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
SF
QoS
TND
SP/DAD
TWINE
TWINE
CR
TND
SF
DAD
QOS
SP
I love the writings of Ian Fleming, amongst other things because of the environments he creates, how Bond himself is human, flawed, but always pushing through even though the odds are against him and always at a personal cost. He shows the darkness behind the glamour in a grander-then life way. Orbis non sufficit.
The films however too often make a mockery of this. Action is the way to go, at the cost of tension. Bond doesn't lose a step at all, never makes a mistake and rolls on through. This mockery was started in the Connery years after Thunderball. Thankfully we returned a few times to more serious stories, in which we still were wondering how he would pull through (noteably OHMSS). And the interesting thing is that those films are always rated the highest (again OHMSS, TSWLM, FYEO, Dalton's films, GE, CR, SF(not an extensive list, as it is in grades)).
So, Bond films shouldn't be fun. We've got M:I series, XXX and Austin Powers for that. Bond films should be darker, slightly bizarre and always within the realm of reality. Bond should have a hard time.
For me, Craig's tenure has been that, with the excellent CR and QoS (allthough the latter needed some digestion) and SF. The film where Bond had it too easy (SP) is again the worst of this run, with no tention at all except for the Hinx fight. But even the torture scene was made too easy and Bond had too little damage from there to make it work.
Nevertheless, speaking of Fleming, his Bond was also classy, bon vivant and not an everyday muscleman. Something we’ve lost during the Craig years.
The reason why I liked Bond more than any other (action) hero was his refined tastes and his cultural snobbery. Something that set him apart from others. I miss that a lot.
Fabulous post. It's no coincidence that as a general rule the closer you stick to Fleming the better your Bond film will be. Perhaps the bloke knew his onions when it came to Bond?
Indeed. Wondering if Goodnight's bumbling arse was going to get him incinerated had me on the edge of my seat.
I never thought about that, but you're absolutely right.
But even that he manages. Taking off his Texido jacket and bending over the poker table like a Texan nouveau riche didn't sit well with me at all. Neither did the talking while eating part afterwards when dining with Vesper.
Fleming went as far as to have him dislike tea, to say there was something foreign about him, even non-British. I like all those things, Bond should be the singular hero with a thousand faces for his time.
Craig Bond isn't really a muscle-man, is he? That's not how I see him. Just fit and developed.
I never really had a problem with it either, and for a while, even championed the 'ahead-of-its-time' approach, but over the years (and especially now, 15 years after the film) I feel it was looking too far ahead. The only issue I have is the tech they are using in regards to the vehicle design. For a decent cloaking result, wouldn't you need the wheels and wheel arches covered behind a completely sealed shell? But even then, you'd still see the bottom of the tyres near the ground.
I realize we are to suspend belief to a degree, but I can't help imagine Bond questioning Q, wondering if/how the tyres themselves are embedded with cameras.
2. TWINE
3. CR
4. TND
5. DAD
6. SF
7. SP
8. QoS
2 SF
3 CR
4 TWINE
5 TND
6 SP
7 QoS
8 DAD
QoS
CR
TWINE
DAD
TND
SF
SP
1. CR
2. GE
3. TND
4. QOS
5. TWINE
6. SF
7. SP
8. DAD
Ranking based on a mixture of entertainment and quality. For example, I consider DAD much more enjoyable than Craig's most recent two, but it's flaws are perhaps enough to put it in last place. I consider SP slightly more enjoyable than SF, but SF is the better made film of the two. TND and QOS are pretty equally awesome, but TND has a more Bondian feel. Same with TWINE- it sits above SF/SP simply because it feels more like a Bond film. CR remains untouchable, while GE is not far behind CR- two of the absolutely best Bond films.
Looking at how I ranked the 8 films here, I cannot determine whether the Bros or Craig era is on top - which makes sense, as I already knew I enjoy the two eras pretty equally.
Only Connery looked more natural in a tuxedo than Craig
And...
Craig is far more suave and stylish than Brozza.
When they say a villain is Bond's equal or Bond's match it irritates me more than when they say it about a Bond girl. I mean how unexciting is it to have your hero go against reasonably difficult odds?
The 'Bond's equal' has been used to death to the point where it carries no significance anymore. They said Silva was 'Bond's equal'. I thought he was powerfull and organised enough.
That's not controversial, that's plain wrong!
Brosnan is only better at looking smug. Craig moves far more graciously.
Ruthless, vicious, determined on the other hand? Yes to all of that, but not gracious.
Agree on both counts.When Craig enters the casino in the tux in CR for the first time, he is suave personified.
Pierce was fairly dapper as well, but to me it seemed a bit self conscious.
Sean, mentored by Terence Young in the art of suavity, worked hard to get as dapper as he eventually became and IMO it paid off.
Roger on the other hand had a natural suaveness about him that I don't think any of the others could match.
I'd say Craig was probably at his most suave in the casino scenes, in CR, or in the dinner with Vesper. Suave, isn't the first adjective that comes to mind when I think of Craig. Neither for him or Tim.