Controversial opinions about Bond films

1738739740741743

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited November 24 Posts: 19,676
    I do like a bit more fun in my Bond, I must admit. It's good, but I feel like it's sort of neither one thing nor the other; it wants to be more dramatic and hard-hitting than it is, and it ends up not quite tickling my Bond bone in the same way that the films either side of it do manage to, plus I feel like Dalton actually gets lost a bit in it. James Bond in a revenge movie should be the coolest thing ever: like Lee Marvin in Point Blank multiplied by Connery in FRWL, but somehow it's just... not.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,944
    mtm wrote: »
    I do like a bit more fun in my Bond, I must admit. It's good, but I feel like it's sort of neither one thing nor the other; it wants to be more dramatic and hard-hitting than it is, and it ends up not quite tickling my Bond bone in the same way that the films either side of it do manage to, plus I feel like Dalton actually gets lost a bit in it. James Bond in a revenge movie should be the coolest thing ever: like Lee Marvin in Point Blank multiplied by Connery in FRWL, but somehow it's just... not.

    I think it's pretty hard, while it can be funny too. The latter not in an obvious way, but I do quite like some of the more subtle bits here and there.

    Having said that, I also love both films that flank it chronologically. I'd even go as far as to say that TLD-LTK-GE is the best three-in-a-row the series has ever seen. The only valid competition I see is the first run of Connery DN-TB.
  • Posts: 6,430
    I like LTK, even with some criticisms. It’s a bit like NTTD in the sense that it’s this formula breaking, end of an era Bond movie. They’re both films you can pinpoint as turning points in Bond.
  • Posts: 2,587
    mtm wrote: »
    I do like a bit more fun in my Bond, I must admit. It's good, but I feel like it's sort of neither one thing nor the other; it wants to be more dramatic and hard-hitting than it is, and it ends up not quite tickling my Bond bone in the same way that the films either side of it do manage to, plus I feel like Dalton actually gets lost a bit in it. James Bond in a revenge movie should be the coolest thing ever: like Lee Marvin in Point Blank multiplied by Connery in FRWL, but somehow it's just... not.

    I think it's quite dry, even for its time. Lethal Weapon and Die Hard have a fair amount of humor.

    That the movie isn't gritty enough wasn't on my bingo card.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 15,476
    LTK is similar enough to Thunderball.
    I like the comparison, and there's quite a few moments. Bond and Felix in a coastguard helicopter - Bond dangling from its winch; a character dies by cyanide, both Bond and villain present in the scene; Bond sneaking aboard an enemy's boat via the subpen - which includes a submersible that transports something in secrecy; Q in the field with gadget camera which later gets knocked out of one's hands by the enemy; Bond is a guest at the villain's residence and provided a beverage; a passenger of a vehicle knocks out the driver, the vehicle ending up in the sea; Bond leaves a casino table with the villain's girl. Related: In TB, Bond removes his scuba backpack to escape the frogmen, while in LTK he puts one on to escape.
  • Posts: 16,260
    QBranch wrote: »
    LTK is similar enough to Thunderball.
    I like the comparison, and there's quite a few moments. Bond and Felix in a coastguard helicopter - Bond dangling from its winch; a character dies by cyanide, both Bond and villain present in the scene; Bond sneaking aboard an enemy's boat via the subpen - which includes a submersible that transports something in secrecy; Q in the field with gadget camera which later gets knocked out of one's hands by the enemy; Bond is a guest at the villain's residence and provided a beverage; a passenger of a vehicle knocks out the driver, the vehicle ending up in the sea; Bond leaves a casino table with the villain's girl. Related: In TB, Bond removes his scuba backpack to escape the frogmen, while in LTK he puts one on to escape.

    I think the biggest similarity is the love triangle (for lack of a better word) between Bond, Lupe and Sanchez. Lupe I think should have been the main Bond girl, but that's another topic.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,944
    Don't see LTK as humourless at all, in fact I think it's more successful in that regard, maybe also because it is used more sparingly, than several other outings.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 15,476
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I think the biggest similarity is the love triangle (for lack of a better word) between Bond, Lupe and Sanchez.
    Yes, it's more a V angle - a triangle suggests that Bond wants to give Sanchez a nice honeymooooon!
  • Posts: 2,587
    All Bond movies have humor, even the Craig ones. It's part of the formula. I'm only speaking in relative terms.
  • Posts: 6,430
    QBranch wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I think the biggest similarity is the love triangle (for lack of a better word) between Bond, Lupe and Sanchez.
    Yes, it's more a V angle - a triangle suggests that Bond wants to give Sanchez a nice honeymooooon!

