How "classic" is not shaving?

124»

Comments

  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    I'd like to ask the beard haters here one question: If the beard scene amounts to less than five minutes of screen time, will you still hate the movie just because he had a beard?
  • edited February 2012 Posts: 306
    First if all, Bain, what do you want everyone to do for the next 9 months, come on here and just repeat that this is going to be the best Bond film ever over and over again? How exciting. What would separate the fans from the SF publicity people? Secondly, of course it's trivial- everything Bond related is trivial, he's a fictional character. And finally, I think you're somewhat missing the larger picture. For some of us, the stubble is just one more unBondian element in what seems to be a slow but steady erosion or stripping away of the unique 007 persona - the small but important things that keep him from being like every other action hero and make instead the longest-running franchise in film history. We may be in the minority here, but that's how we feel. I will stay away from the very tender area of DC's looks, but the beard doesn't help any, and a brooding grim humourless hero too angst-ridden or rebellious to shave doesn't exactly spell a return to a "classic" Bond film, even if just for 30-40 minutes.

    Listen, I'm just as excited as anyone to see a new Bond film, but so far some things have me a little concerned - maybe the sheer pedestrian nature (literally) of the photos so far and the lack of travel most of all - and I will be very glad if and when I'm proved wrong.

    Meanwhile, these boards are for conjecture, hopes and fears - right?

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 I've missed you all.
    Posts: 28,480
    BAIN123 wrote:
    He did say: "and his wife?" to M in the scene at the Hemmingway house. The rest of the time he doesn't mention either. Only briefly when Pam asks him where Felix is does he bark "hospital".

    As for Dan surviving on gadgets what about the defibulator? That's a gadget isn't it lol?

    It's technically a medical apparatus, no gadget.
  • Posts: 306
    Agent - he has it in London and he has it in Shanghai - that's more than five minutes. But I do understand that we don't know the context yet.

    The question is does the context change my point above.
  • edited February 2012 Posts: 11,175
    I didn't mean to sound like I was whining but it just seems a bit...premature... for people to start worrying. To tell the truth I'm a bit unsure myself especially when I hear quotes like "this is going to be the most serious Bond film ever". Bond has always had a certain amount of "quirkiness" and fun to it. That has been what has set it apart and made it endure.

    Nonetheless we don't know the full story yet. It seems a bit harsh to start worrying when we've only just seen one proper still. Just take it as it comes. For all you know you (and I for that matter) may be very suprised come November. Even if it's not what some of us may expect from a Bond film chances are its going to be a good film nonetheless.
  • Posts: 6,601
    I am not sure, your quote about the most serious film is correct. From what I read, they are going for lighter.
  • Posts: 11,175
    Germanlady wrote:
    I am not sure, your quote about the most serious film is correct. From what I read, they are going for lighter.

    I'm going by what the celebrity column in The Sun said so it's hardly the most reliable source I suppose ;)
  • edited February 2012 Posts: 6,601
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    I am not sure, your quote about the most serious film is correct. From what I read, they are going for lighter.

    I'm going by what the celebrity column in The Sun said so it's hardly the most reliable source I suppose ;)

    I have read that lighter touch more often then just once - so, I suppose it MIGHT ne more reliable.

    Maybe it would make sense to apply a certain logic to our musings.
    The prods by now perfectly KNOW what is expected after QOS. Why would they go for something, that so obviously is not popular? Above all, they want to make a ton of money with it (and they NEED to as well), so its rather save to assume, they try to not repeat the mistakes of QOS, starting with the quick editing to make it overly serious. My guess is, that they will come up with something, that has enough Bond elements plus an exciting story line. A bit of trust, folks...

  • Posts: 306
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I didn't mean to sound like I was whining but it just seems a bit...premature... for people to start worrying. To tell the truth I'm a bit unsure myself especially when I hear quotes like "this is going to be the most serious Bond film ever". Bond has always had a certain amount of "quirkiness" and fun to it. That has been what has set it apart and made it endure.

    Nonetheless we don't know the full story yet. It seems a bit harsh to start worrying when we've only just seen one proper still. Just take it as it comes. For all you know you (and I for that matter) may be very suprised come November. Even if it's not what some of us may expect from a Bond film chances are its going to be a good film nonetheless.

    Fair points all.

