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
When I originally came up with the idea for the interview thread, this is what I was hoping for. Thank you to you and @Creasy47 for making this such an enjoyable read.
And thank you all for the compliments. I have but one set of questions to complete. I'm going to talk about my encounters with aliens and the Lewinski affair.
"13.) In 2012, we celebrated the 50th Anniversary of 007. Where do you think we'll be in another 50 years in terms of James Bond?
As long as money can be made, they’ll probably continue to put out these Bond films. I have stopped worrying that the world will have changed too much for James Bond to be relevant any more. Seeing how they continue to breathe new life, successfully I might add, into Sherlock Holmes and other fairly ‘old’ series, it wouldn’t surprise me if they can treat the Bond films the same way. Naturally the Benedict Cumberbatch Sherlock uses tools and modes of communication that weren’t around in Conan Doyle’s days. But nobody cares. Besides, it’s mobile phones, GPS and computers everything in the Bond films too and in such they have strayed very far away from Fleming’s days. Furthermore, Bond is about so much more than just a collection of innovative technological playthings. As long as they keep the man and his manners intact, the world can change and both Bond and we, as fans, shall adapt. That said, if they call it a day somewhere in the next two or three decades, I might be relieved in some sense. It saddens me for instance that SirHenryLeeChaChing wasn’t able to see Spectre. I’d feel happy to know that I survived Bond.
14.) Share your dream Bond film: director, soundtrack, cast, plot, set pieces, whatever you'd like to share.
Returning to a point I’ve already made several times, I’d love to see a Christopher Nolan Bond film. I’m well aware that this is rapidly becoming an unpopular idea as more and more folks are lured to the dark side, convinced as they have no point in being that Nolan’s films are emotionally cold and too cerebral. They’re quite obviously not. In his first feature, Following, Nolan already displays a deeper emotional layer in his characters – just not in as on-the-nose a fashion as what we’re used to seeing in films. Nolan doesn’t take half measures when fleshing out his characters, he merely provides a more sophisticated form of vulnerability and learning to cope with one’s inner demons. In that way, I don’t think he’s too different from even Fleming himself. Bond’s tortured soul became obvious in the later novels, yet not so much through Fleming’s words as through several carefully placed read-between-the-lines hints. If you compare Inception’s Dom to the James Bond of YOLT (the novel), the differences are few. So I bet that if Nolan could collaborate with someone on a Bond script and then direct this material, he could give us a smart yet still very entertaining Bond film, comparable to Inception and The Dark Knight.
Michael Giacchino has been on my Bond radar since M:I 3 and The Incredibles. He mixes ‘old’ with ‘new’ and can stick to formula without sounding like he’s merely ripping off what was done before. There’s a sleek freshness in his music that defies boredom, even if it feels recognizable. I recall a modest appreciation for Arnold’s music in 1997, purely based on his obvious throw-backs to the Barry years. But because his compositions were far less sophisticated and smooth than Barry’s, there was no widespread appreciation. Then again, there never will be, as half of us, Bond fans, wants the Barry sounds back, whereas the other half craves something new. Because I think that Giacchino could perhaps play at the intersection of both persuasions and still deliver something great, I’d let him try it. Another choice would be Henry Jackman, whose scores for Kingsman: The Secret Service and X-Men: First Class bring a lot of post-John Barry spice to modern spy movies that nevertheless harken back to the ‘60s Bonds with obvious deference; Jackman’s music successfully fuses current Zimmeresque touches with classic spy music.
Apart from what I explained in my first set of questions (about the next Bond film) I have no specific desires regarding plot and such. I’d love to see them drain the Fleming Bond novels further, because there is still so much quality material to be found in them. As for the cast, I really want Craig back for at least one more Bond. Would be a shame to let him go now. I always want to be surprised as far as villains and Bond girls are concerned so I’m not even going to try and find suitable candidates. They seem to be doing fine in those departments anyway. But I insist that Kleinman stays on for the opening titles! I tasted keen disappointment in 2008 when QOS resorted to absolutely terrible video game level OT.
