, and as an audience we have to take information on faith- we have no way of proving otherwise. Imagine if the nuclear bomb in Goldfinger had counted to zero and it turned out that it was just a microwave oven pinging: that would be a cheat. We’re told it’s a bomb so we have to believe it is: likewise we’re told this drill will wipe Bond’s memory so we have to believe it will as those are the stakes presented to us. To have it just fail to do so is a bit of a cheat and breaks the trust of the audience- I do agree that it is a misstep.

    Perhaps something like one of Blofeld's goons has the surgery done on him and he's kind of a zombie?

    Maybe if Bond had managed to in some way compromise the weird 'mind wipey' torture machine thingy it would have worked? Maybe he could have stolen something and jammed it into the machine without Blofeld noticing, thus making it less efficient? I dunno...

    Either that or Blofeld could have more explicitly stated that the procedure requires two separate punctures to the brain in order to work. Only one will just disorientate Bond. It's a wee bit clumsy from a script perspective (I'm not a fan anyway as it makes Bond less proactive and relies a bit too much on dialogue) but perhaps it could have been better.

    Yeah not bad thoughts; they would have worked. Maybe have Bond remember Madeline through force of will whilst the procedure is happening- focusing on her face and using the power of his love to beat Blofeld's machine. Perhaps even have him do a Harry Palmer and assert his own name to himself to make sure he doesn't lose it- "The name's Bond.. "

    I do love that brainwashing scene in The Ipcress File. But yeah, something like that would have improved things.

    Kinda wish a future film would try a brainwashing scene like that with Bond. It's a bit hokey if done badly, but with the right direction it could be very tense. Has its roots in Fleming's novels too in a round about way. Also would be a cool way of incorporating the 'My name's Bond, James Bond' line in a very different context if he's saying his name over and over again to not get brainwashed.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,382
    No spoilers, but the new Higson book has a really fun way of using the 'Bond, James Bond' line in a way which is worthy of the movies!

    Brainwashing is potentially dodgy because it is so hokey, as you say; but I guess it can be done. It might be fun, yeah.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,296
    The brainwashing from TMWTGG doesn't strike me as that hokey, although it's very '50s/'60s. And it would be cinematic.
  • edited May 2023 Posts: 4,139
    Even that scene from The Ipcress File feels a bit hokey nowadays with the light and sound effects, haha. There are ways of making such a concept either more realistic or modern though. Either just make it more of a torture scene designed to turn Bond mad/accustomise him to certain behaviour, or incorporate some sort of 'five minutes into the future' technology. I dunno, a spin on maybe a neura-link type thing where the brainwashing technology works by implanting something into the brain that basically makes the brainwashee go mad, and they are more easily susceptible to being tricked/doing things they ordinarily wouldn't. Something like that....
    mtm wrote: »
    No spoilers, but the new Higson book has a really fun way of using the 'Bond, James Bond' line in a way which is worthy of the movies!

    Need to give it a read. I've heard good things, although I'm not often a fan of the continuation Bond novels.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,382
    It's a very quick read and is just lots of fun, I'd say. Definitely worth a go.

    Of course there was a new version of Ipcress last year which left the brainwashing scene not massively changed (I think they added a drug plot in there too from memory), and I'd say it got away with it.
  • PixiePopPixiePop Sweden
    Posts: 11
    I have only watched parts of Daniel Craig's movies, and I am still fairly new to the Bond movies, except for Sean Connery's movies (which I have watched in full a couple times), and while I am aware that especially Craig's movie "Casino Royale" is considered a great movie, I have also got the impression that he is a little bit too "tame" around the Bond girls.

    One reason why Sean Connery is my favourite Bond actor is because he had that special calm and confident attitude;
    he seemed to interact with the Bond girls more like he gave them a chance to spend time with him, and I would say that this is a lot more attractive than a man who becomes really careful around women, and tries way too hard to be overly polite.
    Sure, there are a few scenes in Sean Connery's movies that would be problematic in real life - I would certainly not appreciate if a man spanked me in public in real life and told me to leave because he would have "man talk", although this can be a fun scene in a movie, just because it is so over-the-top sexist in a very self-aware way - but generally speaking, he had a very captivating kind of calm, cold and assertive style, which I personally like to see in James Bond.
  • Posts: 6,709
    Hear hear, well said. Also, the cool cat factor must make a comeback. It’s not enough that you move like a panther, you must be cool as one.
  • edited June 2023 Posts: 202
    Not only should it be a complete reset with nothing from the Craig era being carried over, I would set it in the 1950's. That's where James Bond can get away with being the character Fleming invented. Having read the recent Anthony Horowitz books, the 1950's really are the best place for this character IMHO. I can really imagine Christopher Nolan making a truly awesome trilogy of Bond movies set in this time period, and with some retro gadgets and vintage motors and Bond hanging out in the chic French Riviera with gorgeous women. The only snag I see is that EON would struggle with their not too subtle product placement deals.
  • Posts: 6,709
    I would love that, if done in a serious fashion and not pastiche like in the man from uncle.

    But as we have established, product placement would be an issue. And so would production values and whatnot.
  • PixiePopPixiePop Sweden
    Posts: 11
    Univex wrote: »
    Hear hear, well said. Also, the cool cat factor must make a comeback. It’s not enough that you move like a panther, you must be cool as one.
    Sean Connery really had all that;
    I think that part of his seductive coolness is that he seems totally in control around everyone, both male and female characters.
    It is also obvious from the behind-the-scenes photos that the Bond girls genuinely liked him, like for example his photos with Ursula Andress and Claudine Auger.
  • Posts: 6,709
    All on this lap, all the time, right? Lucky bugger :)
Sign In or Register to comment.