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
LALD is a fan favorite, but I don't quite understand why. It certainly didn't feel like a Bond movie, so it should be in the "controversial films" category.
I suspect it has a lot to do with it being Moore's first. But, while it has many flaws, I do like it, mostly because of its low key atmosphere.
Not to the extent LTK does. It's usually castigated for being 'American', especially outside this forum.
Some of the stunts in this film, from the PTS lets-go-fishing, to the underwater battle/waterskiing behind a plane, to the tanker chase climax (thank you Ms. Broccoli), are some of the most celebrated of the series.
If anything, I remember people back in 89-90 saying how dour and too serious and too un-Bond-like they felt Dalton was (I personally loved the portrayal, and even today I think and Davi and he are perfect foils (I believe Davi elevated Dalton)).
Your first paragraph explains the 'American' criticism neatly.
Paragraph two is apt, but the stunts in this film are usually lost on people who think 'it isn't Bond' and compare it unfavourably to contemporary American films of the era.
Not sure how you can quantify it. DAF is probably more criticised overall, although its "Americanism" is only one small flaw among many bigger ones. Same with AVTAK: I'd wholeheartedly agree that too much time is spent in the US, but that's only one problem the movie has. LALD, like I said, probably gets a free pass because of Roger Moore, a Bond actor far more appreciated among the general public as Dalton.
For Bond being patriotic. To me he should be. Though it is interesting how the character in the last 25 years has become someone who will openly defy orders. Can one be patriotic if you are going against what your superior in British Intelligence wants? I do long for the days when Bond got a mission and saw it through. Maybe with a stern talking to if he bungled it. Apparently that is not complex enough for movie audiences and so our hero must defy orders of the out of touch boss.
Bond and civil servants may choose to do the right thing, in contradiction of their own boss. In spite of them, even. It's their duty.
Bond should act accordingly to doing the right thing, not 'the British thing'.
Some films merge the notion. It gets ugly.
I guess nowadays there's a certain distrust and contempt towards institutions that has influenced many genre movies. It's an era of mavericks and freelancers, where people of rank are perceived as pesky bureaucrats at best, incompetent legalists at worst.
Bond has always been pretty much the red-headed stepchild not going along with the bureaucrats. That won't change.
He definitely has a strong sense of loyalty to M, whom he sees a a quasi father figure of sorts.
Bond's sense of duty is derived from something more subtle than patriotism - he does what he does because he needs to numb a certain angst borne out of being an orphan and an underlying feeling of never having truly fitted in with the upper class establishment environment he was raised in/by.
He actually mildly despises the, in his eyes, boring desk-bound traditionalists who rule the British Empire.
Bond 'fights' the evil he is put in front of not so much out of a sense of patriotic duty but more because it makes him feel alive and as a result of his strong distaste for bullies and megalomaniacs.
Remember - he's a borderline psychopath, albeit one with a moral compass - someone who actually gets a perverse sense of excitement from absurd risky undertakings that would make the average human sh%t their undergarments...
Yep, that's exactly my reading of him too. He's moral, he's loyal (as you say, to his superiors more than the country itself), but he's also mildly addicted to danger and needs it for himself. Which fits with the whole gambling side of him, he's in it for the thrill.
I think to be honest that's not even that uncommon for someone who joins the military: I don't think everyone is doing it because they love their country so incredibly much, a certain amount of it is because they get something out of it personally.
That's getting at something, but I'm not sure that's quite right to be honest. I think James Bond always skirts that line between his need for adventure and something deeper - in this case duty. I'm always reminded of the Scramanaga/Bond conversation in TMWTGG. It's framed more around the enjoyment of killing, but the main idea is that in theory the two are very similar (and that's not an uncommon thing with Bond villains - you see it also with Silva and Travelyan). Bond, however, would say that he kills for Queen and Country rather than enjoyment, and he's being quite serious in that moment. There's something quite fundamental which separates Bond from many of his foes in this sense.
For me that's the key with Bond. I don't think he quite has the resentment of traditionalists that you state, even if bureaucratic desk types and traditionalists are often antagonistic or comedic in these stories (I think he's also far too much of a lone wolf and strong willed to hold any long lasting resentment - that sort of angst is for the villains). There's certainly a tongue in cheek element with the Union Jacks or 'ma'am' moments, but I think it's taken more seriously in the likes of SF and GE. I think Bond as a character in any iteration would admit that while the Britain he works for is very flawed, he'd also (perhaps even reluctantly) say it's better than working for any alternative, and any decision he makes for the greater good would ultimately align with that loyalty.
It is the cheapest way to see the world and live adventures.
I don't think he needs much more motivation than this.
He's the kind of person who would cheat on his wife after the honeymoon. He needs action to avoid boredom.
I respectfully, but firmly, disagree - if you read Ian Fleming's biography, and read the subtext behind Bond's cavalier attitude towards overly risk-averse bureaucratic authority, you'll find that Fleming himself was quite antagonistic toward the pen-pushing Whitehall establishment. That's why he came up with his 'commando-style' clandestine unit - to avoid traditional Naval Intelligence work and do something far more stimulating and less demure.
Fleming's biography isn't really relevant here I'd argue (insofar as the works, and in this case the character, have a life of their own in the text. Many readers have no idea about Fleming's life anyway). If we're going just from the literary Bond and what's in those books, yes, he's certainly annoyed by bureaucratic, 'old boy' types and is often at odds with such people (there's a wonderful description in TLD where it mentions Saunders still wears his old public school tie). I do get the sense Bond is a lone wolf with a need for adventure, and certainly not someone who'd fit in with establishment types who sit behind desks, and call each other 'old man'. But I've never gotten the sense he has a chip on his shoulder about any of that, nor do I think such people represent what he'd see as his duty as an agent of MI6 (in fact arguably they hinder him from doing his job). He actually takes a lot of interest in the history behind Blades as an elite gentleman's club in MR (which I don't think he'd do if he resented that idea of the English establishment).
It'd be a cool thing to explore in a future film though. Maybe Bond and M have to deal with some particularly dislikable superiors who want Bond to do something morally questionable. They could do a TLD type thing where Bond disobeying his orders and investigating on his own ultimately proves there's something deeper.
Thanks :)