Is Now The Time To Go Back To 1953 ?

After all the hype, I have to confess to being disappointed by 'Spectre'.
The much acclaimed 'Skyfall' worked in some ways but 'Spectre' just left me cold.
Months after seeing it at the cinema, I gave 'Spectre' another go but it only confirmed that my memory of the movie as a flashy homage to previous Bond films, with Craig bouncing around in an awful suit whilst working his way through a 'who cares' plot was spot on.
In fact after 53 years of Bond fandom I have come to the conclusion that the only 007 movies that resonate with me in a lasting way are DN, FRWL, GF,TB & OHMSS. And, when I ask myself why - the answer is painfully obvious - they were reasonably close to Fleming's terrific novels and very importantly, they were released at a time when the concept of the solo agent saving the world held good.
Nowadays, espionage is a team game and the advent of the digital world has rendered the idea of a lone secret agent chasing villains in glamorous locations whilst bedding femmes fatales en route, defunct.
His digital foot print would give him away in 5 minutes assuming that his face book page or linkedin cover wasn't blown before that.
Spying today is a team game played with technology and this, together with today's insufferable sense of political correctness risks rendering the Bond franchise superfluous unless it reboots as a period piece.
The writers of the Bond continuation novels have, with the notable exception of Jeffery Deaver who produced the thoroughly awful 'Carte Blanche', realised this and Anthony Horowitz very wisely set his very creditable adventure 'Trigger Mortis' in 1957, directly after 'Goldfinger'.
As a consequence, Horowitz was able to give us a blistering yarn that cooked the Fleming ingredients to perfection.
We had our hero back as he should be, driving his 1938 Bentley supercharged by Amherst Villiers, with his gunmetal cigarette case in the breast pocket of an impeccably tailored Savile Row suit on the way to defeat a completely unhinged villain. Taking time out only for a martini or a liaison of the red blooded heterosexual kind.
In short, unlike 'Spectre', 'Trigger Mortis' really worked and methinks it's time eon really rolled the dice and took Bond back to 1953, the era when he was really comfortable. Then, we could welcome back the true 007 and look forward to some sex and gratuitous violence. Frankly they could start with CR and shoot the whole lot all over again and whats more, Bond could even get to wear suits that fit properly !
«1345

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited May 2016 Posts: 40,371
    EDIT: Misinterpreted the original aim of this, re-opening for discussion.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    I actually agree with this and wish they made some new films filmed in the 50s, but lots of people seem to be against this.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Glad you reopened this thread, @Creasy48. I tend to agree with the premise here.

    @PussyNoMoore, are you really that old? 100 or so?

    Very good reasoning, it comes with age.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    I've been advocating period Bond movies for years for all the reasons stated.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    I would like a period piece. I'm advocating a one-off Bond movie since a long time.
    Not sure if they should re-do all the books though.
    Of course, if a period piece Bond should do the insane BO numbers that SP and SF did, then they can do another, possibly with the same actor.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    I would like a period piece. I'm advocating a one-off Bond movie since a long time.
    Not sure if they should re-do all the books though.
    Of course, if a period piece Bond should do the insane BO numbers that SP and SF did, then they can do another, possibly with the same actor.

    Yes, YES!!! Make it SO, EON!
  • Posts: 520
    Glad you reopened this thread, @Creasy48. I tend to agree with the premise here.

    @PussyNoMoore, are you really that old? 100 or so?

    Very good reasoning, it comes with age.

    Not sure about that age but given that I was 10 years old when I read my first Bond book and that was 53 years ago, you can probably do the maths.
    I'm also particularly proud that I was born in the year that 'Casino Royale' was published.
    I like to think that Ian had me in mind when he wrote it. He certainly provided me with a lifelong friend in Bond !
    Back to the subject.
    Unlike BondJasonBond006, I do think that eon should return to Fleming's work and shoot the whole lot in chronological order but probably start with LALD as CR was used for the Craig era reboot and is probably too recent.
    Personally, I think that well executed, the period Bond could match the box office numbers of SF and SP and what's more, would prove a hell of a lot more sustainable.
    Fleming's stories taken in their purity are such great vehicles and the era of '53 to '65 was just so glamorous, I'm sure faithful movie adaptations would appeal to both existing aficionados and a whole new audience.
    Furthermore, screenwriters and directors would be able to stop twisting and distorting the character of Bond into some ridiculous, politically correct, action man caricature.
    Of course, it is interesting to contemplate who would play the 'real' Bond ?
    In my opinion it calls for a new face and I'd go out on a limb and root for Dominic Cooper - I think he did a great job playing Fleming.


