Why should she have been? Because it was the 40th anniversary film that made reference to all the previous Bond movies? If so, I can see your point, but a reference to Tracy might have been out of step with what is pretty much a light-hearted, over-the-top adventure.
Producer Michael G Wilson has suggested that he's not even sure if Brosnan's Bond is the same Bond who married Tracy anyway; a reference to his lost love in The World Is Not Enough was excised for this reason, Wilson saying, 'Bond never talks about his past.' Visual references are okay though.
I agree the movie was too over the top. Of course pb is the same bond that married tracy in the world is not enough he said the world is not enough is his family mottoe he found out that info in ohmss
Mickey g wilson is a fool who has destroyed bond, there has not been a good bond movie since goldeneye. im sick to death of all his cameos as well,
Bond's downfall in quality can be blamed on all the producers though I also am tired of seeing Wilson whoring himself into every picture.
Agreed. I do not accept Wilson (or Brocoli for that matter) as any kind of Bond authority. What about the " he was married once" in LTK ? In my view they are a pair of lucky schmos who inherited the family Business, and as such their tenure is a hit and miss affair.
Mickey g wilson is a fool who has destroyed bond, there has not been a good bond movie since goldeneye. im sick to death of all his cameos as well,
Bond's downfall in quality can be blamed on all the producers though I also am tired of seeing Wilson whoring himself into every picture.
Agreed. I do not accept Wilson (or Brocoli for that matter) as any kind of Bond authority. What about the " he was married once" in LTK ? In my view they are a pair of lucky schmos who inherited the family Business, and as such their tenure is a hit and miss affair.
Just to clarify, I include Cubby and Saltzman in my criticism. Let's face it, they had a lot to do with the series' creative downfall during the 70's and 80's because they stopped taking risks. Okay, I give Cubby one point of credibility for casting Dalton during this era but he saddled him with a mediocre action director and scripts that were not much above what Cannon Films was doing at the time.
I have said this in another thread before but if they want this series REALLY back on track they have to dig into Fleming; Not just skim through his books and say "oh we can stick that in there". Casino Royale was a good action film that I can enjoy even after multiple viewings but that was not Fleming's novel; Not even close. Keep Daniel Craig, Michael G. Wilson and Barbra Broccoli were wise in doing as much, but get these films back to spy thrillers like From Russia With Love or On Her Majesty's Secret Service. The time is ripe, a post 9/11 world would perfectly accept a Bond film that is a high-octane yet a clever spy adventure that has one foot in the real world but dosen't take itself too seriously.
To be honest, only the first few Fleming books were any good, and even with the early ones he got lucky. I mean, even the first novel Casino Royale tailed off badly towards the end. By the time you get to the novel Live and Let Die - purlease!
To be honest, only the first few Fleming books were any good, and even with the early ones he got lucky. I mean, even the first novel Casino Royale tailed off badly towards the end. By the time you get to the novel Live and Let Die - purlease!
My aren't we picky ? Casino Royale was pure genius and I loved the build up towards the tragic fate of Vesper, it never gets old IMO. The only two I really don't care for is The Spy Who Loved Me and The Man With The Golden Gun, especially the former, yeesh. Really, it's not a badly written story but most the time you are thinking, who cares ? I really don't give a damn about this chick or her problems.
Ian Fleming was a hack, I don't know why he has to be associated with the James Bond character. It would have been far better had John Le Carre penned them, not least as Le Carre takes care of his health and would still be writing them today. A missed opportunity, if you ask me.
Ian Fleming was a hack, I don't know why he has to be associated with the James Bond character. It would have been far better had John Le Carre penned them, not least as Le Carre takes care of his health and would still be writing them today. A missed opportunity, if you ask me.
Wow, that is a pretty low blow to Fleming about his health.
As for John Le Carre, I am sorry but the guy's work is a bore. James Bond would have been a very dull series with him at the type writer and probably would not have lasted many adventures; I doubt even the 11 years Fleming wrote his series. Another thing is Bond is suppose to be more of a pulp series, for men by men who don't want too much whining from their heroes. So turning the Bond series into something as dour and dark as the average Le Carre/Cromwell novel would be turning an apple into an orange.
Ian Fleming was a hack, I don't know why he has to be associated with the James Bond character.
I'm assuming there's some intended humour in that statement, because otherwise it's a little bit odd to say the least. Fleming was certainly no literary master but he invented Bond and wrote a ripping yarn (with a few exceptions). He is therefore completely and permanently entwined with the character. Until Bond made his debut, there really wasn't another successful literary figure like him. Fleming made Bond what he was and what he continues to be...even if we have completely veered away from the character he first described. It was Fleming that gave Bond his taste for the finer things of life, his ruthless edge and the exotic locations that have become synonimous with the character. Our love of Bond - whether literary or celluloid - owes everything to Fleming (unless one's particular love of Bond is restricted to a few completely off the wall cinematic endeavours!).