    I don’t mind the Bond, Sanchez, and Lupe triangle. For me it’s the Pam, Lupe, and Bond one that gets a bit strange and soap opera-ish.

    I like Pam as a character, but I can very much understand the idea that Lupe could have been the main Bond girl. I’m not sure what Pam actually adds past a certain point (the subplot about stinger missiles is pretty much useless anyway).
  • edited November 24 Posts: 898
    QBranch wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I think the biggest similarity is the love triangle (for lack of a better word) between Bond, Lupe and Sanchez.
    Yes, it's more a V angle - a triangle suggests that Bond wants to give Sanchez a nice honeymooooon!

    I think Sanchez wouldn't mind giving Bond a nice honeymoooooon.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 4,596
    mtm wrote: »
    Yes it’s a shame, considering Sanchez is perhaps the most passionate bad guy, it would have been good to see him be allowed the full fury at Bond that knowledge of his actions would have given him.
    As you say, the lighter, although it’s a neat moment, is too brief as it’s unclear Sanchez even remembered Felix really.

    What if Sanchez was dyslexic and couldn't actually read what it said before Bond burned him to death... :))
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 9,094
    007HallY wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I think the biggest similarity is the love triangle (for lack of a better word) between Bond, Lupe and Sanchez.
    Yes, it's more a V angle - a triangle suggests that Bond wants to give Sanchez a nice honeymooooon!

    I don’t mind the Bond, Sanchez, and Lupe triangle. For me it’s the Pam, Lupe, and Bond one that gets a bit strange and soap opera-ish.

    I like Pam as a character, but I can very much understand the idea that Lupe could have been the main Bond girl. I’m not sure what Pam actually adds past a certain point (the subplot about stinger missiles is pretty much useless anyway).

    That, and Pam's character is inconsistent. She's supposed to be a hardened CIA agent working in South America, but acts all childish when Bond points that out. She's supposedly professional, but as soon as the boat runs out of gas she lays on her back for Bond.
    And, as you said, her character adds little to the storyline. Lupe is a way in for Bond as she tries to get out (without losing everything she 'worked for' to accomplish). She's a trophy wife/golddigger, and is very consistent in beeing so. I don't get why people disparage Talisa for portraying just that.

    Pam's 'professionalism' just amounts to wearing body armour and seducing professor Butcher.

  • edited November 24 Posts: 6,430
    007HallY wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I think the biggest similarity is the love triangle (for lack of a better word) between Bond, Lupe and Sanchez.
    Yes, it's more a V angle - a triangle suggests that Bond wants to give Sanchez a nice honeymooooon!

    I don’t mind the Bond, Sanchez, and Lupe triangle. For me it’s the Pam, Lupe, and Bond one that gets a bit strange and soap opera-ish.

    I like Pam as a character, but I can very much understand the idea that Lupe could have been the main Bond girl. I’m not sure what Pam actually adds past a certain point (the subplot about stinger missiles is pretty much useless anyway).

    That, and Pam's character is inconsistent. She's supposed to be a hardened CIA agent working in South America, but acts all childish when Bond points that out. She's supposedly professional, but as soon as the boat runs out of gas she lays on her back for Bond.
    And, as you said, her character adds little to the storyline. Lupe is a way in for Bond as she tries to get out (without losing everything she 'worked for' to accomplish). She's a trophy wife/golddigger, and is very consistent in beeing so. I don't get why people disparage Talisa for portraying just that.

    Pam's 'professionalism' just amounts to wearing body armour and seducing professor Butcher.

    I can understand having to adapt Lupe and/or go with a different actress if they ran with the character as the main Bond girl, but I don't blame Soto for portraying the role as she did. I think a plus with not having Pam around is that Bond would truly be on his own for a portion of the film.