    You're right that no matter how much it deviates from my ideal Bond it will almost certainly be an entertaining quality film. The script is by all accounts very solid and the cast raises the bar for the series, so...some good portents as well...

  • Posts: 80
    Reading some of these comments, makes me want to laugh at how petty some of the comments have become. If today we saw pictures of Connery going Japanese before seeing the film, which one of you would be whining about how unlike Bond he looked, what about his jowley fat Bond incarnation, and eyebrows thicker than Craig’s stubble Bond, I don’t remember Bond described as wearing a toupee or having brown eyes either. Did Moore ever order or drink a martini, was his hair black, Dalton’s Count Dracula Bond, how about Brosnan running around gunning down everything in sight. The rose tinted glasses need cleaning me thinks as Craig Bond isn’t any worse than what’s gone before.
  • Dalton ,Count Dracula Bond ?

    how dare you :|
  • edited February 2012 Posts: 2,558
    "So, just in time for the 50th anniversary, as a tribute to the fans, instead of the time tested Classic image of bond we get Unshaven? "Classic Bond" my ass. When is Bond going to "get on with his job"? I'm done with the gritty and personal take on 007. I was done with it after License to kill."

    You can still have classic Bond in a more gritty, character driven Bond film. For me, CR was pretty classic Bond except for the fact that it was missing the gunbarrel at the beginning. I am getting a bit sick of the revenge stories though.
  • Posts: 11,425
    hisqos wrote:
    Reading some of these comments, makes me want to laugh at how petty some of the comments have become. If today we saw pictures of Connery going Japanese before seeing the film, which one of you would be whining about how unlike Bond he looked, what about his jowley fat Bond incarnation, and eyebrows thicker than Craig’s stubble Bond, I don’t remember Bond described as wearing a toupee or having brown eyes either. Did Moore ever order or drink a martini, was his hair black, Dalton’s Count Dracula Bond, how about Brosnan running around gunning down everything in sight. The rose tinted glasses need cleaning me thinks as Craig Bond isn’t any worse than what’s gone before.

    Very amusing. I can see a bit of Dracula in Dalts as well. That widow's peak.

    I don't have problem with Craig's look. I think he convinces as Bond, but I would like some humour - real humour. He's too damn serious all the time. Bond makes us laugh not because he's a clown or a comic act but because of the wit and (here it comes again) insouciance he shows at moments of danger/high tension. That's what we love about him - his back is against the wall, outnumbered 20 to 1 by goons and he still has time for a witticism (never his last). The other thing Bond should do (in my opinion) is move gracefully and (most of the time) make things look easy and effortless. Look at the way Connery moves in the films - he has thought about it a lot - and it is like watching a dancer. His movements have a real grace to them. It's one of the reasons he was cast. Craig actually isn't bad at this, but they need to work at it a bit more.

    Any way, that's my view. And I agree with VeryBond - it's the gradual stripping away of all these details that is making Bond more and more everyday. For me Brozza was the low point. He looked like some dim good looking guy of the street without an ounce of charisma or sense of what he was doing. Dalton has pressence but was very understated. I liked him a lot but also understand why he perhaps didn't set the box office on fire. Craig is a step in the right direction, but they need to realise we've had enough of his sulking broodiness.
  • St_GeorgeSt_George Shuttling Drax's lovelies to the space doughnut - happy 40th, MR!
    Posts: 1,699
    Frankly, I'd prefer it if Bond wasn't unshaven in a film for any length of time; and yet, having said that, until I see the film in question I really can't draw a conclusion.

    We don't know the reason yet why Bond is unshaven - and neither should we know the reason yet (it may relate to a major plot point that works very well for all we know). There's little point in condemning a Bond character's look from a few grainy images etc prior to seeing the film - that just smacks of fan-boy obsessiveness for me. A little consideration and patience isn't a bad thing... ;)
  • Posts: 6,601
    yes
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 4,914
    Why isn't he shaven? EMP.
  • Posts: 6,601
    echo wrote:
    Why isn't he shaven? EMP.

    Well, he is NOW. What's EMP?

  • edited February 2012 Posts: 172
    Bounine wrote:

    You can still have classic Bond in a more gritty, character driven Bond film. For me, CR was pretty classic Bond except for the fact that it was missing the gunbarrel at the beginning. I am getting a bit sick of the revenge stories though.