  • edited June 2017 Posts: 377
    no
  • edited May 2016 Posts: 14,799
    Problem is we do not live in the 1950s. Neither did the movie Bond, by the way, even in the earliest movies he was always working in a contemporary setting. Making the continuation novels period pieces makes sense, if you want to write continuation novels (I have my reservations about them, as people here know), however this brings up a whole bunch of issues, regarding authenticity. Ian Fleming lived in his time as a man of his time. Setting it in the past, you become an interpreter of this past, risking to take away its authenticity. Bond novels and movies are spy thrillers, not historical ones.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,969
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Problem is we do not live in the 1950s. Neither did the movie Bond, by the way, even in the earliest movies he was always working in a contemporary setting. Making the continuation novels period pieces makes sense, if you want to write continuation novels (I have my reservations about them, as people here know), however this brings up a whole bunch of issues, regarding authenticity. Ian Fleming lived in his time as a man of his time. Setting it in the past, you become an interpreter of this past, risking to take away its authenticity. Bond novels and movies are spy thrillers, not historical ones.

    I agree, but DN and FRWL felt more like fifties movies than sixties, probably because they weren't massive budgets back then. GF made Bond modern in the sixties, IMO.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Anyone hoping for a cinematic period piece are dreaming.

    The sex and gratuitous violence makes no difference. If we're getting comparatively tame stuff now, it won't change just because it's set decades earlier. People need to remember what these films spoken are, who they're made for and why they're made in the first place. You want Bond back in a Rolex, you want him driving a Bentley, Saville Row suits? Great! Are these companies willing to put up finance to get the movies made? Can they produce enough product in time for one movie alone? What are the partnership contracts like with Omega, AM?

    There are so many logistical and ancillary legal stuff involved that to be honest it's probably not even worth the headache. Rolex will never sponsor a Bond film; they just won't and don't need to. Omega, however, don't need to anymore either but they will because their strategy is different and far more fluid than Rolex' and EoN will take any sizeable amount of pesos they can get. As for tailoring, there's nothing wrong with Ford's suits, he just has the capacity to produce a lot more as and when needed. The fit of the suits is a stylistic (horrible)choice by Craig and the cd.

    The 50s/60s era of Bond and I suppose in general is far more romanticised than the post cold war geopolitical climate but again, irrespective of the advancements of technology in the world of espionage, a good writer can use that to their advantage and still tell a cracking story about one man and his mission, while keeping his support cast to minimum use.

    We still have somewhat decent violence but the sex scenes are pathetic and you can blame EoN for that. Other movies with the same rating that appeal to either the same audience or a younger audience have delivered better on these aspects. Changing the era in which these films are set isn't the answer; it's the fundimental change in storytelling and characterisations that need to be addressed.
  • Posts: 14,799
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Problem is we do not live in the 1950s. Neither did the movie Bond, by the way, even in the earliest movies he was always working in a contemporary setting. Making the continuation novels period pieces makes sense, if you want to write continuation novels (I have my reservations about them, as people here know), however this brings up a whole bunch of issues, regarding authenticity. Ian Fleming lived in his time as a man of his time. Setting it in the past, you become an interpreter of this past, risking to take away its authenticity. Bond novels and movies are spy thrillers, not historical ones.

    I agree, but DN and FRWL felt more like fifties movies than sixties, probably because they weren't massive budgets back then. GF made Bond modern in the sixties, IMO.

    Maybe a lot of movies in the early 60s felt like set in the decade before. There is not clear cut between two decades anyway, except a very arbitrary one. In any case both DN and FRWL were contemporary movies with the villains having different allegiances than in the source material for instance.
  • Posts: 520
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Anyone hoping for a cinematic period piece are dreaming.

