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
I’m guessing English is your second language?
I think your reading of some of the things that have been discussed on the last few pages , shows a certain lack of understanding of English.
Which is certainly not your fault of course. But describing “Can you swim?” as a poor joke that Roger Moore didn’t look in the mood for, is way off the mark.
It’s not set up as a joke, and Moore after two films living in the shadow somewhat of Sean Connery possibly under some mis direction from Guy Hamilton, is rightly praised by many Bond fans as having found ‘his’ Bond in TSWLM.
Again not a dig at you, more a lack of understanding I feel.
I guess so, maybe I've just misunderstood them. 😁
But my points regarding TSWLM were just down to my perceptions of watching the film (I guess I've misinterpreted the "Can you swim" line but based on my watching, it's clear that he's making the joke because the Lotus Esprit was about to drive into the sea (Anya even grasped), for me, it has the same vibe as the "Evel Knievel" line of the Golden Gun (and even with the same scenes of both Bond's cars are about to drive into something, in Golden Gun, it's about to drive through a broken bridge), but those two (for me) are delivered in different manners, again, these things were all down to personal perceptions as to how we interpret such dialogues (it's subjective).
I know Moore had hit his stride in TSWLM, balancing the traits of his Bond, I get that, but it's just down to his line deliveries sometimes that I find a bit odd (I'm always watching Bond films with my earphones on, and I've been an observant to every detail), maybe it's just me.
In some topics, I think we've all agreed there that it has a cool concept but was not deeply explored that much, and dropped the ball at the end, even @echo pointed it out (by having Anya slept with Bond at the end and not delving deeper into Anya's angst regarding the killing of her boyfriend, and even made my alternate take on how to improve it).
I've explained my thoughts on those, maybe just wasn't precise enough for me to put down all of my thoughts 😅, sometimes we have those thoughts that's very hard to write down because we don't know in what way we could explain those.
I'm actually happy getting into these discussions, we've got into interesting things.
Imagine England wins its first tournament in 62 years, on home soil, in Wembly arena, and then a few short months after the next Bond film is released. It would be like 2012 and the London Olympics all over again in terms positive momentum and energy.
Interesting insights there, @Mendes4Lyfe
I can already picture myself in a similar marketing stunt.
The same for me, he's not my favorite either, and neither that he comes to my mind when I think of Bond despite of him being the longest actor to held the role, and yes, his era are clearly the least Bondian to me either, full of camp.
But If I have to pick one from every era and when it comes to him, it'll be Moonraker, but compared to other Bond eras, his films just cannot compete against, maybe Die Another Day, but even the first 30 minutes of the film (at least before or up until the introduction of Jinx) is better than Moore Era Bond films.
You're not alone in there, like what I've said, his acting was mostly the same in all of his films, because he had that built in personality that he's always playing.
Outside of Bond, I liked him in The Persuaders, even moreso than his Bond.
I don't believe him in action, although he had the sophistication and charm (but I think it's a bit excessive, compared to Connery, to which was more balanced), and he'd failed to bring in the danger and tension (a staple aspect of James Bond), let alone he's believable in fight scenes, and he had no chemistry with any of his Bond Girls (might be understandable due to the age gap, maybe Maud Adams/Octopussy, but still, it's only the closest, so not to the fullest degree, not the definitive one), and yes, he's not believable in showing vulnerability and failed in bringing humanity to the character (I understand it's not his mantra), just the same as Brosnan, I guess.
He showed some seriousness in some moments as Bond (the admission of killing Anya's boyfriend, the Rio scene after saving Manuela from Jaws, the Centrifuge scene and the Keel Hauling sequence), but in terms of vulnerability, he's incapable of showing human emotions like fear or devastation like Lazenby, Dalton Craig, or even Connery (when he showed fear in DN at the end when he's desperate and rushing to find Honey Ryder, while they're all escaping), it's subtle, but compared to Moore, at least Connery have one, even if it's just minor.
Sure, he was playing Moore but it worked somehow.
Anyway, TMWTGG was his most bondian perfomance. Yeah, that movie. ;)
Overall, though, I think it's too goofy and I wouldn't want to see the franchise go that far again.
Now I've listened to a bunch of the Fleming novels on Audible I've got a better feel for the core of the character and would like to see the disciplined detail-orientated aspect of the character brought more to the fore on-screen. I think we saw some of that in Casino Royale, but it has rather fallen by the wayside since then, imo.