    I do really like LTK as it is though, but the sections with Pam getting annoyed at Bond for sleeping with Lupe and Q consoling her are a bit too soap opera for me (the flat lighting and camera angles don't help with that impression either!)
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited November 24 Posts: 19,676
    mtm wrote: »
    I do like a bit more fun in my Bond, I must admit. It's good, but I feel like it's sort of neither one thing nor the other; it wants to be more dramatic and hard-hitting than it is, and it ends up not quite tickling my Bond bone in the same way that the films either side of it do manage to, plus I feel like Dalton actually gets lost a bit in it. James Bond in a revenge movie should be the coolest thing ever: like Lee Marvin in Point Blank multiplied by Connery in FRWL, but somehow it's just... not.

    I think it's quite dry, even for its time. Lethal Weapon and Die Hard have a fair amount of humor.

    That the movie isn't gritty enough wasn't on my bingo card.

    The Michael Kamen factor does make me yearn a bit for the energy and wit of a McTiernan film, yes. It sounds like Die Hard but isn’t quite as good.
    mtm wrote: »
    Yes it’s a shame, considering Sanchez is perhaps the most passionate bad guy, it would have been good to see him be allowed the full fury at Bond that knowledge of his actions would have given him.
    As you say, the lighter, although it’s a neat moment, is too brief as it’s unclear Sanchez even remembered Felix really.

    What if Sanchez was dyslexic and couldn't actually read what it said before Bond burned him to death... :))

    The scripty font is quite hard to make out to be fair, he was probably about to say “Does that say ‘Dello and Petia’? Who’s Dello and Petia?”
    Plus his eyes are all full of petrol, how’s he supposed to read that? Poor old Franz.
  • edited November 24 Posts: 6,430
    No idea how it would have played out (in an alternative showdown obviously), but it could have been interesting if Sanchez genuinely didn't remember Felix's name. Like, Bond's whole vendetta has been about something that barely registered for Sanchez. May well put things into perspective for Bond considering all the trouble he's caused for everyone around him (including the Hong Kong narcotics team). And it'd show how much of a hardened killer Sanchez is.

    Could be an interesting idea for a future Bond film I guess.
  • edited November 24 Posts: 2,587
    007HallY wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I think the biggest similarity is the love triangle (for lack of a better word) between Bond, Lupe and Sanchez.
    Yes, it's more a V angle - a triangle suggests that Bond wants to give Sanchez a nice honeymooooon!

    I don’t mind the Bond, Sanchez, and Lupe triangle. For me it’s the Pam, Lupe, and Bond one that gets a bit strange and soap opera-ish.

    I like Pam as a character, but I can very much understand the idea that Lupe could have been the main Bond girl. I’m not sure what Pam actually adds past a certain point (the subplot about stinger missiles is pretty much useless anyway).

    That, and Pam's character is inconsistent. She's supposed to be a hardened CIA agent working in South America, but acts all childish when Bond points that out. She's supposedly professional, but as soon as the boat runs out of gas she lays on her back for Bond.
    And, as you said, her character adds little to the storyline. Lupe is a way in for Bond as she tries to get out (without losing everything she 'worked for' to accomplish). She's a trophy wife/golddigger, and is very consistent in beeing so. I don't get why people disparage Talisa for portraying just that.

    Pam's 'professionalism' just amounts to wearing body armour and seducing professor Butcher.


    I think they were still writing Bond as an alpha male even though Dalton didn't portray him that way.

    In fact, I think one of the problems of this era is that he's supposed to be a womanizer, but we don't see him act like one.
  • Posts: 137
    Telly Savalas is the only properly satisfying on-screen Blofeld we’ve ever had.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 19,676
    007HallY wrote: »
    No idea how it would have played out (in an alternative showdown obviously), but it could have been interesting if Sanchez genuinely didn't remember Felix's name. Like, Bond's whole vendetta has been about something that barely registered for Sanchez. May well put things into perspective for Bond considering all the trouble he's caused for everyone around him (including the Hong Kong narcotics team). And it'd show how much of a hardened killer Sanchez is.

    Could be an interesting idea for a future Bond film I guess.

    I mean I do question if he does remember, certainly Della (whose name is first on the lighter) we have no reason to think he knows the name of; although being a guy who does behave in a vaguely honourable way I guess we can surmise he might have taken note of Felix's name. Maybe a scene where he mentions Felix as being someone he took care of halfway though the film or so might've helped.
    LeighBurne wrote: »
    Telly Savalas is the only properly satisfying on-screen Blofeld we’ve ever had.