15.) This doesn't have to pertain to your favorite and least favorite films, but which of the movies is easiest for you to rewatch? Hardest to rewatch?
Surprisingly enough, the one Bond film I find infinitely rewatchable is QOS. It’s not my favorite Bond film at all, yet because of its short feature length and extremely fast pace, I could sit through this one almost every day if so desired. I experience half the film as a blur anyway, so perhaps I’m still trying to find more things to better understand.
The hardest one to rewatch is YOLT, even if it’s not my least favorite in the series. But the film constantly hits me in the face, and quite hard I might add, with its many weak plot moves. Music, locations, cinematography, effects, production design… I have no complaints. But the film’s plot just doesn’t work for me. At least AVTAK, TMWTGG and TWINE seem to compensate their plot weaknesses better for me than YOLT.
16.) Tell us about yourself. (Of course, if you don't want to share anything too personal, you needn't.) What are your hobbies, outside of Bond interests, etc.?
Most members know me quite well by now. I’ve been on this forum since ’05, ergo I’m an open book I guess. In summary, I’m an exceptionally good looking Jedi Knight who dresses up as Batman at night and teaches chemistry and physics during the day. My mission-in-life has become to beat Creationism to a pulp – Ken Ham included – but I won’t succeed because human stupidity, as Einstein proclaimed, is infinite. Besides that, I love this forum. And I love you all.
17.) What is your favorite non-Bond film, TV show, and novel?
My favorite films:
3 – Heat (M. Mann)
2 – Blade Runner (R. Scott)
1 – 2001: A Space Odyssey (S. Kubrick)
My favorite TV show – not animated:
3 – 24
2 – The Walking Dead
1 – Sherlock
My favorite TV show – animated:
3 – Batman: The Animated Series
2 – Futurama
1 – The Simpsons
My favorite novels:
3 – Anything by Arthur C. Clarke (especially 2001: A Space Odyssey)
2 – Anything by H.P. Lovecraft (especially The Shadow Over Innsmuth)
1 – Anything by Isaac Asimov (especially The Robots Of Dawn)
18.) Favorite artist, band, or genre(s) of music?
Overall, I prefer film music. Listening to film music consumes about 95 % of my music listening time. John Barry, John Williams, Jerry Goldsmith, …
As for bands and such:
3 – U2
2 – Roxette
1 – Enigma
19.) You can meet any three people to have ever existed, who are they and why?
3 – The guy who killed that other guy and started WW I in the process of doing so. I’d tell him not to do it, explaining the chain reaction of war, economic disaster, a crueler war, a cold war, terrorism, oil wars, more terrorism, global terrorism, even more wars and Donald Trump. So put that gun away, son, and let us catch a silent movie. Don’t mess up the future of mankind across the globe…
2 – Dr. Isaac Asimov, clever scientist, great science fiction author and an inspiration for me, a teacher. Reading his science books, I marvel at how ‘easy’ he can make things sound. His explanations of difficult scientific topics defy all didactic methods taught us in school, yet the clarity and transparency he brings is exactly what I should have had when I was in school. Science was never such a delight, such a simple game of logic, as when discussed by Dr. Asimov.
1 – Audrey Hepburn, and I’d ask her to marry me (and quit smoking). She was a gorgeous, wise and talented woman whose views on life continue to impress me. Also, there’s the “Audrey Style”, and it’s a unique thing.
20.) Let's end this with something random: I hand you a box and a check for $100,000, but you may only select one. The box may contain anything you can possibly imagine, from a rock to a private island that will forever be yours in Italy, from a lollipop to a check for $1,000,000, and you will only know what is inside if you select the box. Which do you choose and why?
Whatever I choose, in one universe I have option A, in the other I have option B, so both work fine for me. (That’s how Hugh Everett III ‘solved’ the Shrödinger Cat paradox.) All Joking aside though, I’d go for the $100,000 I think. It won’t buy me a house in this country, but I’d use it for that 7 week trip to Japan I keep putting off.