I was thinking, because it came up in the other thread about the qualities each actor brought that, slightly counterintuitively, I think we might see Moore's Bond get angry more than Connery's. I struggle to think of Connery's Bond ever getting angry: he's always just supercool. He tried to add some emotions where he could, but they weren't really there in the script.
I'd disagree that his acting stayed the same because the character he was playing didn't, really. Would the guy who twisted Andrea's arm behind her back and made Goodnight listen to him on the job when she was in the wardrobe have made Stacey a quiche and tucked her up in bed?
Only half of the actors' performances changed really. Only Sean, who got less interesting, then came back and became more comedic; Roger, who had his three distinct versions of the character; and Craig - the only one whose maturing and softening of the character was actually intentional.
For me personally, I'm not sure if I'd put one over the other, but then again I tend to dislike ranking Bonds. They're very similar anyway - less opposites and more two sides of the same coin (both certainly play the character with a tongue in cheek approach with that element of believability/sincerity when needed). I will say that without Moore's Bond I doubt a) the character would have survived onscreen, and b) we would have gotten any of the subsequent Bond portrayals in the form we do. By simply having Moore as the lead the writers and director were able to develop TSWLM - a film where Bond could show subtle emotion towards a reference to the death of his wife, a film where he could show express honesty when talking about killing the Bond girl's lover. Certainly Connery was a capable actor, but it was the potential for showing the humanity in Moore's Bond that I think really opened up those opportunities. As @mtm said Moore's interpretation and the writing even developed while still fundamentally portraying the same character. At the very least it showed that subsequent Bonds didn't simply have to copy Connery and could bring something unique to this role. And in hindsight I think we're better for it when it comes to Bond films.
Well, that happens when you make more than one or two movies. ;)
5-7 movies are a lot, if you think about it. All movies cannot be the same.
It's at the 2:04/05 mark
Producer Barbara Broccoli has a lot of non-Bond projects on the bubble
https://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/bond-26-producer-barbara-broccoli-busy-july-2024?
She obviously has no respect for her fathers legacy and don't care about Bond fans. Her passion now lie elsewhere. Bond died in NTTD.
Behind the scenes, nothing seems to be happening
This feels like losing a part of your soul. Maybe it's time for all of us to move along.
I am hoping that when the Fleming novels go public domain in 10 years we'll get a ton of new Bond movies. They'll all be the NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN equivalents for the 2030s, but by then that won't matter. :)
I've used the wording "if or when we get a new Bond film" a few times on here. I'm sure we'll get another Bond film someday, but it's completely feasible that killing off James Bond in the last movie was more than just a 'daring, brave, natural conclusion to Daniel Craig's Bond*', and the Bond franchise as we know it, is over now.
*some people here have actually said that.
James Bond will return.
As others have said, James Bond will return.
Is it sad? IMO? Yes it is.
And I’m sorry, but if someone comes along just tonsay that I have no right to feel this way, then they know nothing of what it is to be a fan. This is the definition of being a fan, to yearn for something in the continuity of itself.
It's certainly interesting times. We all saw what fan meddling has done to Star Wars. I simply don't want a repeat of that with Bond, where they open the floodgates to fans and suddenly it's ruined. I trust them with the baby, and it's their baby, so I have to wait to see how things develop. I'm excited to see things start moving, but I'm not taking it personally when they're not... let's be better than Star Wars. Not telling anybody how to feel, I'm annoyed that we're not getting more to talk about as well. But it's just an annoyance, James Bond will return indeed. I just don't want him to do it out of desperation.
I also think BB and Eon may just be looking for a hint of inspiration.
👍 Yup, well said.
The Bond fan base is older. Unlike Star Wars, you won't find many dedicated Bond fans below 30. I could be wrong though. Never saw a study or a survey about this. But it's certainly not like back in the day where every teenageboy went bananas over a new Bond premiere. The last couple of premieres I attended the crowd was 90% 30+. James Bond needs to be Legoized to attracted the younger generation :-)
Plenty of dictators and wanna-be dictators around doing things that can serve as an inspiration for a Bond villain.
Remote Control is a dead project.
The last time its production status was updated was February 25, 2020. Another project lost to COVID.
It may resurrect down the road, but for now this is a non-project. If Mi6 wrote that this was one of the films EoN is working on, perhaps they should try and do their research?