Shouldn't Bond 23 really be Bond 24?

jamesm123

I'm talking about Never Say Never Again here. Released five months after Octopussy, i never understand the snobbery about this not being a real Bond film. The character is legally called James Bond and it has Connery as Bond for f*%k sakes!
I always treat this film as a kind of Lazenby one-off interlude between the Rog movies. And after seeing Bond in a clown suit in Octopussy, NSNA seems like an art-house masterpiece.
I there should have been more non-Eon Bond films, it might have made them up their game and we would have had more films to be talking about here.

Napoleon Plural

Sadly, Connery's comeback has as many detractors, if not more, than Octopussy, not just because of high expectations not being met, or on principal because it doesn't have the James Bond theme and logo, etc. Though I agree that NSNA did make EON up its game for OP, which has a great extended action scene climax - train, cars, then aeroplane finale.

Also, it's hard to place NSNA in the same framework as the others, as it seems to exist in a parallel universe, having Bond as a teacher of all things (though we never see this). Though of course, so does Craig's tenure now.

Agent Sidewinder

jamesm123 wrote:

I'm talking about Never Say Never Again here. Released five months after Octopussy, i never understand the snobbery about this not being a real Bond film. The character is legally called James Bond and it has Connery as Bond for f*%k sakes!
I always treat this film as a kind of Lazenby one-off interlude between the Rog movies. And after seeing Bond in a clown suit in Octopussy, NSNA seems like an art-house masterpiece.
I there should have been more non-Eon Bond films, it might have made them up their game and we would have had more films to be talking about here.

And I don't quite understand the snobbery about Bond wearing a clown suit in order to infiltrate a circus (rather sensible, really, wouldn't you think?) but it would be boring if we all agreed, wouldn't it?

The thing is that NSNA is effectively redundant within the film canon, being as it is a remake of Thunderball, so that does, as Plural said, place it within an alternate universe. Plus, it wasn't made by EON, and they're the ones promoting the numbering system.

thesecretagent

I don't have a problem with NSNA being included in the Bond line up. It's just a remake of Thunderball in the same way Casino Royale is a movie version of the book. Both NSNA and Octopussy are a bit rubbish though, they both have good scenes and bad. I remember at the time thinking Connery actually looked better in NSNA than he did in DAF, after such a long break from the role. I was only twelve at the time and saw NSNA unedited on a flight (with the horse taking the full fall from the castle) and saw Octopussy at the cinema. Two in one year and how long have we been waiting for the next...

The Domino Effect

I like NSNA but I am one of those who just doesn't consider it a 'real' Bond. Yes it was Connery, yes it was the Bahamas, yes Kim Basinger was hot...but without the classic Bond theme music, it just doesn't do it for me. An enjoyable film, but just as I cannot consider the original Casino Royale to be a 'genuine' Bond, so I just can't accept NSNA in that category either.

Thunderpussy

I agree The Domino Effect, I don't consider the 67 CR or NSNA as anything else than oddites, Just as many of the other spy movies over the years, Our man Flint, Matt Helm, The man from Uncle etc. some are fun but not part of the offical list.

Hardyboy

Look at it this way: while most people agree that the 007 novels penned by Kingsley Amis, John Gardner, Raymond Benson, etc., are James Bond novels, how many people think of Colonel Sun as "Bond 15" and License Renewed as "Bond 16?" Ian Fleming wrote his Bond novels and the other guys wrote theirs--all without participation from Fleming; likewise, there are 22--soon (I hope) to be 23--films crafted by EON Productions and so two films made by other groups cannot be grafted on to their output.

Napoleon Plural

Nah, you've confused me now.

The Domino Effect

Very good analogy, Hardyboy. Or to use a football analogy (for those so inclined), when Manchester United plays a pre-season friendly and the biggest name in their starting XI is Luke Chadwick, yes, it's still Manchester United, the shirts are right, there are 4 or 5 'real' first team players on the bench and Sir Alex is managing them....but you don't feel you've really seen Manchester United play when it's all over.

Sir Miles

The Domino Effect wrote:

Or to use a football analogy (for those so inclined), when Manchester United plays a pre-season friendly and the biggest name in their starting XI is Luke Chadwick, yes, it's still Manchester United, the shirts are right, there are 4 or 5 'real' first team players on the bench and Sir Alex is managing them....but you don't feel you've really seen Manchester United play when it's all over.

If they get stuffed playing like that - then it's the real Manure you've beaten ) -{

Dalkowski110

"Also, it's hard to place NSNA in the same framework as the others, as it seems to exist in a parallel universe, having Bond as a teacher of all things (though we never see this). Though of course, so does Craig's tenure now."