Thanks for reading this interview these past weeks and thanks to @Creasy47 for hosting the interview."
Was a pleasure to interview you, very in-depth and enjoyable! Also, 'Heat' AND 'Blade Runner' in your Top 3? You're a genius. I don't know if I've seen you comment on it, but I'm interested in your thoughts on the sequel. You were the one who set me on the right track of which edition I should see first when I finally got around to seeing 'Blade Runner' for the first time a few years back!
Thank you! I'm happy you enjoy it.
I'm going to keep my eye out for the next person to interview. To allow this thread to move at a nice pace, I'm only selecting people who have signed up and still take part on a slightly regular basis.
I'm sorry I took my time as I did, but at least I finished the task so I guess it's a mission accomplished for me. Do I get to bed the Bond girl now? ;-)
@Thunderfinger, you a fan of the Clarke, man?
No Bond film death rays, either.
After such a truly great and wonderful interview, how do you follow that up @Creasy47.
Great work guys, any news on what happens next. Be good if this thread didn't stall for too long.
1.) How did you become interested in James Bond?
I have no recollection of where I met James Bond. I was around three or four, if my maths checks out. At that time I used to watch three things religiously. ‘Raiders’, the incredible, ‘Carry On Screaming’ and any Bond film I’d been lucky enough to record on VHS; sometimes two squeezed onto a Long Play VHS. That was the genesis of my love of Bond, a quasi-religious devotion to these little VHS tapes that I had decorated with my own hand-drawn labels.
The first very specific memory I have, outside the general haze of cars, guns, stunts and women, was the UK television premiere of AVTAK. Thanks to the internet I was able to pinpoint the exact date. Wednesday, January 31st 1990. I had turned six several weeks earlier. It was a standard evening - bed at eight, but only after polishing off a school book in the presence of my Mum. I say it was standard, it was anything but, because in the back of my mind I was readying myself for an evening sans Bond; probably staring at the fish tank next to the bed and listening for the distant echo of Grace Jones slipping onto Roger Moore. Then everything changed…
Whatever nuance I’d managed to inject into, Griffin Pirate Stories’ ‘Roderick the Red’, it was enough for my mother to declare I had read it ‘well’. She’d seen the light and Bond was a ‘go’. That evening I would savour the most bizarre of all Bond films. And that is the beginning of the officially verified chain of memories that would lead to thirty years of obsession.
2.) Of course with any high points in the series, we all have a low point. What are some of the low points for you in the EON series of James Bond films? Also, why do you feel that way?
While I can acknowledge missteps, poor creative decisions and even severe lapses in quality, on the whole the series thus far has weathered every conceivable storm pretty well imo. It pains me to see some of the vitriol directed EON’s way, particularly at Barbara. Anyhow, with that being said, you should take most of my ‘low points’ with a pinch of salt, because in context they are reasonably minor.
So, to low point number one. Anyone who is relatively familiar with me on the forums will probably know that I don’t rank the films. Certainly not the entire canon. My tastes are too mood driven and my overall outlook too positive to throw any one film under the bus. I genuinely don’t dislike a single picture and believe they all add to Bond tapestry. However, for the purposes of this question I should reveal details of an experiment that took place on a gloriously sunny afternoon in a Wimbledon pub last summer. I was several pints into a drinking session when a friend insisted on determining my least favourite Bond film; I’d refused to make that call on several occasions. Through a series of convoluted head to heads, and after several more drinks, we finally arrived at a singular film that lay bottom of the pack. That film was QoS.
Now, I don’t hate QoS, nor do consider it to be a bad film, but something in this elaborate drink-fuelled experiment rang true. On a personal level, and this is concerning someone whose cinematic experiences began with GE, QoS is still my biggest disappointment. CR changed the landscape of the canon in a way that hadn’t been done since OHMSS, but unlike its predecessor, CR paved the way for a bold new world of Bond. The appetite was there, in a way it hadn’t been in ‘69, and it heralded the potential for a series of films remarkably different from those that had gone before.
