If He Fires Me I'll Thank Him For It.

chrisisall

The dark Bond. The weary Bond. The angry Bond.
The Bond you wouldn't want to have a pint with.
Dark Bond has had mixed success in the movies.
FRWL (reasonably dark for the time IMO) was successful, but OHMSS less so.
TLD did well, but LTK less so.
CR was a hit, QOS not as much (Okay, so some narrative quality issues there),
BUT,
Big surprise- SF a really BIG hit despite some of the arguably darkest moments in the entire series.

I for one appreciate the darker take (obviously, since Tim is my favourite Bond thus far). Dan's overall take is fabulous IMO, and if a few elements of SF had been just a tiny bit different, it would certainly be in my top five, as it is, I'm warming to it now.
The super spy version as played in GF, TB, most of Moore's tenure and the preponderance of TND is all great fun, though, and cannot be easily dismissed by me.

So my questions are, is there a type of motion picture Bond you prefer (near burnt-out, professional agent, super spy), or do you like a spread of types, and,
has the general movie-going/renting public grown up enough to accept a darker, more literary Bond for long? If the next movie is very serious and not an easily accessible adventure with many comedic moments will it be the hit SF was?

Napoleon Plural

I don't think they do the burnt out Bond well. It's all a bit Le Carre-lite. Dalton's line doesn't work, cos he goes 'Stuff my orders!' I mean, really. It's sounds like a schoolkid out of Just William. 'To hell with my orders!' might have worked, to avoid profanity.

There was a line about Dalton's Bond being burnt out, acidie or whatever, expressed by M but it didn't make the cut. Would have worked, what with Kara being the innocent sort of bringing him back from despair, but like FYEO guess it didn't turn out as written.

There is a tendency to still play to the crowd a bit rather than show a downheartened Bond.

chrisisall

Napoleon Plural wrote:

Dalton's line doesn't work, cos he goes 'Stuff my orders!' I mean, really.

Maybe it's that I'm from the States, but I thought that line worked fine. But then 'stuff it' was a popular term in the Eighties here.

Number24

I think a mix of the three works best. But the majority of screentime should show the profecional spy, with just a little of the other two.

Blackleiter

chrisisall wrote:

Napoleon Plural wrote:

Dalton's line doesn't work, cos he goes 'Stuff my orders!' I mean, really.

Maybe it's that I'm from the States, but I thought that line worked fine. But then 'stuff it' was a popular term in the Eighties here.

Maybe you're on to something about us Americans, because that line worked for me as well.

Blackleiter

Number24 wrote:

I think a mix of the three works best. But the majority of screentime should show the profecional spy, with just a little of the other two.

I like that mix, and I think the first few Connery films got it right. SF was also pretty close.

Higgins

I always found that line a bit childish.

You don't like your job - resign!
You don't have to wait until they fire you and then thank them.

Grow up, you immature and weepy agent {[], don't think that Connery or Craig would have pulled something similar

ZorinIndustries

I'll take any three any day of the week. That's what I think makes the Bond franchise so successful is the diversity. It appeals to a wide variety of fans who have different preferences. I'm only 18 and my buddies prefer the dark, gritty Bond in DC. Understandably so. I showed a Roger Moore film to my friends and they thought it was so-so. Different strokes for different folks.

If I had to choose, I'd pick the nearly burnt-out Bond. I don't know why, but I've always loved AVTAK, DAD, and now adding SF to the list. I like an older Bond. I especially think it worked well in FYEO. You could see Bond aging and losing his touch, but it clicked on the screen.

After that rambling, I enjoy all three of the interpretations mentioned in the OP.

chrisisall

Bondtoys wrote:

You don't like your job - resign!
You don't have to wait until they fire you and then thank them.
don't think that Connery or Craig would have pulled something similar

What?!
Craig went FARTHER than just whining about it in SF!!
(You DID see the movie, right?) )

Firemass

Bondtoys wrote:

I always found that line a bit childish.

You don't like your job - resign!
You don't have to wait until they fire you and then thank them.

Grow up, you immature and weepy agent {[], don't think that Connery or Craig would have pulled something similar

Craig said that line, not Dalton. ?:)

chrisisall

Firemass wrote:

Craig said that line, not Dalton. ?:)

One of us is confused....

Higgins

Firemass wrote:

Craig said that line, not Dalton. ?:)

As M is female in SF how can 'he' fire him?

Blackleiter

Firemass wrote:

Bondtoys wrote:

I always found that line a bit childish.

You don't like your job - resign!
You don't have to wait until they fire you and then thank them.

Grow up, you immature and weepy agent {[], don't think that Connery or Craig would have pulled something similar

Craig said that line, not Dalton. ?:)

Nope - Dalton said it in TLD.

Higgins

Here we agree, old chap

screename

I like all the Bond's (except Roger) Connery is classic and still has three four great films, Dalton is my second favorite really captured the literary Bond from CR and LALD, Brosnan's fun for a good romp that doesn't make me cringe and is still serious, and Craig is my all-time favorite for his coldness and brutality, sadly something Dalton never got to do very well.

screename

ZorinIndustries wrote:

I'll take any three any day of the week. That's what I think makes the Bond franchise so successful is the diversity. It appeals to a wide variety of fans who have different preferences. I'm only 18 and my buddies prefer the dark, gritty Bond in DC. Understandably so. I showed a Roger Moore film to my friends and they thought it was so-so. Different strokes for different folks.

