Would you rather watch OP OR TLD?

19798100102103119

Comments

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,034
    mtm wrote: »
    Yeah, young absolutely. We've even done old Bond a few times: really that's what NTTD was.
    I don't think a Bond in his 70s would be significantly more interesting than that, and really NTTD was right: he shouldn't live to be that old anyway.
    I'd quite like actual Young Bond as per the books: I think that would be fun, but there's also a line of thinking that the next 007 should be younger than usual anyway. In a world where Ryan Gosling is maybe too old to open an action film, and everything that Timothée Chamalet makes earns a shedload, maybe we need a new Bond who's in his 20s or early 30s.
    echo wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    peter wrote: »

    Where NSNA takes the win is Brandauer, and his top-notch performance as Largo. He was tightly coiled, a barely in control psychotic that certainly scared me as a kid when I watched this film, and still does now.

    I know I always say it, but I almost think Connery could have sued Cubby for making the villain in his next film a young psychotic guy with blond hair called Max :D

    Mind you, he didn't really have a leg to stand on with Blofeld's white cat and a character called Q :))

    😂, very true.

    How did they get away with Blofeld's white cat and Q (these were EoN's inventions, not Fleming, nor the novel of Thunderball)?

    Beats me! I guess maybe they banked on Eon not thinking it was worth the trouble. I suppose Casino Royale had done a version of Q too so the waters had been tested.
    peter wrote: »
    Paluzzi was always in control, and that not only made her sexy, but more dangerous

    My issue is that the film isn't big enough: it doesn't feel like a sequel to Goldfinger like YOLT does- it feels like what it is: a script written before the Bond films got successful. So they should have made it crazier, and I think NSNA should have done that too.

    I think they should have done something like landed the Vulcan on a runway which rises out of the sea or something- stored it in a base under Palmerya. And make the plan less dull: maybe say they're ransoming the UK but in fact they're going to let the bomb off right where they are and create a tidal wave which destroys Florida and Cuba (then make loads of money by swooping in and rebuilding them) - and frame 007 for the explosion as revenge for Dr No and Red Grant (and Bouvar I guess)!
    Largo doesn't know this though- he thinks it's in Washington, but Blofeld kept him in the dark: when Fiona reveals this to him she kills him! Then, she tries to make her getaway in the Vulcan, but Bond (or Domino) stops it taking off and destroys it and the base. Maybe with his jetpack :D

    I dunno, maybe that's all very silly, but I wish it were sillier. Having the bombs thousands of miles away just makes it duller and reduces the personal stakes, and the ransom plot is no way as interesting or clever as Goldfinger's plan- and I want more Fiona!

    This is so astute, and a new way (for me) to look at TB. I've always found it a slog. It makes sense that it would be from a lower-key script that they more or less dusted off, so that they could continue to make a new Bond film every year.

    In a way, it's much more tonally in line with DN, simpler.

    DN to FRWL to GF to YOLT is a definite progression in terms of outlandishness. TB is the outlier.

    Thanks, yeah: in a way I think the problem is they made the films too quickly if anything, they didn't really take time to learn from their successes with GF and spot what made it a hit. You go from Oddjob, who was obviously a massive hit with his striking look, crushing golfballs, saying "Ah!" and steel-rimmed bowler, to Vargas who..er.. "doesn't do anything". That's literally his quirk: that he's boring. I mean, what were they thinking?

    TB was supposed to be the first film originally I think, and although they bolted jetpacks and things into it I think you can tell: it's in line with Dr No, as you say and feels more 50s than 60s.

    Random thought but thedove made a really good point about NSNA giving a reason for Bond to be sent to Shrublands: the PTS is such a great place to do that it's kind of mad it doesn't happen. Imagine if he'd been exposed to some deadly toxin Bouvar was smuggling or something so gets sent to Shrublands as a precaution (this is 60s Bond so he can't get badly injured or anything :D ).

    Well, to be fair, they couldn't have made YOLT without TB.

    I mean, YOLT was Dr No meets TB.

    Anyway, TB made a lot of money.

    Yeah, @mtm , take that!
  • Posts: 14,910
    A younger(ish) Bond, for many reasons, some of them stated here and elsewhere already: we've already had old Bond recently, we need a new actor that will remain a long time in the role, operatives would normally be in their prime, etc.
  • Posts: 978
    peter wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Yeah, young absolutely. We've even done old Bond a few times: really that's what NTTD was.
    I don't think a Bond in his 70s would be significantly more interesting than that, and really NTTD was right: he shouldn't live to be that old anyway.
    I'd quite like actual Young Bond as per the books: I think that would be fun, but there's also a line of thinking that the next 007 should be younger than usual anyway. In a world where Ryan Gosling is maybe too old to open an action film, and everything that Timothée Chamalet makes earns a shedload, maybe we need a new Bond who's in his 20s or early 30s.
    echo wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    peter wrote: »

    Where NSNA takes the win is Brandauer, and his top-notch performance as Largo. He was tightly coiled, a barely in control psychotic that certainly scared me as a kid when I watched this film, and still does now.