With that in mind and with expectations at an all time high, my overriding feeling was that QoS categorically failed to reach the heights of CR, right across the board, and I will never be able to shake the profound impact it initially had on me. I wanted to love it, I needed to love it, but to paraphrase Dr. Kanaga, ‘I gave it every break possible… it wasn’t even close’.
In hindsight I can watch the film, as l can the whole canon, with a sense of perspective. I can appreciate its qualities, of which there are many, but it remains the disappointment of the series for me personally. I understand for many this will seem ludicrous next to certain other much-maligned entries, but I guess, quite obviously, it all boils down to experience and expectation. I was unaware of the context and relationship between OHMSS and DAF as a child. I’d seen them and loved them, both, and to learn of the circumstances surrounding this era further down the line added much needed perspective, but on an emotional level the way those films resonated with me was deep-seated. I genuinely love both for entirely different reasons.
Likewise with DAD, there was a certain expectation surrounding the Brosnan films. Never was there a sense that these films would break new ground. Despite superficial posturing about the girls, they were simply distilling the bare essentials and repackaging them. You knew what you were getting and the end product was largely as expected. For that reason I find it hard to get on their back and as popcorn entertainment they’re a blast. The one true atrocity of the era, which will come as no surprise to anyone, is the parasurfing segment. It’s the only unforgivable element of the series in my book, so you can chalk that up as low-point number two.
Low-point number three (for the record these aren’t hierarchical) would be the McClory debacle. Before I briefly detail why I believe it to be a low point, it should be said that every fan should educate themselves on the circumstances surrounding the relationship between Fleming and McClory, Bryce, Whittingham et al. Not only is it genuinely fascinating, but I think it’s important, as Bond fans, to understand the whole affair as best we can. For a kick-off I don’t believe McClory was the devil incarnate, I actually think he started out as a well meaning, relatively astute, businessman, if a little pugnacious. But it was the evolution of his greed and delusions of grandeur that quite rightly paint him as the bastard of the piece. I do believe him to be partially responsible for the psychological and physical trauma that led to a naive Fleming’s untimely demise, and his treatment of Whittingham was disgusting. The spectre of his actions hung over the films for many decades. I’m glad the issue is finally resolved, but his belligerence casts a large shadow.
3.) With SP finally gracing theaters and now being released on blu-ray/DVD release, what were your overall thoughts on it? Was it worth the three year wait? What're your likes, dislikes, and things you may change?
You certainly won't find me in the bracket that chalks it up as a crime against humanity. Is it one the great Bond films? No. But it has enough swagger to keep me invested and it's tonally very interesting.
Likes:
Atmosphere. It's a slightly unnerving film, at once a surreal, nightmarish vision, juxtaposed with a lightness of touch and a Craig-Bond with a real devil-may-care attitude.
Cinematography. Not Deakins MK:II, but a concerted effort to offer up something fresh. It looks like no other Bond movie, which to me is a huge positive. It seems to have had a marmite-effect. I sit firmly in the pro-Van Hoytema camp. Some of the framing and composition is exquisite.
Q. Q's introduction in SF is arguably the best scene between Whishaw and Craig, but the rest of the film never really capitalised on the promise of that brilliant little exchange. Instead the next time we see him he’s dressed like a Topshop model and seems peculiarly cold; that frisson of energy between the two has abated. It didn't help that a lot of his dialogue was expositional, tech-heavy blah, blah, blah...
So I was pleasantly surprised when SP managed to recapture that energy and pepper it throughout.
Song/Titles - Sorry, it works for me.
Dislikes:
Snow Chase: I had high hopes for this sequence but it fell flat. It falls foul of a very simple rule. Don't be explicit with your choreography. All these sequences have to be meticulously planned, but the best and most successful sequences are usually those that appear organic. They aren't linear; they have moments of apparent spontaneity that shift the action unexpectedly, keeping the audience on the edge of their seat.
The snow chase fails at this. It's linear and most problematically the action is telegraphed. When you see a plane dropping into a narrow tree-lined passageway you know its wings are coming off. When you see a plane hurtling towards a barn you don't need to cut away to silence, it’s clearly about to crash through the other side. It’s all a bit route one.