Completely agree. Also, if we recognize NSNA just because it had Connery as Bond, well...what's stopping us from recognizing the comedy sketch that Roger Moore did in the 1960's? After all, he WOULD BE James Bond and played it a bit like AVTAK. And let us not forget Pierce Brosnan lampooning himself on Saturday Night Live...

jamesm123

Yes but NSNA is a proper feature length film and not a 10 min spoof. And the Man Utd analogy doesn't make sense, surely Connery is more important to Bond than Chadwick is to Utd. And even it's a remake of Thunderball so what? The NSNA story is part Fleming because of Thunderball. It's a bit like saying "Ill skip past the Bond and Melina getting towed by the boat in FYEO as it's really from LALD and therefore not a true Bond story".

Thunderpussy

"the Man Utd analogy doesn't make sense "
I don't think that really matters as I've been told most of my arguments don't make sense either. )

GaddGeneGadd

James I'm with you. I always considered it a Bond film, well because it was a Bond film. Not a very good one mind you, but eon has given us a few of them as well now haven't they LOL

The Domino Effect

The United analogy was tongue in cheek (I thought the inclusion of Luke Chadwick would make that obvious!), but I still stand by my own personal opinion that unless it contains all of the crucial Bond elements, it isn't an official Bond. I'm not disputing that it's a Bond film just as I don't dispute that the original Casino Royale is a Bond film - but the absence of a number of key points make it a fringe film in my own collection.

Napoleon Plural

It's the EON films that are out of wack. No Michael Kamen score or net of 007s over the opening screen, no Edward Fox as M or Pamela Salem as Moneypenny. On that basis, there's one Bond movie and the others frankly shouldn't be counted.

Sir Miles

The Domino Effect wrote:

The United analogy was tongue in cheek (I thought the inclusion of Luke Chadwick would make that obvious!),

Especially as he hasn't played for them for five years )

The Domino Effect

Exactly!!

Sir Miles wrote:

The Domino Effect wrote:

The United analogy was tongue in cheek (I thought the inclusion of Luke Chadwick would make that obvious!),

Especially as he hasn't played for them for five years )

Mr Beech

As said above, I just see the numbers as the EON promotion. They have no choice but to respectably call it by their own numbers.

pyrat

If you are going to include NSNA you need to include CR 1966 and if you include CR66 you need to consider CR 1954 which would make it actually Bond's 26th outing. However, only the Saltzman/Broccoli films are generally counted as the "official" Bond films which gives us Bond 23.

Percy Sugden

Personally speaking i rather like Never Say Never again, and although it isn't an 'official' Bond Movie in the real sense of the term 'official', i always consider it to be a Bond Movie, unlike the 1967 version of Casino Roayale which is just a very unfunny, plot free, muddled up piece of rubbish. Having said that it does have some great looking bond girls in the film, including Daliah Lavi, Alexandra Bastedo and Barbara Bouchet, even Deborah Kerr still looked good, and she was in her mid forties!.

Capungo

I like NSNA, but then again I also like OK Connery. I don't really think of either of them as a "Bond film". To me, there's more to a Bond film than the mere inclusion of a character named James Bond. If that were the only criterion, the Bollywood movie Mr. Bond (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq32Zu8SskQ) could claim to be "Bond 17", right between Licence to Kill and GoldenEye. I think of stuff like NSNA, CR '67, OK Connery, Mr. Bond, etc. as spy movies that contain lots of references to the Bond films. All have a derivative, parasitical relationship with the EON series.

Thunderpussy

It should really be Number three, as the Ones before Craig really don't count. -{

Sir Miles

Thunderpussy wrote:

It should really be Number three, as the Ones before Craig really don't count. -{

Or have you been kept in because of the riots ?

jamesm123

Since MGM now own NSNA I think it should be included in any future Bond box set. Would it be inserted after DAF or Eyes Only?

rennervision

So I've often wondered for those who don't consider NSNA to be a true Bond movie - when asked how many times did Sean Connery play Bond, what is your answer?

77007

4.5

I'd like to forget DAF, and YOLT is worthy of a 1/2 effort.

Thunderpussy

I say seven But one was an unofficial Bond film. Leaving Sir Roger as the Actor with the Most Official Bonds under his Belt.

chrisno1

Given that MGM /Eon bought the distribution rights to NSNA in the early 2000s, does this now make it an official 007 movie?

77007

chrisno1 wrote:

Given that MGM /Eon bought the distribution rights to NSNA in the early 2000s, does this now make it an official 007 movie?

No. You can't undo the unofficialality of NSNA.

77007

A cut with a Barry score would still be cool to see.