    I know I always say it, but I almost think Connery could have sued Cubby for making the villain in his next film a young psychotic guy with blond hair called Max :D

    Mind you, he didn't really have a leg to stand on with Blofeld's white cat and a character called Q :))

    😂, very true.

    How did they get away with Blofeld's white cat and Q (these were EoN's inventions, not Fleming, nor the novel of Thunderball)?

    Beats me! I guess maybe they banked on Eon not thinking it was worth the trouble. I suppose Casino Royale had done a version of Q too so the waters had been tested.
    peter wrote: »
    Paluzzi was always in control, and that not only made her sexy, but more dangerous

    My issue is that the film isn't big enough: it doesn't feel like a sequel to Goldfinger like YOLT does- it feels like what it is: a script written before the Bond films got successful. So they should have made it crazier, and I think NSNA should have done that too.

    I think they should have done something like landed the Vulcan on a runway which rises out of the sea or something- stored it in a base under Palmerya. And make the plan less dull: maybe say they're ransoming the UK but in fact they're going to let the bomb off right where they are and create a tidal wave which destroys Florida and Cuba (then make loads of money by swooping in and rebuilding them) - and frame 007 for the explosion as revenge for Dr No and Red Grant (and Bouvar I guess)!
    Largo doesn't know this though- he thinks it's in Washington, but Blofeld kept him in the dark: when Fiona reveals this to him she kills him! Then, she tries to make her getaway in the Vulcan, but Bond (or Domino) stops it taking off and destroys it and the base. Maybe with his jetpack :D

    I dunno, maybe that's all very silly, but I wish it were sillier. Having the bombs thousands of miles away just makes it duller and reduces the personal stakes, and the ransom plot is no way as interesting or clever as Goldfinger's plan- and I want more Fiona!

    This is so astute, and a new way (for me) to look at TB. I've always found it a slog. It makes sense that it would be from a lower-key script that they more or less dusted off, so that they could continue to make a new Bond film every year.

    In a way, it's much more tonally in line with DN, simpler.

    DN to FRWL to GF to YOLT is a definite progression in terms of outlandishness. TB is the outlier.

    Thanks, yeah: in a way I think the problem is they made the films too quickly if anything, they didn't really take time to learn from their successes with GF and spot what made it a hit. You go from Oddjob, who was obviously a massive hit with his striking look, crushing golfballs, saying "Ah!" and steel-rimmed bowler, to Vargas who..er.. "doesn't do anything". That's literally his quirk: that he's boring. I mean, what were they thinking?

    TB was supposed to be the first film originally I think, and although they bolted jetpacks and things into it I think you can tell: it's in line with Dr No, as you say and feels more 50s than 60s.

    Random thought but thedove made a really good point about NSNA giving a reason for Bond to be sent to Shrublands: the PTS is such a great place to do that it's kind of mad it doesn't happen. Imagine if he'd been exposed to some deadly toxin Bouvar was smuggling or something so gets sent to Shrublands as a precaution (this is 60s Bond so he can't get badly injured or anything :D ).

    Well, to be fair, they couldn't have made YOLT without TB.

    I mean, YOLT was Dr No meets TB.

    Anyway, TB made a lot of money.

    Yeah, @mtm , take that!

    Yeah, take that!

    :D

    YOLT was a sequel to TB too.
  • Posts: 1,766
    YOUNG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Posts: 15,948
    Older. I want Dalton back!
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,253
    I do a get a kick out of seeing the veteran Bond with years of experience take control of the situation effortlessly. And for Craig-Bond, years of experience quitting MI6 evidently, landing that visitor badge in Moneypenny's rubbish bin every time now.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,126
    Great thoughts on both sides and certainly interesting to see where the producers take things.

    On to another one that might provide some fun for us to consider.

    Would you rather see a future film feature Canada OR Australia?

    James Bond has yet to appear officially in either country in an adventure. During the Dalton years a few scripts featured Vancouver. I am unaware of any drafts of any adventure to feature Australia. There would be lots of interesting places in both countries to shoot in.

    Obviously they shouldn't be shoe horned in, but if there was a chance to see Bond in action in either country which would you rather see?
  • Posts: 14,910
    Really tough one. A bit of a cop out for an answer, but I'd say it would depend where in Canada and of the context. Given that Canadian characters and sometimes settings are featured in Fleming stories, I'd say Canada, for instance Quebec City.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,034
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Really tough one. A bit of a cop out for an answer, but I'd say it would depend where in Canada and of the context. Given that Canadian characters and sometimes settings are featured in Fleming stories, I'd say Canada, for instance Quebec City.