Things I’d change:
I’d have liked them to erect a rig in Zocalo square for some of the higher altitude helicopter shots. I don’t find the effects-heavy close-up and mid-shots particularly effective.
As above - I’d re-choreograph the snow chase. Bond moving from vehicle to vehicle in pursuit.
I’d remove the scene with Bond and Tanner on the Thames. It’s some of the worst expositional dialogue in the series.
I’d remove Hinx’s final line. It was the same gag uttered by ‘Q’ earlier in the film. Pointless and ineffective.
I’d re-calibrate the Swann MI6 scene so it doesn’t appear to be so overtly, ‘damsel in distress’. I actually like the visuals and set up around the rest of it. It’s bizarre.
I’d scrap the final shot of them driving off in the DB5. I made my feelings quite clear on the DB5 post-SF. The shot is supposed to be some sort of bombastic fanfare, but if I’m being completely honest it made me cringe. It is totally lacking and undercuts the relatively sombre ending. I have to worry about anyone who actually bought that. It left me feeling cold.
4.) What were your overall thoughts on Mendes' return? Did he deliver, and how would you compare it to Skyfall?
I think he delivered an interesting film. I prefer it to SF, simply because I feel the latter unravels once Silva is apprehended. SP pushes forward and is paced better. If you don’t buy Blofeld then I can see why you’d struggle to maintain interest, but I personally love the scenes at the Moroccan compound and have yet to be less than excited by them with each viewing. SF has some absolutely superb moments, but I find it juggles a little too much and contradicts itself from time to time, where SP is more streamlined. SF certainly has moments that are superior to SF. As a two film package I think it will be something discussed in fine detail over the next few decades.
5.) What would you like to see story wise with Bond 25? And what more do you think Daniel Craig can bring to the role? Any thoughts on the at-times rumored back-to-back shooting, is it something like you'd like to see? If, for some reason, Daniel doesn't return, who would you like to see take over?
I wrote an outline for a potential Bond 25 post-SP, in between other scripts. I like it; others won't. It's not your average Bond. We don't see 007 until post-credits and the first act proper (and part of the second) is quite a slow burn, more akin to OHMSS. The action is limited and we see Bond in a light we rarely have before. His struggle is in the here and now, rather than with past demons, so you could say more CR than the three that followed. Madeleine is back, but does not function in the way your usual Bond girl would. Her fate is something I have not seen hypothesised on here anywhere. I imagine EON would veto it, but I'd like to see it. That’s the basic thrust of what I’d personally want in B25.
As for what Dan can bring, it absolutely depends on the story. What I have in my mind is finality. I’d have him go to the edge.
I’ve no interest in back-to-back shooting. I don’t think Bond should ever require it. Each film should be standalone, however potentially far-reaching the narrative might be. The idea of back-to-back implies stories that are too interconnected to be individual, a part one and a part two. POTC 2+3. Matrix 2+3. Never as good as the first because the directors’ focal point is constantly shifting and resolutions are left to fester until further down the line, usually with underwhelming consequences. Get one film made and well.
6.) What are your thoughts on each of the actors to play Bond? Also, who is your favorite? Least favorite?
I’ll try and be as succinct as I can on these, as I don’t want to bore people with the usual platitudes. Apologies if any of this now constitutes the usual platitudes.
Connery: what can you say about the man that hasn't already been said? Genuinely, I can't offer up anything original. The guy was/is a Titan.
Lazenby: If push came to shove, Lazenby would be bottom of the pile for me. Yes, he stars in arguably the best film in the series and, no, he is not terrible by any means, but I feel his performance is more by accident than design. There’s very little going on between the ears and behind the eyes, which is probably why he inadvertently pulls off the 'vulnerability' many speak of. He's physically capable, but so are many blokes. I think you have to bring something else to the party as Bond and I don't feel George really did that. He'd have made a great Milk Tray man.