    The sex and gratuitous violence makes no difference. If we're getting comparatively tame stuff now, it won't change just because it's set decades earlier. People need to remember what these films spoken are, who they're made for and why they're made in the first place. You want Bond back in a Rolex, you want him driving a Bentley, Saville Row suits? Great! Are these companies willing to put up finance to get the movies made? Can they produce enough product in time for one movie alone? What are the partnership contracts like with Omega, AM?

    There are so many logistical and ancillary legal stuff involved that to be honest it's probably not even worth the headache. Rolex will never sponsor a Bond film; they just won't and don't need to. Omega, however, don't need to anymore either but they will because their strategy is different and far more fluid than Rolex' and EoN will take any sizeable amount of pesos they can get. As for tailoring, there's nothing wrong with Ford's suits, he just has the capacity to produce a lot more as and when needed. The fit of the suits is a stylistic (horrible)choice by Craig and the cd.

    The 50s/60s era of Bond and I suppose in general is far more romanticised than the post cold war geopolitical climate but again, irrespective of the advancements of technology in the world of espionage, a good writer can use that to their advantage and still tell a cracking story about one man and his mission, while keeping his support cast to minimum use.

    We still have somewhat decent violence but the sex scenes are pathetic and you can blame EoN for that. Other movies with the same rating that appeal to either the same audience or a younger audience have delivered better on these aspects. Changing the era in which these films are set isn't the answer; it's the fundamental change in storytelling and characterisations that need to be addressed.

    Some interesting points from doubleogo particularly with regard to sponsorship.
    That said, I wouldn't be so quick to rule out companies like Rolex and Bentley when it comes to sponsorship dollars.
    Bentley have already dipped their toes into literary Bond with fabulous special editions and certainly have much deeper pockets than Aston Martin.
    That said, the real point is about the best route forward and here I obviously have a different perspective.
    For me, despite the fact that both of Mendes Bond movies were well made they - Spectre in particular - completely lacked tension.
    Ironically, CR got it nearly right because it strayed perilously close to Fleming's novel.
    Just think how great it would be if somebody actually made the books into movies!
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    Wouldn't mind seeing some of the Fleming stories done like the Sherlock Holmes TV series. (The ones with Jeremy Brett)

    Moonraker would make a brilliant period piece. Imagine the Card game with Drax and the Bentley crash brought to life on screen!

    Wouldn't mind seeing an adaptation of the story FYEO as well.
  • Posts: 520

    Moonraker would make a brilliant period piece. Imagine the Card game with Drax and the Bentley crash brought to life on screen!
    .

    It is an absolute sacrilege that Fleming's Moonraker has never made it to the screen.
    What a great story that was. Unfortunately those that have only seen the pastiche movie and who haven't read the book won't have a clue what they are missing.
    Brilliant, brilliant novel and it would be a perfect vehicle for a period re-boot.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,727
    Nice pipe dream idea but I can't see it ever happening. As @Ludovico says, the Bond films have always been contemporary pieces and that is how they will most likely remain. I don't think that Eon are prepared to mess with the Bond formula to quite that extent.
  • Posts: 520
    Birdleson wrote: »
    That novel (MOONRAKER), along with THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, are the two that we need to see accurately adapted

    Clearly Birdleson is a fan with great taste. TSWLM would indeed make a great movie but it would need the most skilful direction. A shame Hitchcock isn't around to helm it!

  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985

    Moonraker would make a brilliant period piece. Imagine the Card game with Drax and the Bentley crash brought to life on screen!
    .

    It is an absolute sacrilege that Fleming's Moonraker has never made it to the screen.
    What a great story that was. Unfortunately those that have only seen the pastiche movie and who haven't read the book won't have a clue what they are missing.
    Brilliant, brilliant novel and it would be a perfect vehicle for a period re-boot.

    Moonraker is my favourite Fleming novel.

    Such a shame it probably will never be adapted. Wouldn't have to have a huge budget either!
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,727

    Moonraker would make a brilliant period piece. Imagine the Card game with Drax and the Bentley crash brought to life on screen!
    .