I love John le Carre and consider him a masterful author. I have read all of his books and love how le Carre has constantly invented new characters and adapted with time...but a le Carre Bond would never have survived through 22 major motion pictures. Instead of this board being used to source Bond's fine clothes or for discussing his glamorous women and exciting locales, we'd all be swapping tales of introspection, self-doubt, office politics, infidelity, betrayal, domestic unhappiness and worn polyester...not exactly spectacular box office fodder or an escape from the perils of everyday life!
Fleming himself easily could have written a dour "Le Carre-esque" Bond novel, people underestimate his versatility as a writer. Look no further than The Living Daylights as an example of how down to earth Fleming made a Bond story; It was a dirty job and no one showed any comfort or sympathy towards James despite his obvious and justified un-easiness towards the mission. The story in spent preparing for the kill and the only pleasure for JB is that the very end; Truly the dark side of Fleming's adventures.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Ian Fleming was a hack, I don't know why he has to be associated with the James Bond character. It would have been far better had John Le Carre penned them, not least as Le Carre takes care of his health and would still be writing them today. A missed opportunity, if you ask me.
) Whew...I needed that, NP. Thanks
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Denzil2222
Posts: 77MI6 Agent
Comments
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Bond's downfall in quality can be blamed on all the producers though I also am tired of seeing Wilson whoring himself into every picture.
Agreed. I do not accept Wilson (or Brocoli for that matter) as any kind of Bond authority. What about the " he was married once" in LTK ? In my view they are a pair of lucky schmos who inherited the family Business, and as such their tenure is a hit and miss affair.
Just to clarify, I include Cubby and Saltzman in my criticism. Let's face it, they had a lot to do with the series' creative downfall during the 70's and 80's because they stopped taking risks. Okay, I give Cubby one point of credibility for casting Dalton during this era but he saddled him with a mediocre action director and scripts that were not much above what Cannon Films was doing at the time.
I have said this in another thread before but if they want this series REALLY back on track they have to dig into Fleming; Not just skim through his books and say "oh we can stick that in there". Casino Royale was a good action film that I can enjoy even after multiple viewings but that was not Fleming's novel; Not even close. Keep Daniel Craig, Michael G. Wilson and Barbra Broccoli were wise in doing as much, but get these films back to spy thrillers like From Russia With Love or On Her Majesty's Secret Service. The time is ripe, a post 9/11 world would perfectly accept a Bond film that is a high-octane yet a clever spy adventure that has one foot in the real world but dosen't take itself too seriously.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
So I take it you are fan of the books first and foremost ?
Me too though all the 60's films get highmarks in my book. Even the poorest like You Only Twice gets points for it's spectacle nature.
To be honest, only the first few Fleming books were any good, and even with the early ones he got lucky. I mean, even the first novel Casino Royale tailed off badly towards the end. By the time you get to the novel Live and Let Die - purlease!
Roger Moore 1927-2017
My aren't we picky ?
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Wow, that is a pretty low blow to Fleming about his health.
As for John Le Carre, I am sorry but the guy's work is a bore. James Bond would have been a very dull series with him at the type writer and probably would not have lasted many adventures; I doubt even the 11 years Fleming wrote his series. Another thing is Bond is suppose to be more of a pulp series, for men by men who don't want too much whining from their heroes. So turning the Bond series into something as dour and dark as the average Le Carre/Cromwell novel would be turning an apple into an orange.
I'm assuming there's some intended humour in that statement, because otherwise it's a little bit odd to say the least. Fleming was certainly no literary master but he invented Bond and wrote a ripping yarn (with a few exceptions). He is therefore completely and permanently entwined with the character. Until Bond made his debut, there really wasn't another successful literary figure like him. Fleming made Bond what he was and what he continues to be...even if we have completely veered away from the character he first described. It was Fleming that gave Bond his taste for the finer things of life, his ruthless edge and the exotic locations that have become synonimous with the character. Our love of Bond - whether literary or celluloid - owes everything to Fleming (unless one's particular love of Bond is restricted to a few completely off the wall cinematic endeavours!).
I love John le Carre and consider him a masterful author. I have read all of his books and love how le Carre has constantly invented new characters and adapted with time...but a le Carre Bond would never have survived through 22 major motion pictures. Instead of this board being used to source Bond's fine clothes or for discussing his glamorous women and exciting locales, we'd all be swapping tales of introspection, self-doubt, office politics, infidelity, betrayal, domestic unhappiness and worn polyester...not exactly spectacular box office fodder or an escape from the perils of everyday life!
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Roger Moore 1927-2017