    Same as @Ludovico with one added area: Mont Tremblant specifically, and; Banff, Alberta.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,133
    Canada, definitely. Although I am biased as I've been to both and much preferred Canada as a destination. Oz is certainly full of things that can kill you more than Canada is, but that's about it. Visually more striking, culturally more interesting these days.
  • A scene in the outback would be great, but I have to choose Canada.
    I think I can agree with @Ludovico because QC is quite beautiful in a classic kind of way that would make for an interesting Bond film.
    Also a lot of nature and woodland that Bond could explore (similar to the Vermont setting of FYEO, a story where Bond passes through Canada). For example drive two hours out of Toronto and you start seeing farms and agricultural lifestyle.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,253
    Australia. This beautiful creature is screaming out for a plot inclusion in Aussie adventure Quantum of No Solace...
    cbf2d4e0cd7368b707e837dbde058110983c591d.jpg
    Creatonotos gangis, the Australian horror moth

    M: "You were supposed to be in Sydney last night. I'm afraid this unfortunate moth business has clouded your judgment. You have a job to do. I expect you on a plane this afternoon."
    Bond: "No. ...Sir. Not there. Anywhere but there, please. Their wildlife, it's..."
    M: "Leave it to the Australians. It's their mess. Let them clear it up."
    Bond: "Sir, they're not going to do anything! They let these monstrosities roam free. What if one lands... They fly, you know! They have tentacles and they fly. No - you have my resignation, sir."
    M: "We're not a country club, 007!"

    Alright, so Bond's not going to Australia ever - it has to be Canada.
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,954
    Bond should come to Australia and meet up with the Kerrigan family.
    @QBranch should get that reference. ;)

    I'd be happy with either to be honest. Canada is so vast and diverse; it would suit as a Bond locale.
    However, an Australia as a secondary location with Japan as the primary would be outstanding.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,126
    Bond came close to being assigned to Station C Canada in Thunderball, but with his fondness for water sports was able to convince M to re-assign him to Nassau.

    Then in QOS he helped a Canadian agent in Russia out at the end of the movie. Funny that they even cast a Canadian lady in the role.

    024_9-1-1024x485.png

    I could have seen her as the leading lady in a film. Maybe another bit of continuity to the Craig films that she re-appears again in a future adventure?

    As a proud Canuck I would love to see Bond finally come to the Great White North! Officially, Canada has subbed in for other snowy locales, must famously in the PTS of Spy.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 15,548
    Didn’t the Moonraker 747 crash there too?
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,605
    Canada for me.
    I've never been to either, but Canada seems more Bondian than Australia, Australia seems too vast as beautiful as it looks
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    edited May 19 Posts: 5,126
    mtm wrote: »
    Didn’t the Moonraker 747 crash there too?

    That's the official version. "Crashed in the Yukon". Still perplexed as to why they were so far up north.

    Toronto was mentioned in GE when they were trying to trace the signal of Boris while in the train.

    Is Canada they most mentioned country in the series that Bond has never visited?
  • Oft-mentioned in the novels: It's where Tania goes after FRWL, where the head of the American station is from in LALD, of course visited in FYEO. In TSWLM it's where Viv is from and where Bond is coming from. I do think he lands in Gander in GF but unsure on the whole.
  • Posts: 14,910
    thedove wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Didn’t the Moonraker 747 crash there too?

    That's the official version. "Crashed in the Yukon". Still perplexed as to why they were so far up north.

    Toronto was mentioned in GE when they were trying to trace the signal of Boris while in the train.

    Is Canada they most mentioned country in the series that Bond has never visited?

    It might be.

    I think Canada makes more sense in a spy thriller, especially a Bond movie: it's right next to the USA, it has an historical link to the UK, it has its share of glamorous places (I mentioned Quebec City), but also vast territories where you could put a villain's lair, etc.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,126
    Okay that was interesting and I was happy to see my home country getting some love!

    Through out the series Bond has had many ladies that have become allies. Some are civilians and others are agents just like him. I wonder which kind of relationship do you prefer? Give us your favourite example of that type of relationship in your comments.

    For example if I said I preferred civilian. I might highlight Bond and Tracy and their love affair but also how they team up to fight off Blofeld and stave off SPECTRE agents.

    Would you rather the leading lady character be a civilian OR a fellow agent?

