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
Agree. Are we really worried about Bond's lungs and liver? I'm not. Last time I checked Bond was a fictional character. Not only are his lungs and liver impervious to excess, but now he can come back to life after being blown to bits by rockets.
=D>
Alchol's effects on over all health can be masked and isn't as obvious as smoking, so having a man in a tux order a martini still plays into our imaginations as being somewhat cool and sophisticated.
Smoking is altogether different.
The nasty truth about that habit is out and there's no putting the toothpaste back in the tube; most have seen what smoking leads to, so although Bond is a fictitious character (and I can assure you I care not one bit about his liver and lungs), it stretches belief to think a guy who smokes could do even half of what Bond does.
Let me see him jumping off cranes, but please never let me see him light another coffin-nail. I can believe the parkour chase in CR more readily than I can a man who smokes, then tried to participate in that sequence!
This a moot point in the end...it's safe to assume Bond won't smoke again, and for the foreseeable future, he will still have plenty of booze to occupy his time.
But then so the Bond of the books, think of how he survived Dr. No's obstacle course or that fight with giant squid where he's climbing a giant net, considering him smoking two packs of cigs a day?
Think of how Lazenby's Bond climbed up a cable car, or how he made himself dangle and jumped into a bobsled track in OHMSS?
Or how Dalton's Bond fought Necros while hanging through the giant net, aerially in TLD, Or how Bond managed to climb a mountain in the TLD PTS? Or how did he also done the whole Tangier action sequences, that whole rooftop scenes and that motorcycle scene? That whole Tangier action sequence is one of the most demanding action sequences in the series up until the Craig Era.
Or did he managed to climb Blofeld's volcano lair or how did he managed to do some fighting in the Kobe Docks and rooftops in YOLT without having some complications?
He'd made some dangerous stunts back then and he's smoking.
Despite of him smoking, he could still do some extreme action scenes.
His challenges in the books were far more extreme than what he did in the films that he sometimes spent the book's ending in the hospital.
So, I don't think that's a problem.
I mean, we're used to the typical Bond vs henchman fight in which Bond is in some way at a disadvantage physically (we see it in his fights with Oddjob, Jaws, even Red Grant although more so in the novel). We had SF in which Bond's injuries/substance abuse affected him for the entire movie. It's certainly there in the novels. In the case of something like the obstacle course in DN, for example, what's put at the forefront isn't how strong or fit Bond is (on the contrary, he struggles throughout the whole thing, has recently come back from his near death experience in FRWL, and would likely have died had he not stolen the knife). Instead it's his endurance and ability to think fast that gets him out of the situation despite how ill prepared he is physically for the task.
So in that sense even acknowledging that Bond's drinking isn't necessarily good for the physicality of his job might play into something quite fundamental (and human) about the character.
In the films, it's harder to ignore. Especially today with the stunts being so intricate, one has to believe that the character and the actor playing him are in top shape (one of the reasons I didn't like Brosnan-- he didn't look strong enough to do most of the stunts his character was doing).
@007ClassicBondFan … exactly… We can stretch the imagination, especially when we’ve never wrestled giant squids or fought barracuda… But some of us have taken a puff and know that disgusting burn down the throat and that eruption in the lungs; others have seen the affects of chronic smoking, therefore reading the amount Bond smokes, I knew very early on, was just ridiculous and took me out of the stories.
But I can at least force some of this down, or I expel the idea from my mind that a man who smokes 60-70 cigs/day, is able to snorkel like a pro, or hold breath underwater for long periods of time…
But if I hadta watch a modern actor smoking like Dalton, I’d be disappointed and I couldn’t believe that he’s a character who’d then be able to run up a crane, dive off of it, sprint full out, break into an embassy, fight, shoot, battle and cause a massive explosion AND get away… in reality, this actor/character wouldn’t be able to sprint up a set of stairs let alone do the things Bond is supposed to do.
I am not defending smoking. I've not missed it, nor will I. I just don't agree with the notion that without smoking Bond's action scenes are more believable.
@CrabKey i didn’t say the action scenes were more believable because he doesn’t smoke, I said: IF Bond smoked it’s take me out of the movie coz I wouldn’t believe he could get up a flight of stairs, let alone do the things he does in the films.
That’s IF he smoked.
It’s about stretching the imagination, and i buy that James Bond can ride horses, jump on planes, off of bridges onto trains… but IF I saw him smoke, it’d take me out of the picture— does that make sense? I’m not calling any of the stunts remotely believable, nor am I saying a non-smoker makes it more believable. I’m saying that IF the character did all of these (especially modern) stunts AND he smoked, it’d ruin the illusion for me.
Hey @mattjoes — you’re correct! And you nailed it: I can go along with all those bullets missing Bond. I let all logic take a back seat while I watch him jumping and fighting and driving and, and, and…. And I obviously know it’s all preposterous stuff. But lighting a smoke and doing all of that, forget it, 😂. That’s my line in the sand. If you want me to “believe” you can do all of this AND you’re a smoker?…
And some passages in Fleming seduce me, others make me feel ill (YOLT always gives me a queasy stomach and all his smoking does too— Fleming was that good he gives me a reaction (both pros and cons)).
I take Connery Bond having the odd cigarette , because his action was quite basic… But the things they’re having Bond do now? Keeping the “truth” of the story alive, you just can’t have the character as a smoker anymore.