    I think he's easily the best, yeah. I'm not completely down on Waltz though, I must say.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 4,596
    007HallY wrote: »
    No idea how it would have played out (in an alternative showdown obviously), but it could have been interesting if Sanchez genuinely didn't remember Felix's name. Like, Bond's whole vendetta has been about something that barely registered for Sanchez. May well put things into perspective for Bond considering all the trouble he's caused for everyone around him (including the Hong Kong narcotics team). And it'd show how much of a hardened killer Sanchez is.

    Could be an interesting idea for a future Bond film I guess.

    This Sanchez business has become comedy gold! Not only did Sanchez not know who Bond was but he also possibly didn't have a clue what the names on the lighter were supposed to signify! One very confused drug lord as he burned to death... :))
  • Posts: 8,647
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I must say I agree: the tanker chase in Licence to Kill is the biggest action finale. I think it's so satisfying because step by step the villains are eliminated until it is just Bond and Sanchez fighting mano a mano. You can really feel Sanchez start to unravel as he goes more and more mad; and as his life's work (his drugs) goes up in flames

    Add incredible explosions, a great score, some nice stunt driving and an always kinetic sequence and for me LTK has the greatest climax out of all of the Bond films.

    I must be one of the very few that find the Truck chase an unsatisfying climax. I never found it that exciting.

    When i first saw it i wanted something more personal between Bond and Sanchez. The two hanging off the back of a Tanker just seemed a waste of potential for a riveting showdown between them.

    You're not the only one: I often find truck and car chases kind of boring. Not sure why. Maybe because the characters get lost in the spectacle?

    Exactly right. The characters did get lost somewhat in all the mayhem.

    I know Bond is destroying Sanchez's operation, but there's no real showdown between them. A brutal hand to hand combat would have been a more satisfying, with Sanchez aware of why Bond is trying to kill him.

    I disagree mate. I thought it was a clever use of the lighter, it was a gift from a close friend who was maimed by this sadistic villain, what better way to kill him? Love LTK for all the reasons @GoldenGun gave, terrific Bond movie with lots of Fleming in it. I think Ian would have loved it!
    Personally I was more disappointed with SF, we were led to believe there was going to be a brutal final confrontation between Silva and Bond, and to just kill him with a knife to the back was such a cop out, gave me another reason to dislike this movie!
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 4,596
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I must say I agree: the tanker chase in Licence to Kill is the biggest action finale. I think it's so satisfying because step by step the villains are eliminated until it is just Bond and Sanchez fighting mano a mano. You can really feel Sanchez start to unravel as he goes more and more mad; and as his life's work (his drugs) goes up in flames

    Add incredible explosions, a great score, some nice stunt driving and an always kinetic sequence and for me LTK has the greatest climax out of all of the Bond films.

    I must be one of the very few that find the Truck chase an unsatisfying climax. I never found it that exciting.

    When i first saw it i wanted something more personal between Bond and Sanchez. The two hanging off the back of a Tanker just seemed a waste of potential for a riveting showdown between them.

    You're not the only one: I often find truck and car chases kind of boring. Not sure why. Maybe because the characters get lost in the spectacle?

    Exactly right. The characters did get lost somewhat in all the mayhem.

    I know Bond is destroying Sanchez's operation, but there's no real showdown between them. A brutal hand to hand combat would have been a more satisfying, with Sanchez aware of why Bond is trying to kill him.

    I disagree mate. I thought it was a clever use of the lighter, it was a gift from a close friend who was maimed by this sadistic villain, what better way to kill him? Love LTK for all the reasons @GoldenGun gave, terrific Bond movie with lots of Fleming in it. I think Ian would have loved it!
    Personally I was more disappointed with SF, we were led to believe there was going to be a brutal final confrontation between Silva and Bond, and to just kill him with a knife to the back was such a cop out, gave me another reason to dislike this movie!

