has james bond done its dash?

James Suzuki

This is a Bond fan site and i still love James Bond but the question came up, has Bond done it's dash. I don't want to believe it but there hasn't been a really good one in my point of view since goldeneye, 16 years ago. Do u think they're struggling for ideas or thing. I don't want to believe Im not trying to be offensive?it but Bond has gone or sour and has become an action movie now.

Thunderpussy

I do think Bond was at his Best in the 60's and from then on a mix of great and Not so great Movies.But He does have a future,It was only last year a Russian spy ring was caught in America. So in a way the Cold war still goes on. In basic terms He's a great action/Thriller movie Character and can Make a lot of Money,which is all that matters to Hollywood. So Bond will continue, or rather ......... James Bond will Return -{

The Domino Effect

As long as the writers can come up with entertaining, interesting and relevant plots, Bond will always have a place. People like escapism. They like exotic destinations, good clothes, excitement and beautiful people. It doesn't matter whether Bond is taking on communists, terrorists, fundamentalists, oligarchs, capitalists, megalomaniacs, teapartiers, smugglers, druglords, football agents or Wikileakers...people will be interested. CR was a box office smash which proves that interest is still strong and I bet a lot of those people were seeing a Bond film for the first time - or certainly for the first time in a movie theatre. Ultimately Bond will never become irrelevent as long as the creators can create something worth watching.

thesecretagent

I do view the two recent ones as a different type of film. I like them, but there is much missing. On the off chance I flicked over to watch TWINE on tv last night, to fall asleep to really, but guess what? It felt like a proper Bond film. Nobody on this planet looks better in a suit than Brosnan, the action was good the music was Bondian - sure there are duff bits, but since YOLT there have been in every film. Brosnan's last film was pretty bad in places, but had some great scenes, and gets put down a little too quickly IMO. But at least he looked like Bond, and acted like Bond. I don't think Bond will ever get back on track until they address this.

mrbain007

thesecretagent wrote:

I do view the two recent ones as a different type of film. I like them, but there is much missing. On the off chance I flicked over to watch TWINE on tv last night, to fall asleep to really, but guess what? It felt like a proper Bond film. Nobody on this planet looks better in a suit than Brosnan, the action was good the music was Bondian - sure there are duff bits, but since YOLT there have been in every film. Brosnan's last film was pretty bad in places, but had some great scenes, and gets put down a little too quickly IMO. But at least he looked like Bond, and acted like Bond. I don't think Bond will ever get back on track until they address this.

You've summed up my feelings exactly, I agree with you 100% (and I say that as some1 that enjoyed CR)

Lexi

thesecretagent wrote:

I do view the two recent ones as a different type of film. I like them, but there is much missing. On the off chance I flicked over to watch TWINE on tv last night, to fall asleep to really, but guess what? It felt like a proper Bond film. Nobody on this planet looks better in a suit than Brosnan, the action was good the music was Bondian - sure there are duff bits, but since YOLT there have been in every film. Brosnan's last film was pretty bad in places, but had some great scenes, and gets put down a little too quickly IMO. But at least he looked like Bond, and acted like Bond. I don't think Bond will ever get back on track until they address this.

You bring up a good point - as in, the Bond that I remember growing up, who could do better one liners - said in that oh so subtle 'double entendre' way - than Moore? (Then attempted by Brosnan, after a more serious Dalton.....) However, I do feel that Craig is only just flexing his Bond muscles, and his one liners are very subtle....but just as effective, IMO

Yes it was brave, and yes it's a much more serious version, but surely they (whoever 'they' are now...) can hit that 'sweet spot' - that makes the pendulum, which has admittedly swung quite hard towards the 'serious arty route', can make it back to the more 'light hearted' middle of the arc.

Only time will tell - and of course which direction Barbara, the studio, and whoever holds the dollars feel it should reach

thesecretagent

The thing is, for some reason, I really like Craig and I really like both CR & QOS. And then, inexplicibly, I don't. There's just something (especially with QOS) that doesn't sit right. When I watch or even see a snippet of another Bond film, I think, "Ah, that's more like it..." But there are elements in both of Craig's that I feel has been missed. I suppose as I watch them, there is little familiarity - a formula, I suppose, which is missing. I certaily don't want Craig to go, I just want a little bit more back from the film makers...

Lexi

kinda like an old lover who has gone.... they annoyed you to hell while you were going out with them, and then - when you are with someone new.... you miss the familiarity of love past.....

thesecretagent

Bang on!

Say, you're a Cornish lass - I don't know you like that, do I?