A cigar I can buy once in a while. But not a pack a day smoker. Not even a one-day smoker.
But it’s moot. EoN Bond won’t be smoking any time soon.
However, general attitudes to smoking have. And that's a valid enough reason for Bond to not smoke, I guess. I find it very cool looking on camera, but I can certainly understand the logic behind why it wouldn't be a good visual in the grand scheme of things.
One thing to remember is that Bond is not just Bond on its own - Bond is a product of many facets and product placement is one of them. Him smoking back in the early 60s made sense because it was a thing that everyone did. What made Bond's habits in the books stand out was not just this mad, unhealthy habit, but that he had his cigarettes hand-rolled. He did the things others did but in a better way.
But now? Less people smoke than they ever did. Nobody gets their cigarettes hand rolled or their tobacco pre-mixed to their taste anymore.
If it's not worth including, then just don't include it.
Edit: it's mad that this has popped up in a Craig-era thread, considering his Bond never smoked while Craig himself once smoked like one of those regiment guys I mentioned above.
For good reason.
That may be true, but I'd argue that's an exception to the rule in the grand scheme of things; and that's with the knowledge that the rule might be massively flawed.
Craig's trainer might have been incredibly wise (and I'd agree with him, quitting was a great thing for me personally) but the fact remains that thousands of soldiers fitting Bond's physical profile have puffed away consistently over the decades and probably still do.
There are people who have never inhaled a cigarette in their lives that couldn't run 20km; yet my Dad uaed to smoke 50 a day and probably could still give it a good whack.
The key thing is public perception. And with that in mind, I totally agree with Bond not being a smoker. It hasn't changed my enjoyment of the films one bit.
For me, it doesn't matter if he's smoking but still doing action scenes, yes, @peter it takes you out of the books sometimes, but when I'm talking about Bond's drinking, some people here are going to counterpart me the books, because that makes him badass and etc.
And yet, drinking and performing action is also not that far off, and that's what takes me out of the Craig Bond sometimes, he's more of a heavy drinker than those of the previous Bonds, him drinking every minute of the film, vodka martini? It's still the same as the other liquors, but look at the guy, he never gets his stomach bloated (due to liver disease), not getting a bit weak because of the strong alcohol consumption, yet he could still do action scenes (the most obvious here being the Cuba sequence in NTTD where he fights while he drinks), that's a bit tad unbelievable to me 😅, even Paloma who drank a lot but never seemed to lost her way and could still kick guys who were bigger than her 😅.
But I'm taking it, because it's just a film, and the characters that I'm watching were fictional characters, and like what @CraigMooreOHMSS had said, some smokers in real life could still able to perform heavy activities, and there are also some non smokers who couldn't able to do so.
It's no different to him smoking whilst doing action, I have no problem with it, what I'd like is to keep the important aspects of Bond (as Fleming created), as he usually is, a smoker, a gambler (even this aspect is suddenly fading from Bond), a drinker, a reckless driver, and a Casanova.
Because what I'm seeing is cigarettes was removed from the character, because it's already outdated, but then, the characters around him like Severine, still smokes, those people in the SPECTRE meeting smokes, and even other fictional characters in other films smokes, but why Bond couldn't?
As @FoxRox said, it's another part of fantasy element, is it that true that Bond is a male wish fulfillment? Is he what men looking of what they wanted to be?
That's Bond, he's a symbol of masculinity who can made every aspects looked cool, he can make smoking cool, he can make drinking cool, he can make all things cool, despite of those things not being cool in real life! And therefore something that men cannot afford.
If we're taking out the unbelievable moments in Bond films then better we should take out Sports cars too, because it's also impossible and a bit empathy for the people of England that half of their taxes goes to Bond's expensive cars which would be destroyed in the middle of an action scene, right?
But no, because again, he's a fantasy male wish fulfillment.
Does anyone here see those "male wish fulfillment fantasy" in Craig?
Yes, while smoking is really a dated aspect, and if we're removing those in Bond, all of his vices, then it's no different to the books being rewritten because some words didn't aged well, and have many people (particularly the young generations) gets offended.
And we're fighting for them to be kept, because it's a part of Fleming, those racism, sexism, homophobic aspects and etc. And if they're removed, all of what makes those Ian Fleming books would be gone.
And that's the same as the Bond character, as I've felt he's being adjusted to the modern times.
That's why I really enjoyed the Dynamite comics books, because they've still kept Bond in the modern world, yet still also kept the aspects of what makes the character distinctive.
Bond ordering a vodka martini, shaken not stirred is a well known part of the character.
Despite both being bad for us, smoking is just bad. Drinking in moderation is still acceptable.
I'd bring back Arnold to score the next one, and make it sound as John Barry-ish as possible. If it makes the Arnold haters moan even more because of this, then that is an added bonus.
I'd lose unnecessary links to previous Bond films. I'm done with the DB5 (as much as I love the car), and I don't want to see homages to previous flicks anymore.
I'd throw away any family angst or retcon Fleming re-imagined crap from SF, SP and NTTD (the worst thing they did in the Craig era).
And I'd throw away any attempts at trying to connect the films into a continuous arc. Again, another massive failure during the Craig era, as the overall arc was not planned beforehand, it was just clumsily shoehorned in with each film.
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.