Moore: My personal favourite Bond. Not the closest to Fleming [no shit] but he’s the actor who gives me the most joy. Roger’s gift is that you can see he revels in the nonsense of it all and if you’re on his wavelength that translates directly back. He was the ‘Superman’ Bond that Dalton spoke of, but while I agree with Dalton to some extent, I think it’s a little disingenuous. He only pushed it as far as Tim, but in the opposite direction. Horses for courses, I guess. Roger developed his vision, with the help of Gilbert, into a quasi-fantastical, super-spy, who would breeze through a film like the whole affair was water off a double-taking pigeon’s back. I don’t mind that, because the films were dripping with quality; production design, cinematography, score… Cubby found a new lease of life post TMWTGG and I would count the rest of Roger’s tenure as being exceptional in their execution. Even AVTAK, despite the outpouring of vitriol fired its way. Ok, shagging Grace Jones at 57 is comparable to a bad porno, but it’s a small blotch on an otherwise largely untainted CV.
I don’t trust people who actively dislike Moore. It’s similar to when people tell me they’re religious. I’m not sure we can fully understand each other. Soz.
Dalton: I would guess that TLD is one of my most watched Bond movies, I've probably seen it somewhere between 80-100 times over the last few decades, so that should likely tell you something about my feeling towards Broody McBroodface. I love Dalton, I do, he seems like a guy who put his heart and soul into the character, but was perhaps a little late to the party. He’s the guy with the beautifully eclectic DJ set who turns up to the house party at 4am when everyone is smacked off their tits and don’t give a toss that he’s spent ages tenaciously crafting it. So in his next film he spikes everyone’s drinks and turns them against each other, before kicking the shit out of the chief hipster who copped off with his mate’s missus. I’m not going to go over old ground as this topic has been done to death, but in the cold light of day I rate TLD exceptionally highly, with LTK not quite reaching the same heights. On a superficial level his look is all wrong in the latter.
Brosnan: My cinematic Bond. Like Moore, Brosnan revels in the thrill of it. That works for me. I don’t feel like waxing lyrical as it seems to court an unpalatable level of hate. All I’ll say is, I love Brosnan.
Craig: An actor who brought with him an energy that is palpable. A bit of a thug at times, but he’s eased into the role’s demand for sophistication. He’s never going to be on the level of the other candidates in this department, but while he lacks a little elan, he more than makes up for it with his craft. The Vesper death scene is possibly my favourite in the series and it’s all down to Craig selling it. Eat your heart out, Laz.
7.) What is your absolute favorite Bond film and why? What is your least favorite and why does it sit at the bottom of your ranking?
TSWLM: I bloody hate this question, but as I’m categorically not going to give you a ‘least’ favourite, I’ll begrudgingly offer up an entry clinging to the apex. Ground-breaking stunt, classic henchman, Atlantis, insane car, Bond in uniform, Oscar-worthy production design, Bond 77, Barbara Bach, ‘Where’s Fekkesh?’, General Gogol, the largest sound-stage ever built, Shane Rimmer, ‘When one is in Egypt…’, thunderous finale, Caroline Munro, ‘Keeping the British end up’. The list goes on… pure unadulterated fun, it’s Bond and beyond.
8.) What are some of your thoughts on the other areas of Bond: Favorite novel? Favorite games? Favorite song and soundtrack?
Novel: MR is a classic. For my wife’s (then girlfriend) birthday a couple of years back, we went to Deal for the weekend and took in the various sites along the coast (Kingsdown and St. Margarets). It was only when we returned and a mate blabbed about the Bondian connection that she realised the romantic weekend was just a beautifully executed ruse. Mwahaha! It’s a perfectly paced, wonderfully realised story with an excellent villain and a cracking Bond girl in, Brand. Perhaps it’s because of the pan-european and international flavour of the other novels that marks MR out as being distinctly British. Either way, I love it. All I can say is, if you haven’t read it, why not?
I also have a real soft spot for TMWTGG. It’s slight, but a decent little bit of pulp. Likewise, with DAF and TSWLM. I’ve come to realise that the books I read most are those furthest from their cinematic counterpart.
