Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
A Cycle for Bond films : 6 steps by era
JohnBond
France
Hello everyone,
Although i don't post a lot on this forum (but still reading you everyday !), i really wanted to share with you a vision of the whole Bond saga that came to my mind about 2 years ago already, after seeing Spectre… At that time, i wasn't so sure about this analysis, so i kept it for myself, waiting for more visions of Bond films to eventually support it…
Now, as i took some distance on it, and as Daniel is about to prepare a fifth one and extend his "era", i think it's time to let you react to my vision, precisely because it may also helps to know what to expect from Bond 25…
I think the picture speaks for itself, so i will just add a few comments :
> I merged 2 actor's tenures for 2 eras (1st and 3rd), because the 2 actors in both eras have a lot in common (Lazenby following the steps of Connery of course, and linked with Connery's past films, Brosnan stepping in a third film that was originally intended for Dalton, whose first film was originally intended for Brosnan…)
> I also merged some films in a single "step", to support my theory of course (!) and also because i feel they both fit in a single longer step : those films are Goldfinger and Thunderball (Connery's Bond at his peak for 2 times) and For Your Eyes Only and Octopussy (both classical and more grounded films, after Moore's Bond's "peak" and before his "fall")…
> I suggest you to especially look at the columns of (common step) films we have (4 are full by now) : i'm fascinated by the dialogue between some Bond films of the same columns, like LTK with QOS (revenge…), or GF with GE and SF (resurrection/peak), YOLT with TND and SP (bigger and bigger films… smaller and smaller scripts…), OHMSS with FYEO and TWINE (back to reality, the spectre of Tracy… the garden of death soon ?), or even DAF with DAD…
> naturally, i have a couple of adjectives to define each of the 6 types of Bond films, but i don't think i need to write them here… Actually, it would be more interesting for everyone to choose by himself…
Hope you will enjoy it, and by the way thank you for the quality of your daily comments on this forum !
^ 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
What got my attention is Type 4, anticipating Type 5 and BOND 25. Plus concerns for BOND 26 as Type 6.
As for type 6, I hope Daniel will stick to his words and avoid that risk ! The way i see type 6 is a return to type 4 (ambitious film with a few important mistakes), but in an even lazier way…Let's hope we can avoid this curse of the last Bond film this time !
According to his chart we are do for a ohmss
This means that either Craig is back for two more or the next era will kick off on an OTT note.
Please God don't let that happen,Daniel needs to go out on a high after all his efforts.
He deserves the best.
Well thats depressing
It better not be another skyfall. I mean I know people love skyfall and thats great but no one can deny that it lacks in plot. They will have had 4 years they better bloody make a film with a coherent plot this time. Something like TLD, CR, or QOS where eveytime I watch it I go, wait who is dealing with what?
Thank you for appreciating my chart !
Personally, i feel Craig, Purvis & Wade and EON may want to go back to a real Fleming adaptation for the last one, precisely go back to the CR way : start from the base of the novel then update, refresh, boost it while remaining faithful to its spirit.
It would also be a nice way to "mirror" CR, and indeed to leave on a high note as Daniel said. We still have unused content from Moonraker, Diamonds are forever, The Spy who loved me and a very few short stories but You Only Live Twice seems obvious if they indeed take the Fleming road…
In that case, i think we can expect a "Skyfall style" film, with a very daring, surprising and even shocking story (as was OHMSS and Bond's wedding in 1969, and in a way Elektra King the first real feminine Bond vilain in TWINE > Irma Bunt in B25 perhaps ?), just like @Mendes4Lyfe said.
But if the Fleming base is here i don't think we need to worry about the plot : they still have 1 year and a half to develop it and Purvis & Wade may be better when it's about boosting a story (and not fully write it)… we'll see but i personally feel confident.
@BondJasonBond006 , I'm glad this chart idea gave you inspiration for others ! Yours is indeed slightly different. Going back to the normal 6 eras is useful to compare. So if i understand well the closer we get to the middle the better it is ? The thing is that it depends on everyone's tastes then (for instance i would take TND out of the high point to join SP) but it would be an interesting way to compare visually everyone's appreciation of the entire saga.
My hope is Nolan gets the gig and we get a well crafted film with good practical stunts/set pieces
I definitely had noticed the parallels between FRWL, TMWTGG, LTK & QoS previously. They all have a bit of a personal angle to them (Bond requested specifically for a labour of love, Bond threatened by a bullet, Bond out for revenge and Bond finding solace). I have mentioned previously that Brosnan never got that kind of film for his 2nd outing (instead he jumped straight to OTT with TND), and I believe that impacted his tenure negatively.
Moreover, he started with a sort of greatest hits package in GE (albeit a finely tuned and grounded one which perfectly combined a little cinematic flair with grit like Connery's third and fourth and Moore's third). Sadly, it's the sort of film which is better left for a third outing rather than a debut. As you noted, it probably happened this way because it was originally intended for Dalton.
I agree that we are probably in line for a more grounded and scaled back entry next time out (like OHMSS, FYEO and TWINE). The issue I have is if B25 is truly to be Craig's last, that doesn't bode well for B26 and the start of a new actor's run. I contend that a new actor should ideally start with a gritty and grounded entry, since they inevitably get more outlandish as their tenures progress.
So ultimately, I'm looking beyond Craig's finale to B26, and really hope they get that one right.
About Brosnan and his "missing beginning" feeling, that's precisely the reason why I decided to merge him with Dalton. I like to think now that, despite their different takes on the character, these two share much more comparing with the others (except Connery & Lazenby), and especially a common story : the story of a new Bond through the end of the Cold War, starting in Czechoslovakia, Afghanistan, then Russia, Cuba, Germany, Vietnam, Azerbaidjan and ending in North Korea… A kind of tour around famous places of the Cold War.
Besides, Goldeneye makes so much sense to me as a "sequel" to LTK, with Bond being a more stable and detached man after finding his "solace", despite showing remains of anger. The feeling to me is not so different from the one between FRWL and GF, TMWTGG and TSWLM, or QOS and SF (especially). I'm pretty sure that if Dalton came back for GE, he would have shown something like that, quite different from his LTK performance. The question is would he have continued until DAD ? I have my doubts…
In a way, Brosnan may appear like a Lazenby, a "follower" of something that was already launched before him, if we ignore the number of films of course…
Would he have continued to DAD? We know that he didn't - he was offered GoldenEye by Cubby but didn't want to commit to more than one film.