    Interesting point ,now since you mention it, i try to resume what plot already done before B23 (correct me if i'm wrong)

    -facing Megalomaniacal villains : 14 times (DN,TB,GF.YOLT,OHMSS,DAF,LALD,TMWTGG,TSWLM,MR,AVTAK,GE,TND,DAD)

    -Revenge plot:3 times (DAF,LTK,QOS)

    -Bond facing his past:3 times (TND,TWINE,QOS)

    -Mission finding valuable properties: 5 times (FRWL,MR,FYEO,OP,GE)

    -Mission finding relatively not OTT criminals:2 times (TLD, CR)

    -Mission protecting key persons : 3 times (FRWL, TLD, TWINE)

    based on my version of statistic of plot "revenge plot" only 3 times happened in the series, megalomaniacal villains got 14 times, what else the producers can do? do you guys have any suggestions what plot should franchise make in the future? make Bond finding his cousins? or finding his illegitimate son/daughter?
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    edited February 2012 Posts: 7,854
    chuck007 wrote:
    -Bond facing his past:3 times (TND,TWINE,QOS)

    Huh? When did he face his past in TWINE? You could have stacked GE in there, though (him fighting Trevelyn and all).
  • Posts: 172


    chuck007 wrote:
    -Bond facing his past:3 times (TND,TWINE,QOS)

    Huh? When did he face his past in TWINE? You could have stacked GE in there, though (him fighting Trevelyn and all).

    oops sorry about the mistake

    :D
  • edited February 2012 Posts: 940
    chuck007 wrote:
    -Revenge plot:3 times (DAF,LTK,QOS)

    -Bond facing his past:3 times (TND,TWINE,QOS)

    based on my version of statistic of plot "revenge plot" only 3 times happened in the series, megalomaniacal villains got 14 times

    To be fair, DAD also linked in with facing his imprisonment past in Korea and revenge. It was personal. "The same person who set me up then has just set me up again, so i'm going ARFTA him." Thats revenge.

    DAF never seemed a revenge plot to me. It should have been after OHMSS, but there was no reference to Tracy, even in the PTS when Bond is after Blofeld (which he had been after in the previous films anyway). Otherwise you could say FYEO was about revenge with Blofeld (the PTS) which isn't entiely accurate.

    QOS seemed like a revenge movie on paper (M even thought he was after revenge but it wasn't the case). Yes, Bond sought answers but the whole point of the movie is Bond found what he was looking for, and it wasn't through killing every person who had links to Vesper. People often presume it was a revenge movie, it actually wasn't.


    As for this thread - yes, in an ideal situation, I'd prefer more time with Bond shaven, but he hasn't got the beard for the whole of Skyfall, which indicates there's a reason for it being there. Lets wait for that reason. I'm sure it is perfectly logical for a secret agent in the context of this movie.

    And I don't entirely agree with the common argument of "That was years ago, Bond has to move with the times now." To a degree, yes, but if we go too far that way with other things we will lose all grasp of what makes Bond truly stand out from all other action heroes. Its a formula of balance, some things must always stay consistent. We musn't forget that.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 4,914
    Germanlady wrote:
    echo wrote:
    Why isn't he shaven? EMP.

    Well, he is NOW. What's EMP?

    Electromagnetic pulse.

  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited February 2012 Posts: 4,914
    slyfox wrote:
    DAF never seemed a revenge plot to me. It should have been after OHMSS, but there was no reference to Tracy, even in the PTS when Bond is after Blofeld (which he had been after in the previous films anyway). Otherwise you could say FYEO was about revenge with Blofeld (the PTS) which isn't entiely accurate.

    I remember Peter Hunt saying at some point that he felt that the movie OHMSS happened before the movie YOLT (preserving the order of the novels), which is why there is no YOLT reference when Bond goes through the items in his desk. (It doesn't explain the ninja in the title sequence, though.)

    Along those same lines, DAF could exist in an alternate universe, one without OHMSS. Connery's Bond could merely be hot on Blofeld's trail following the events of the movie YOLT.

    Of course later the decision was made to include references to OHMSS in TSWLM, FYEO, and LTK, bringing it back into the character's life. But at the time of DAF the intent may have been to erase OHMSS's existence.
Sign In or Register to comment.