[NB. There isn’t a Fleming I dislike].
Game: This is not even in question. Not only is Goldeneye 64 the pinnacle of Bond gaming it’s universally acknowledged as being seminal in the landscape of video games. It was a bona fide game-changer that still stands up to this day. Only the other day I saw a sandwich board advertising yet another tournament at a local pub. I still play this game, not only at home but various venues across the city - even on cinema screens. I know there are people who prefer the newer games and that is their prerogative, but nothing comes close to this game. It ‘is’ the best James Bond video game and is it the most important James Bond video game. No substitutes.
Song: There are many, many incredible Bond themes, mixing various styles and genres, but there’s only one that stands out to me as being ‘the’ quintessential title song. Diamonds are Forever encapsulates everything I associate with Bond. It’s at once understated, yet powerful. It injects the grandeur and class one associates with Bond, the twinkle of the piano, the bombast of the brass and, when it kicks in halfway through, the throbbing bassline. For me it’s the perfect balance of grit and class.
Soundtrack: While this has always been a favourite of mine I would say it has risen in my estimation in the last couple of years due to external factors. When I was whisked away on a surprise trip to Japan two years ago the first thing I did before leaving was to make sure YOLT was with me. I’ve always had it up there as one of the great Barry entries, but this holiday brought a completely new dimension to it emotionally. Whether it was listening to ‘Fight at Kobe Dock’, while being there, or staring up at the stars above Mt. Fuji listening to ‘Capsule in Space’, visiting Himeji Castle, The New Otani hotel… ‘Mountains and Sunsets’ drifting out of my ryokan up in the hills… it was incredible. I will forever associate the score with that moment in my life. One of the best I’ve ever experienced.
9.) What are your favorite aspects of the Bond film series? And if you were able to bring something to the films/character what would you add to the series if you could? Or, rather, what would you bring back that we haven't seen in a while?
One of my favourite aspects and something I’ve been into since a child is the production design, although I wouldn’t have known it as that back in the day. All I remember as a kid is being completely besotted with these incredible locations, Dr. No’s lair, Fort Knox, the Volcano lair, The Whyte House, Piz Gloria, Atlantis… these were amazing worlds that I wanted to visit and they were real. I often wonder if kids these days have the same visceral experiences I had when they watch new Star Wars or Marvel films. The tangibility and scale of a Ken Adam set did and still does blow my mind.
I’d bring loads! Not everyone would like it, though. I’ve got a tonne of ideas for Bond that I’ve written either to drag me out of writer’s block or to get away from a project. Some of it is undoubtedly crap, other stuff I like. It’s an ever evolving process so when people say, what would your perfect Bond film look like? It fluctuates depending on the circumstances. I have an idea in my head which I feel could be a final Craig film, but I also have a concept for a non-Craig ‘re-launch’ if you like. There’s no first mission conceit, it’s simply Bond as we know and love, but in a slightly different world to the one we’ve experienced recently.
I’m largely averse to lifting from the past, in fact I generally hate it, it’s almost an iconoclastic process because you’re never going to top those initial nuggets of brilliance, but you risk tarnishing them. What I feel is missing, which is hard to distill into a short blurb on here, is the ability to convey a few missing links with Fleming. It still has to be paramount in the genesis of your idea. The tone and atmosphere of those novels can be transplanted into a 21st century setting, it’s just working out what you do show and don’t show within the film and how you use your locations to deliver those flavours. Do you go tech heavy, or do you lean on the physical world? Do you go ‘gadgets’? For me, no. Do you go, Aston? For me, no. I’d dispense with Q and MP, keeping only ’M’ and I’d replace most of the action set-pieces with suspense and plot. If a set-piece develops organically then it’s in. That’s roughly what my approach would be.
10.) If you could put yourself in one Bond film, which film would it be and why is that?
Probably MR, for the overabundance of amazing Adam production design.
Great answers @RC7 very much looking forward to the rest of this.
Cheers guys.