    It is an absolute sacrilege that Fleming's Moonraker has never made it to the screen.
    What a great story that was. Unfortunately those that have only seen the pastiche movie and who haven't read the book won't have a clue what they are missing.
    Brilliant, brilliant novel and it would be a perfect vehicle for a period re-boot.

    Moonraker is my favourite Fleming novel.

    Such a shame it probably will never be adapted. Wouldn't have to have a huge budget either!

    You've got very good taste as it's my favourite too!
  • Posts: 3,333
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Problem is we do not live in the 1950s. Neither did the movie Bond, by the way, even in the earliest movies he was always working in a contemporary setting. Making the continuation novels period pieces makes sense, if you want to write continuation novels (I have my reservations about them, as people here know), however this brings up a whole bunch of issues, regarding authenticity. Ian Fleming lived in his time as a man of his time. Setting it in the past, you become an interpreter of this past, risking to take away its authenticity. Bond novels and movies are spy thrillers, not historical ones.

    I agree, but DN and FRWL felt more like fifties movies than sixties, probably because they weren't massive budgets back then. GF made Bond modern in the sixties, IMO.
    They may feel like that to you now in retrospect, but I can assure you that Dr No upon release was a considered fresh and avant garde, especially with it's pop soundtrack, modernistic sets and John Barry's orchestrated main theme throughout. It's easy to forget the type of movies that proceeded this and then what came immediately after Dr No broke the mold.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    Dragonpol wrote: »

    Moonraker would make a brilliant period piece. Imagine the Card game with Drax and the Bentley crash brought to life on screen!
    .

    It is an absolute sacrilege that Fleming's Moonraker has never made it to the screen.
    What a great story that was. Unfortunately those that have only seen the pastiche movie and who haven't read the book won't have a clue what they are missing.
    Brilliant, brilliant novel and it would be a perfect vehicle for a period re-boot.

    Moonraker is my favourite Fleming novel.

    Such a shame it probably will never be adapted. Wouldn't have to have a huge budget either!

    You've got very good taste as it's my favourite too!


    :\"> Thanks. Just love the fiendish plot and the character of Drax is Fleming's best ever villain!

    Read it at least once a year
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Could they make a faithful TSWLM adapatation, though? Isn t the clause still valid?
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,969
    bondsum wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Problem is we do not live in the 1950s. Neither did the movie Bond, by the way, even in the earliest movies he was always working in a contemporary setting. Making the continuation novels period pieces makes sense, if you want to write continuation novels (I have my reservations about them, as people here know), however this brings up a whole bunch of issues, regarding authenticity. Ian Fleming lived in his time as a man of his time. Setting it in the past, you become an interpreter of this past, risking to take away its authenticity. Bond novels and movies are spy thrillers, not historical ones.

    I agree, but DN and FRWL felt more like fifties movies than sixties, probably because they weren't massive budgets back then. GF made Bond modern in the sixties, IMO.
    They may feel like that to you now in retrospect, but I can assure you that Dr No upon release was a considered fresh and avant garde, especially with it's pop soundtrack, modernistic sets and John Barry's orchestrated main theme throughout. It's easy to forget the type of movies that proceeded this and then what came immediately after Dr No broke the mold.

    Pop soundtrack?
  • Mark_HazzardMark_Hazzard Classified
    edited May 2016 Posts: 127
    People who are seeing problems with sponsors just think in problems. The true challenge comes when this retro movie has to catch up with pace and action of today's blockbusters. Also James Bond should be smoking again, heavily, and definitely have more drinks. I can think of a lobby or two that would strongly oppose that.

    However also these considerations are narrow-minded. Given the success of productions like Mad Men, Catch Me If You Can, X-Men: First Class and in a slightly more moderate aspect The Man From Uncle and Pam Am, there is definitely a good market potential for a period piece.

    Although it would be better, Fleming's work doesn't have to be followed to the core. There would be more room again for gadgets for instance. While I've personally always regarded remakes are sacrilege, I can see a more faithful adaptation of Moonraker working, as well as Diamonds Are Forever and even You Only Live Twice. Combining that with David Arnold's work that would more closely resemble John Barry's soundtrack, even using the same title songs, would provide solid ground for EON.