Lexi

Oh you would remember if you did )

The Domino Effect

I can honestly say that there isn't a single Bond film that I don't like. There are certainly ones that I like more than others and ones that I watch far more frequently than others, but I genuinely like them all. But for different reasons. I love the eyebrows, gadgets and one-liners of Moore; the Flemingesque Bond of Connery and its time-capsule of the 1960s; the homage of OHMSS; the modernisation and re-birth of Dalton; the suave, smooth and high-tec of Brosnan, and the action-packed vengeful brooding of Craig. So while I may still enjoy the comfort and gentle and familiar embrace of a Moore, I wouldn't want to see that style emulated now and I think that if it was it would die at the Box Office as people wouldn't know whether it was a spoof of itself (a la Austin Powers). The same way that a Craig Bond would likely have died in the court of public opinion in the early 1970s. Times change, Bond changes...although I certainly wouldn't mind if Bond 23 shifted somewhat towards a modernised Brosnan Bond rather then continuing steadfastly on the path of CR and QoS. I don't even mind if we return to the terry cloth zippered pool suits as long as they're worn half-zipped by Eva Green, of course!

Golrush007

The Domino Effect wrote:

I can honestly say that there isn't a single Bond film that I don't like. There are certainly ones that I like more than others and ones that I watch far more frequently than others, but I genuinely like them all. But for different reasons. I love the eyebrows, gadgets and one-liners of Moore; the Flemingesque Bond of Connery and its time-capsule of the 1960s; the homage of OHMSS; the modernisation and re-birth of Dalton; the suave, smooth and high-tec of Brosnan, and the action-packed vengeful brooding of Craig. So while I may still enjoy the comfort and gentle and familiar embrace of a Moore, I wouldn't want to see that style emulated now and I think that if it was it would die at the Box Office as people wouldn't know whether it was a spoof of itself (a la Austin Powers). The same way that a Craig Bond would likely have died in the court of public opinion in the early 1970s. Times change, Bond changes...although I certainly wouldn't mind if Bond 23 shifted somewhat towards a modernised Brosnan Bond rather then continuing steadfastly on the path of CR and QoS. I don't even mind if we return to the terry cloth zippered pool suits as long as they're worn half-zipped by Eva Green, of course!

I'm with you 100%...

I find all the various incarnations of Bond entertaining for different reasons. Like you, I have definite preferences but every film from FRWL (being my favourite) to YOLT (my least favourite) is an enjoyable bit of cinema in its own right. I am happy with the direction taken in the Craig films and would like to see it continue, but also stay true to some of the cinematic traditions. I would like to see the next one re-incorporate Moneypenny, and Q (but still keep the gadgetry to a sensible real life level). I don't see why Bond can't continue to be popular for the foreseeable future. So, to answer the OP, I don't think Bond has done its dash. The last two films have both been very good in my opinion and have done good business...so why should it stop?

j.blades

^ Amen, you two have summed it pretty thoroughly, viva Bond! )

Loeffelholz

I don't think Bond is through by any means---it isn't doomsday yet! :007) That said, I think #23 is a watershed opportunity, after the protracted setup Craig's interpretation of the role has been given over the previous two films (the much-debated 'reboot'). This is a golden opportunity to turn Craigger loose as a fully-developed Bond---straighten the tie, down a vodka martini, bed at least two women (preferably 3 or 4) and say something wry---all whilst not losing the tough edge that is his trademark.

A tall order...but if Eon is up to the task, it can be the biggest box office Bond film ever, and secure the franchise for another decade (IMRO).

mrbain007

I think bond is past it's peak and has been for some time. The politically incorrect era when Bond was first created and later shown on the silver screen is well and truly over. Since the 60s the Bond producers have been competing with other films rather than other films competing with IT. However I've enjoyed pretty much all the films made since then (some more than others obviously).

I think bond still has the capacity to entertain providing all the key elements stay intact. I say this as someone who grew up with (and loved) the pierce brosnan era.

If it were to end, I would rather it end with it's head held high and it's reputation in tact. The last film was a disappointment IMO but that doesn't mean they should pull the plug now. It would be a shame for qos to be the last ever bond film.

Loeffelholz

Eon should embrace Bond's non-politically correct nature, as IMO that's the key to his continuing appeal and success. There's enough PC crap out there for everybody who feels such nonsense is necessary; James Bond should remain what and who he is.

James Suzuki

well spoken, i agree with you

bigzilcho

xboys, I was about to answer your question with one of my favorites quotes from Cubby.

It seems, however, that ol' Loeff beat me to the punch.

The opearative word is "doomsday."

When asked how long will Bond films be made, Cubby's answer was: "Until doomsday."

Any question of Bond's survival in the future is IMO a moot point of enquiry.

Bond will outlast every person reading this post. Once we can all acknowledge that James Bond is the most durable character in the history of pop culture, we can breathe a little easier about any delays.