    Fair enough mate :) But i don't think Fleming would have approved of Bond going 'rogue' on a reckless quest for revenge. His Bond i think would have agreed with M. "Leiter knew the risks.."
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 19,676
    I guess he does go after revenge in YOLT, but maybe not completely rogue as such, yeah. I do think QoS (film) deals with the revenge thing in a more interesting way, and rings a bit truer to Bond’s character.
  • Posts: 6,430
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I must say I agree: the tanker chase in Licence to Kill is the biggest action finale. I think it's so satisfying because step by step the villains are eliminated until it is just Bond and Sanchez fighting mano a mano. You can really feel Sanchez start to unravel as he goes more and more mad; and as his life's work (his drugs) goes up in flames

    Add incredible explosions, a great score, some nice stunt driving and an always kinetic sequence and for me LTK has the greatest climax out of all of the Bond films.

    I must be one of the very few that find the Truck chase an unsatisfying climax. I never found it that exciting.

    When i first saw it i wanted something more personal between Bond and Sanchez. The two hanging off the back of a Tanker just seemed a waste of potential for a riveting showdown between them.

    You're not the only one: I often find truck and car chases kind of boring. Not sure why. Maybe because the characters get lost in the spectacle?

    Exactly right. The characters did get lost somewhat in all the mayhem.

    I know Bond is destroying Sanchez's operation, but there's no real showdown between them. A brutal hand to hand combat would have been a more satisfying, with Sanchez aware of why Bond is trying to kill him.

    I disagree mate. I thought it was a clever use of the lighter, it was a gift from a close friend who was maimed by this sadistic villain, what better way to kill him? Love LTK for all the reasons @GoldenGun gave, terrific Bond movie with lots of Fleming in it. I think Ian would have loved it!
    Personally I was more disappointed with SF, we were led to believe there was going to be a brutal final confrontation between Silva and Bond, and to just kill him with a knife to the back was such a cop out, gave me another reason to dislike this movie!

    Fair enough mate :) But i don't think Fleming would have approved of Bond going 'rogue' on a reckless quest for revenge. His Bond i think would have agreed with M. "Leiter knew the risks.."

    I feel for better or worse Fleming wouldn’t have loved any of the Bond movies. Not hated them necessarily, but I think many just wouldn’t have been how he’d have approached Bond. LTK may well be an example, and for all the Fleming material in there I also have a hard time imagining the literary character acting the way he does in that film.

    Not that Fleming’s opinion would have mattered much anyway. His books/how they feed into the films do, but even that’s in service to the film.
  • Posts: 2,587
    mtm wrote: »
    I guess he does go after revenge in YOLT, but maybe not completely rogue as such, yeah. I do think QoS (film) deals with the revenge thing in a more interesting way, and rings a bit truer to Bond’s character.

    Well, Fleming had already written the sequel to Casino Royale, it's called LALD ;)
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited November 25 Posts: 19,676
    007HallY wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I must say I agree: the tanker chase in Licence to Kill is the biggest action finale. I think it's so satisfying because step by step the villains are eliminated until it is just Bond and Sanchez fighting mano a mano. You can really feel Sanchez start to unravel as he goes more and more mad; and as his life's work (his drugs) goes up in flames

    Add incredible explosions, a great score, some nice stunt driving and an always kinetic sequence and for me LTK has the greatest climax out of all of the Bond films.

    I must be one of the very few that find the Truck chase an unsatisfying climax. I never found it that exciting.

    When i first saw it i wanted something more personal between Bond and Sanchez. The two hanging off the back of a Tanker just seemed a waste of potential for a riveting showdown between them.

    You're not the only one: I often find truck and car chases kind of boring. Not sure why. Maybe because the characters get lost in the spectacle?

    Exactly right. The characters did get lost somewhat in all the mayhem.

    I know Bond is destroying Sanchez's operation, but there's no real showdown between them. A brutal hand to hand combat would have been a more satisfying, with Sanchez aware of why Bond is trying to kill him.

    I disagree mate. I thought it was a clever use of the lighter, it was a gift from a close friend who was maimed by this sadistic villain, what better way to kill him? Love LTK for all the reasons @GoldenGun gave, terrific Bond movie with lots of Fleming in it. I think Ian would have loved it!
    Personally I was more disappointed with SF, we were led to believe there was going to be a brutal final confrontation between Silva and Bond, and to just kill him with a knife to the back was such a cop out, gave me another reason to dislike this movie!

    Fair enough mate :) But i don't think Fleming would have approved of Bond going 'rogue' on a reckless quest for revenge. His Bond i think would have agreed with M. "Leiter knew the risks.."