    One should be careful with remakes though, since the movie Live And Let Die would be regarded as a classic for instance and novels like TMWTGG and TSWLM didn't really do it for me. An original story set in the '60s would work for me as well.

    Finally, since the Bond from the novels is actually in his mid 30's, I can imagine who would play him:
    tumblr_nzztsxmhwb1rrhhnko1_500.gif?w=620&h=310&crop=1
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Like I said, you're living in a fantasy land if you think we're going to get a cinematic period piece Bond film. As long as these films are made as contemporary we're not going to see Bond smoke habitually ever again. Back in the day, it was cool to smoke and conveyed a level of status but this isn't 1969. Smoking has a very different general image now.

    As for the various ancillary product placements/sponsorships, they are a very big deal and pivotal to financing these movies in the first place. To dismiss them so trivially is short sighted and furthermore it's not looking for problems but just so happens to be an obvious one anyone who understands business can immediately recognise. You mentioned a bunch of period piece TV shows, which is fine and something I personally wouldn't mind BUT again, TV shows aren't theatrical cinema. UNCLE was essentially a flop and not a mumer of a sequel is on the table and X-men first class was great but was a one off as the subsequent movies left the 60s and time jumped, exploring the 70s in DoFp and now the 80s with Apocalypse. Mad Men was a great show but the series was 2 seasons too long for me. That level of writing and characterisation is something EoN should be paying an arm and a leg for but sadly I doubt we'll ever see such talent lend itself to Bond any time soon.

    Regarding keeping up with action, it doesn't need apocalyptic type destruction and ppintless explosions. Keep the focus more on great hand to hand combat, actual car chases and an explosion here and there and you're sorted. Create and build tension and suspense, lets feel the gravity of whats at stake. This is possible for television because just look to TV shows like 24; that approach for action scale should be the ceiling and it's overall production value to adapt the Bond novels is beyond capable.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,969
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Like I said, you're living in a fantasy land if you think we're going to get a cinematic period piece Bond film. As long as these films are made as contemporary we're not going to see Bond smoke habitually ever again. Back in the day, it was cool to smoke and conveyed a level of status but this isn't 1969. Smoking has a very different general image now.

    As for the various ancillary product placements/sponsorships, they are a very big deal and pivotal to financing these movies in the first place. To dismiss them so trivially is short sighted and furthermore it's not looking for problems but just so happens to be an obvious one anyone who understands business can immediately recognise. You mentioned a bunch of period piece TV shows, which is fine and something I personally wouldn't mind BUT again, TV shows aren't theatrical cinema. UNCLE was essentially a flop and not a mumer of a sequel is on the table and X-men first class was great but was a one off as the subsequent movies left the 60s and time jumped, exploring the 70s in DoFp and now the 80s with Apocalypse. Mad Men was a great show but the series was 2 seasons too long for me. That level of writing and characterisation is something EoN should be paying an arm and a leg for but sadly I doubt we'll ever see such talent lend itself to Bond any time soon.

    Regarding keeping up with action, it doesn't need apocalyptic type destruction and ppintless explosions. Keep the focus more on great hand to hand combat, actual car chases and an explosion here and there and you're sorted. Create and build tension and suspense, lets feel the gravity of whats at stake. This is possible for television because just look to TV shows like 24; that approach for action scale should be the ceiling and it's overall production value to adapt the Bond novels is beyond capable.

    Smoking still looks cool, that's a fact.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    It's not a fact.
  • Mark_HazzardMark_Hazzard Classified
    Posts: 127
    Some say that living in a fantasy is what this chap called 'Fleming' did.

    Classic brands like Martini and Rolex wouldn't mind to be attached being attached to the series I take it. Nor would Bentley:
    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-2573099/New-small-Bentley-tempt-James-Bond-away-Aston-Martins-considered.html

    I agree it might be unconventional for the producers to go into the '60's. Yet, as he would put it, I think the stakes are right.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,969
    doubleoego wrote: »
    It's not a fact.

    Your profile PIC says otherwise.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,969
    Smoking and wearing sunglasses are universally cool. B-)
Sign In or Register to comment.