I'm with Domino and Golrush in terms of liking all the 007s. Everybody and his brother can throw darts at each and every Bond. All's fair with Bond fans. However, not liking Brosnan or Craig (or Roger for that matter) means ABSOLUTELY nothing in the grand scheme of the Bond universe.

James Bond cares not for our petty likes and dislikes. To Bond, critics are like henchmen: disposeable.

You know why? Because our opinions are not set in stone. Secretagent posted at how surprised he was about TWINE. How many people have grumbled about Roger or Dalton or the Laz and gone back to be SHOCKED at what they missed?

22 movies. Take a real close at that number. 22...and counting! By any account of movie history, thats an astonishing number for a series. Something MUST be going right.

Has Bond done its dash? Xboy, I can only offer you my opinion that that even asking such a question is...shocking. Positively shocking.

Bond has only begun and we are lucky to be present for his first 50 years.


"When do you sleep, 007?"
"Never on the firm's time, sir."

R. Sterling

bigzilcho wrote:

xboys, I was about to answer your question with one of my favorites quotes from Cubby.

It seems, however, that ol' Loeff beat me to the punch.

The opearative word is "doomsday."

When asked how long will Bond films be made, Cubby's answer was: "Until doomsday."

Any question of Bond's survival in the future is IMO a moot point of enquiry.

Bond will outlast every person reading this post. Once we can all acknowledge that James Bond is the most durable character in the history of pop culture, we can breathe a little easier about any delays.

I'm with Domino and Golrush in terms of liking all the 007s. Everybody and his brother can throw darts at each and every Bond. All's fair with Bond fans. However, not liking Brosnan or Craig (or Roger for that matter) means ABSOLUTELY nothing in the grand scheme of the Bond universe.

James Bond cares not for our petty likes and dislikes. To Bond, critics are like henchmen: disposeable.

You know why? Because our opinions are not set in stone. Secretagent posted at how surprised he was about TWINE. How many people have grumbled about Roger or Dalton or the Laz and gone back to be SHOCKED at what they missed?

22 movies. Take a real close at that number. 22...and counting! By any account of movie history, thats an astonishing number for a series. Something MUST be going right.

Has Bond done its dash? Xboy, I can only offer you my opinion that that even asking such a question is...shocking. Positively shocking.

Bond has only begun and we are lucky to be present for his first 50 years.


"When do you sleep, 007?"
"Never on the firm's time, sir."

We need a plaque for what you wrote.
Or a sticky.
Good job, big.
You summed it up perfectly.

sambwoy

I am semi-curious about the next Bond film, and there is still a strong possibility that I will go to see the next film, but only as long as other hero franchises continue whether it be Indiana Jones or Die Hard etc, because let's be honest they have a lot going for them too.

While you can say a lot of good things about Bond, it is always nice that there are other action heroes offering cinematic alternatives.

TonyDP

Loeffelholz wrote:

Eon should embrace Bond's non-politically correct nature, as IMO that's the key to his continuing appeal and success. There's enough PC crap out there for everybody who feels such nonsense is necessary; James Bond should remain what and who he is.

I feel the same way; for me one of the appeals of Bond is that he goes against conventions: he smokes, he drinks, he womanizes, he makes light of the most dire situations ... and he gets away with it. That confident arrogance, for lack of a better term, had been missing for a long time (GE was probably the last film to really show us a Bond who didn't care about possibly getting hit with a sexual harrassment suit).

These days Bond doesn't really stand out from the rest of the spy / action hero crowd like he used to. He's much more of an everyman and his adventures are much more pedestrian and grounded in reality. That diminishes him in my eyes and its that incursion of the ordinary world into his reality that could lead to the franchise's eventual downfall more than anything else.

I think that part of the issue is that it has become so expensive to make these films. To my eyes, QoS looked like a fairly modest production; there certainly weren't any audacious stunts like the ski jump from TSWLM or any massive setpieces like the Ken Adams sets of past films, and yet it reportedly cost $200 million to make. I'd love to see a big adventure with Bond leading a commando raid thru some amazing complex like the good old days but I just don't think Wilson & Broccoli have it in them.

mrbain007

TonyDP wrote:

Loeffelholz wrote:

Eon should embrace Bond's non-politically correct nature, as IMO that's the key to his continuing appeal and success. There's enough PC crap out there for everybody who feels such nonsense is necessary; James Bond should remain what and who he is.

I feel the same way; for me one of the appeals of Bond is that he goes against conventions: he smokes, he drinks, he womanizes, he makes light of the most dire situations ... and he gets away with it. That confident arrogance, for lack of a better term, had been missing for a long time (GE was probably the last film to really show us a Bond who didn't care about possibly getting hit with a sexual harrassment suit).