    I feel for better or worse Fleming wouldn’t have loved any of the Bond movies. Not hated them necessarily, but I think many just wouldn’t have been how he’d have approached Bond. LTK may well be an example, and for all the Fleming material in there I also have a hard time imagining the literary character acting the way he does in that film.

    Not that Fleming’s opinion would have mattered much anyway. His books/how they feed into the films do, but even that’s in service to the film.

    Yeah, I always get the impression, given all of the various treatments and scripts he wrote, that Fleming cared more that Bond appeared on the screen in any way at all than precisely how! Although obviously I'm sure he preferred the way he did it because that's, y'know, the way he chose to do it.
    I do agree on the character in LTK; I'm not totally sure that's how Bond would act. But I'm not certain. I do prefer the Craig version who puts his duty first though, it's a bit more interesting if anything because there are more dimensions to his decisions.
  • edited November 25 Posts: 6,430
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I must say I agree: the tanker chase in Licence to Kill is the biggest action finale. I think it's so satisfying because step by step the villains are eliminated until it is just Bond and Sanchez fighting mano a mano. You can really feel Sanchez start to unravel as he goes more and more mad; and as his life's work (his drugs) goes up in flames

    Add incredible explosions, a great score, some nice stunt driving and an always kinetic sequence and for me LTK has the greatest climax out of all of the Bond films.

    I must be one of the very few that find the Truck chase an unsatisfying climax. I never found it that exciting.

    When i first saw it i wanted something more personal between Bond and Sanchez. The two hanging off the back of a Tanker just seemed a waste of potential for a riveting showdown between them.

    You're not the only one: I often find truck and car chases kind of boring. Not sure why. Maybe because the characters get lost in the spectacle?

    Exactly right. The characters did get lost somewhat in all the mayhem.

    I know Bond is destroying Sanchez's operation, but there's no real showdown between them. A brutal hand to hand combat would have been a more satisfying, with Sanchez aware of why Bond is trying to kill him.

    I disagree mate. I thought it was a clever use of the lighter, it was a gift from a close friend who was maimed by this sadistic villain, what better way to kill him? Love LTK for all the reasons @GoldenGun gave, terrific Bond movie with lots of Fleming in it. I think Ian would have loved it!
    Personally I was more disappointed with SF, we were led to believe there was going to be a brutal final confrontation between Silva and Bond, and to just kill him with a knife to the back was such a cop out, gave me another reason to dislike this movie!

    Fair enough mate :) But i don't think Fleming would have approved of Bond going 'rogue' on a reckless quest for revenge. His Bond i think would have agreed with M. "Leiter knew the risks.."

    I feel for better or worse Fleming wouldn’t have loved any of the Bond movies. Not hated them necessarily, but I think many just wouldn’t have been how he’d have approached Bond. LTK may well be an example, and for all the Fleming material in there I also have a hard time imagining the literary character acting the way he does in that film.

    Not that Fleming’s opinion would have mattered much anyway. His books/how they feed into the films do, but even that’s in service to the film.

    Yeah, I always get the impression, given all of the various treatments and scripts he wrote, that Fleming cared more that Bond appeared on the screen in any way at all than precisely how! Although obviously I'm sure he preferred the way he did it because that's, y'know, the way he chose to do it.
    I do agree on the character in LTK; I'm not totally sure that's how Bond would act. But I'm not certain. I do prefer the Craig version who puts his duty first though, it's a bit more interesting if anything because there are more dimensions to his decisions.

    Craig’s Bond I can buy as a reimagining of the blunt instrument from Fleming’s novels. He puts his duty/job, but not necessarily his superior’s orders, first. That works and even adds another layer to Bond’s character, agreed.

    I think most authors have odd relationships with movie versions of their work anyway, especially when they don’t have direct involvement. It’s difficult to imagine what Fleming would have made of later films, and much like asking ‘what would Cubby have said’ it’s irrelevant in many ways.
  • Posts: 137
    Licence is the movie they should've made after OHMSS.
  • Posts: 6,430
    It would have been cool. But I think in practice the franchise was too young and not in a strong enough position to survive another underwhelming film. So I can see why we got DAF.
  • edited November 25 Posts: 2,587
    If it didn't work so well in the 80s, I doubt it would have worked any better 18 years earlier.

Sign In or Register to comment.