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
oddly enough, QoS brings this in spades, a stoic hero who puts his inner turmoil aside to fulfill his mission, and is highly criticised for it as beeing a 'revenge' film, whilst the opposite is true.
But yes, that's one of the reasons it sits up somewhere on top of the list-i-prefer-not-to-make.
Yeah, that's what I said, hes a very Fleming cynical Bond but the story is brisk enough that we don't get the opportunity to see behind the mask, besides in brief moments such as Saunders death. He is forced into keeping composed as a result of his circumstance, whether it be his passion for avenging his fallen 00's, playing the role of the Koskovs' friend for Kara's benefit, or putting on a smug, unbothered persona to hide his desperation when captured in Afghanistan (another moment where the cynical Bond bubbles to the surface "we're inside a bloody Russian airbase!")
The 'horses arse' scene also to mind as a genuine moment where Bond seems very human and his front slips in front of Kara. It's a sense you get which the film is trying to play up with Kara/Bond's relationship, particularly in regards to his deception towards her. Bond's mask is very much taken off when he decides to tell Kara the truth! Honestly though, I don't think it's all that dissimilar to CR. The whole point of that film is that Bond puts up that 'front' when doing his job and until he tells Vesper he's ready to retire (and of course the reaction to her death) he maintains that mask.
I know it's annoying, but TLD is a major reason we have CR ;) I don't get the sense you'd particularly enjoy a Bond 26 that drew heavily upon TLD. Personally, I certainly don't mind a Bond film giving us a sense of his struggles or conflict in the story. Just depends on how it's done.
Probably true, yes!
I dunno, I think it's ironic that despite this longing for a GE or TLD for Bond 26, those are the two films which played a major role in giving us the Craig films! GE with its themes of Bond's relevancy in the modern world, a villain who comes back from the dead and operates in 'the shadows', the references to Bond's childhood. And of course TLD with Bond going against MI6 (or indeed 'rogue') to get the job done etc.
Again, I doubt some here will be happy with anything we get. It is what it is ;)
Anyway, we'll see.
That's why I used the example of John McClane in Die Hard. you could say his mask is off in a similar fashion to Dalton in that he is at a low ebb professionally and personally. If you were to take John McClane out of the context of saving New York he would doubtless become a very sad figure very quickly. likewise, if you were to take Dalton in TLD aside and have an frank conversation he would probably be a mess of psychological issues and loneliness. but the point is, and this is crucial, we are witnessing it from the outside looking in. that's what I mean by not seeing behind the mask, I think you may have misunderstood slightly. we witness Dalton developing feelings for Kara, but he doesn't bare his soul in the same way that Bond does falling for Vesper or Tracy.
I guess I just don't see anything wrong with it in the context of CR or OHMSS. Nor am I seeing a major difference between Dalton in TLD and those other examples. We're always looking at Bond from the outside in, whether it's that 'horses arse' scene with Bond's mask slipping when he looks at Kara with that very emotional expression before telling her he'll send her back to London (hinting that he genuinely cares and feels for this woman), or Craig's Bond saying frankly to Vesper that he's decided to resign.
I can understand preferring the execution of one over the other - that's natural, and it's understandable preferring, say, the performance or writing of one scene over the other. But I'm not sure the mental gymnastics to try and justify all this is working, especially considering we're talking about slightly different movies.
Personally, I probably wouldn't disagree that a character using their reactions to convey their vulnerability is more interesting than a frank conversation. But ultimately a frank conversation is sometimes needed dependent on the scene or film. I mean, you wouldn't see Craig's Bond in QOS, SF or SP being as open as he is during that moment in CR (or at least saying outright to another character - they're more in the Dalton vein you were speaking about). Different stories and different scenes.
I agree, the big mistake is thinking a weighty "meaty" story is always better and a lightweight, breezy story is always worse. The been the issue over the past couple decades, each film NEEDS to have some kind of added twist or personal stakes and it has arguably hurt as much as it has improved the end result. There does come a time when an audience is ready to get lost in escapism and thrills unburdened by emotional angst.
BTW who do you think can direct Bond film if not for Villeneuve?
Maybe save that question for the Director thread you are also very aware exists?
I agree, we don't need personal takes in every Bond film, I think the last two Craig films are evidence that they tried too hard to concoct that into the plot.
As far as a new director, I would recommend Joseph Kosinski, Top Gun Maverick and F1 both have panache, practical action and have great story and character. Also, most of all, they achieve a great tone. They have great light moments and sadder moments, but the baseline is very enjoyable.
Another suggestion would be Ron Howard, he's capable of making huge blockbusters but also smaller human dramas as well. Although, I don't think he would make a Bond film that is too meaty. He would make a thrill ride.
Honorable suggestions include: Peter Berg, Lee Isaac Chung and Peter Jackson