I think thats very true. The appeal of Bond has always been his indulgance - his enjoyment of the finer things in life. The original Bond, whilst undoubtably a very flawed character, lived for the cigarettes, the alcohol and the ladies (he often had adulterous affairs with married women). You may not always have wanted to be Bond but you envied his exotic lifestyle.

Andy007

It's a thread which raises a valid concern. I've been a Bond fan for so many years but still young compared to many out there. I've always been a huge fan of the classic Bond films 1-16. Somehow it never seemed the same since. The 6-year gap from LTK to GE oversaw many changes. Not just Brosnan as new Bond (but M, Moneypenny) new music composer (David Arnold) production team, director plus more. But the main difference is the style of films. Since 1995 the Bond films became more action films compared to the previous Bond formula/spy thrillers. There is far more technology in the later films which is natural as times have changed. But when you watch Bonds 1-16, then the rest -it does not feel the same. Goldeneye was the start of a new era but unfortunately a few films have let the series down since then. Namely TND & DAD. Brosnan was the right Bond for the 90's. Take a film like TND which is too fast-paced (director RS to blame for this) and gung-ho. It's entertaining as general action, but falls short to the 'classic Bond' style. The characters are disappointing in this. I actually liked TWINE -despite it's criticism from others. This was a decent Bond film imo. But DAD was a let-down for Brosnan's tenure. Don't care how much this made in Box office- it was a farce & probably the worst Bond film. The first half is actually ok, but the fencing fight is the last decent scene literally.
A reboot was needed & we got that in CR -a great film. Daniel Craig proved to be an inspired choice. He has the right blend of toughness, dry wit & more like Dalton's approach. Unfortunately QOS seemed to be a rushed & disappointing sequel. The film is far too short for Bond, but if you take out the action scenes (which are too fast-paced anyway) the film offers very little. Yes it ties up the loose ends from CR and gives more insight into Quantum & Bond's involvement, but it's a bit drab & boring at times. The film is waiting for something to spark it but it doesn't happen. It just seems quite a dull affair & probably one of the worst Bond films in truth. Craig although sharp throughout doesn't match his brilliant performance in CR - but that's down to the script & lack of film time too. The villain is forgettable, with a Bond girl who seems a lookalike of Elektra King in TWINE. I wanted to give this insight into each film to explain my views on the main question. The point being that the Bond series has become quite disjointed since GE in 95. With only 6 films in 22 years, it is no regular series anymore. But this is a good thing imo. The Bond films are there to be cherished & watched many times. I'd take quality over quantity any time. But what is disappointing is that in 6 films, at least 3 have been let-downs. CR was brilliant, GE & TWINE, both decent films imo, but the others fall short by long way. Imagine if more films had been rushed into the last 16 years. I say 16 because the delay between LTK & GE was forced. We could have seen more flops with the series on a downer. However because of the infrequent films -it gives us something to look forward to more. People wait in anticipation & you have to make the most of it when they're released. The films since GE have all been box-office successes, many of them huge, but real fans know that DAD for example was a real low point. The 4-year gap to CR was well worth it. It will be a 4-year gap when Bond 23 is out. This gives good chance of a decent film.

little nelly

Loeffelholz wrote:

Eon should embrace Bond's non-politically correct nature, as IMO that's the key to his continuing appeal and success. There's enough PC crap out there for everybody who feels such nonsense is necessary; James Bond should remain what and who he is.

SPOT ON!

Tracy

Any series that can return to strong characterization and character-driven narratives can be resurrected.

I think GE, TWINE, and CR are the most highly regarded 007 films of the past 2 decades because Bond has a compelling history with one of the main characters - Alec, Elektra, and Vesper, respectively. His push-pull relationships with each of them set of a chain of action. Sure, the political influences on the storyline, the cinematography and art direction, the gadgets - yes, those all change with the times. But I do find that the films I like best have the strongest casts/most interesting characters. Bond won't die if he's being challenged by compelling villains and allies.

Blackleiter

I agree 100%.

Tracy wrote:

Any series that can return to strong characterization and character-driven narratives can be resurrected.

I think GE, TWINE, and CR are the most highly regarded 007 films of the past 2 decades because Bond has a compelling history with one of the main characters - Alec, Elektra, and Vesper, respectively. His push-pull relationships with each of them set of a chain of action. Sure, the political influences on the storyline, the cinematography and art direction, the gadgets - yes, those all change with the times. But I do find that the films I like best have the strongest casts/most interesting characters. Bond won't die if he's being challenged by compelling villains and allies.

Thunderpussy

I agree too, Give Bond a decent Villain and a half decent plot, mixed with a few good characters -{