    Civilian examples Honey Ryder, Tatiana Romanova, Tracy Bond, Domino, Pussy Galore, Tiffany Case, Solitaire, Melina Havelock, Octopussy, Stacey Sutton, Kara Milovy, Pam Bouvier, Natalya, Christmas Jones, Camille, Severine, Madeline Swann

    Fellow Agents Aki, Kissy, Mary Goodnight, Anya Amasova, Holly Goodhead, Wai Lin, Jinx, Vesper Lynd.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,438
    I think this question had been asked before, and it's suggested by me! @thedove 😅

    But anyway, it depends, either of those characters could work, if done right, really, that's said, you can do a lot more with a civilian character, just like an ally that helped Bond previously in the veins of Kerim Bey, Tiger Tanaka or Draco, compared to the likes of Vijay (as much as I liked his banter with Bond), Chuck Lee, or any MI6 contacts that Bond had worked with, and that's because their backgrounds were more grounded, with a field agent, you can't do anything other than to stuck him or her in that particular ground without moving anything, the character was built as it is, you can't do anything other than to improve his or her banter with Bond, and heightened up the skills and what he or she can do in the story and the plot.

    I liked me some more Tracy, for me she's the complete package, she's got it all: skillset, wit, determination, banter, chemistry, charisma, and strong characterization.

    The only time that they've hit the lightning was in Vesper Lynd given how multifaceted she was in the story and her role in the plot, but it's still not as perfect as Tracy, because we've never got to know more of her or what she can do, there are still some questions lingering to me regarding her character, so, still, there's still some bits left to be desired, but it's the closest they've got to creating an interesting dynamic they could do with an 'agent' who works with Bond other than being struck in usual, particular field, because we've seen her other angles like her connections to the villain, Le Chiffre and Quantum (and it's much more interesting in the book).

    So for me, it depends really, but if asked, I would be down to a civilian role, because you can do a lot more with the character, some variety of choices, and very complex or diverse.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,253
    Definitely the female agent, the leading lady who can kick henchman ass, the love interest that fights beside me and back to back and we both save the day together. I want that kind of romance in real life. We haven't really had that in the films, I think. Bond ends up rescuing the agent at some point, every time. (Did Bond rescue Kissy?)
  • Posts: 14,910
    Civilian. It prevents the character to be redundant to Bond (or worse, to make Bond redundant in his own movie) and it creates a more creative premise with more room for drama. Plus, I often find the "make the Bond girl a fellow agent" utterly lazy.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,034
    I'd like to see a leading lady being anything BUT a fellow agent. Lazy tropes are a trap (she's like Bond, but a woman!); the only fellow agent I believed worked was Camille.

    Otherwise I'd like to see a leading lady who is "outside the law"; inspired by Pussy Galore, Tiffany Case and Octopussy, have a leading lady who's a jewel smuggler, or the lead villain's go-to cat burglar... A woman whose heart is good, but who's also a lone wolf, and skates just outside of the law, would excite Mr. Bond, I'm sure...
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,605
    Civilian.

    I think it makes thinks more interesting and you don't have to work as hard to have Bond be a great agent. Plus a civilian takes the place of the audience in a way, similar to how Mathis was explaining the card game to Vesper in Casino, it was a subtle way to explain the rules to the viewer
  • Civilian, but helpful in some way, and swept up in the whole thing. Like a Stacey without the screaming.
  • Posts: 12,348
    I’m more interested in seeing civilians as allies, as I think it allows for more unique characterizations and contrasts from Bond. There’s no reason a female ally can’t be somewhere in between being at least as capable as Bond and a damsel in distress.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,126
    QBranch wrote: »
    Definitely the female agent, the leading lady who can kick henchman ass, the love interest that fights beside me and back to back and we both save the day together. I want that kind of romance in real life. We haven't really had that in the films, I think. Bond ends up rescuing the agent at some point, every time. (Did Bond rescue Kissy?)

    He didn't rescue Kissy, you can argue that Kissy rescued Bond by swimming back to get Tiger. He needed to rescue Anya, Holly, Wai Lin, and Jinx. These are the examples of female agents that I can think of, someone mentioned Camille as an agent, I don't think Bond really rescues her until she's had her revenge and is waiting for death to come to her.
  • Posts: 14,910
    peter wrote: »
    I'd like to see a leading lady being anything BUT a fellow agent. Lazy tropes are a trap (she's like Bond, but a woman!); the only fellow agent I believed worked was Camille.

    Otherwise I'd like to see a leading lady who is "outside the law"; inspired by Pussy Galore, Tiffany Case and Octopussy, have a leading lady who's a jewel smuggler, or the lead villain's go-to cat burglar... A woman whose heart is good, but who's also a lone wolf, and skates just outside of the law, would excite Mr. Bond, I'm sure...

    This.

    I always wanted to have a cat burglar Bond girl, although comparisons with Catwoman would of course be brought up and most likely they would not be favourable.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited May 22 Posts: 3,011
    Civilian. For the contrast with Bond and the potential to reveal aspects of his character that'd probably remain unsaid with a fellow agent who already knew the game and the stakes.
Sign In or Register to comment.