If I had to choose, I'd pick the nearly burnt-out Bond. I don't know why, but I've always loved AVTAK, DAD, and now adding SF to the list. I like an older Bond. I especially think it worked well in FYEO. You could see Bond aging and losing his touch, but it clicked on the screen.

After that rambling, I enjoy all three of the interpretations mentioned in the OP.

Do you really think that Pierce was burned out in in DAD? I thought he was at the top of his game (even if his expanding waistline wasn't) and had maybe even two more films in him.

chrisisall

screename wrote:

Do you really think that Pierce was burned out in in DAD? I thought he was at the top of his game (even if his expanding waistline wasn't) and had maybe even two more films in him.

Pierce just got better as he went along, too bad his films didn't go quite the same way. Yeah, he had a couple of more in him, and the capacity to do Fleming's Bond the right way- if only he'd had the scripts...

Asp9mm

Brosnan doesn't seem like he could fight very well. Same with Dalton (then) and Moore. Lazenby, Connery and Craig, look and could handle themselves well and pull it off. Dalton now looks much harder and savvy than he did back then. Moore is huge in real life and I really wouldn't want to mess with him. But Brozza, he just looks like a model with no physical danger about him at all, both on screen and off.

chrisisall

Asp9mm wrote:

But Brozza, he just looks like a model with no physical danger about him at all, both on screen and off.

That's the type that will fool you, and knock you the **** out unexpectedly. )

Blackleiter

screename wrote:

ZorinIndustries wrote:

I'll take any three any day of the week. That's what I think makes the Bond franchise so successful is the diversity. It appeals to a wide variety of fans who have different preferences. I'm only 18 and my buddies prefer the dark, gritty Bond in DC. Understandably so. I showed a Roger Moore film to my friends and they thought it was so-so. Different strokes for different folks.

If I had to choose, I'd pick the nearly burnt-out Bond. I don't know why, but I've always loved AVTAK, DAD, and now adding SF to the list. I like an older Bond. I especially think it worked well in FYEO. You could see Bond aging and losing his touch, but it clicked on the screen.

After that rambling, I enjoy all three of the interpretations mentioned in the OP.

Do you really think that Pierce was burned out in in DAD? I thought he was at the top of his game (even if his expanding waistline wasn't) and had maybe even two more films in him.

I agree - I don't think Brosnan seemed burned out at all.

Barbel

screename wrote:

Do you really think that Pierce was burned out in in DAD? I thought he was at the top of his game (even if his expanding waistline wasn't) and had maybe even two more films in him.

+1. In DAD Brosnan was the same age as Moore in TSWLM, and he did 4 more films afterwards, and younger than Connery in NSNA. He's too old now, obviously, though he looked just fine (a little greyer, of course, but that's easily dealt with) in films like Laws Of Attraction which was filmed around the time he would have been playing Bond again.

chrisisall

Barbel wrote:

he looked just fine (a little greyer, of course, but that's easily dealt with) in films like Laws Of Attraction which was filmed around the time he would have been playing Bond again.

I liked him in After The Sunset- he was so still prime Bond material. -{

Barbel

Yes, he definitely had another couple of films left to do; so sad that such a good (and well-recieved) Bond actor should become the only one to leave the role involuntarily.

Connery- we all know this story!
Lazenby- refused to do more, a decision he later regretted.
Moore- basically retired.
Dalton- quit owing to delays (although there are alternative theories, nothing has been confirmed).
Craig- Still there.

screename

But if he did another film, we might never have gotten Craig.

Thunderbird 2

An younger or older Bond I can live with. CR-06 level of darkness I am happy with.
However I am fed up with the rebelious, maverick Bond. LTK is an enjoyable film, but 007 going against the establishment and getting away with it shatters the illusion for me. Its not creadible.
As to worn out Bond, that puts me off. He's a fictional hero, one who usually enjoys lifestyle elements to envy - the locations, clothes cars, women. So to see him have some measure of fun and humour has to be there. All the Bonds (except perhaps Dalton) have had those uplifting moments. Who wants to watch two hours of someone being burnt out and thoroughly miserable? We get enough of that in the real world.

Re the dialogue this topics title comes from, I am fine with that. Bond is frustrated at others M, Saunders etc interfering in his ability to do his job properly. "Stuff my orders! That girl didn't know one end of a rifle from another! Go ahead, tell him what you like,...".
Pushkin adds to this later in the hotel room. "You are professional, you do not kill without reason." Underlining Bond's motives and (correct) instincts earlier.

Barbel

screename wrote:

But if he did another film, we might never have gotten Craig.

Yes.

chrisisall

Thunderbird 2 wrote:

So to see him have some measure of fun and humour has to be there. All the Bonds (except perhaps Dalton) have had those uplifting moments.

Did you miss Dalton's Bond at the amusement park with Kara? Or with "why don't you ask me" Pam?

)
Pushkin adds to this later in the hotel room. "You are professional, you do not kill without reason." Underlining Bond's motives and (correct) instincts earlier.

Yes, the professional emerges there.

screename

Thunderbird 2 wrote:

An younger or older Bond I can live with. CR-06 level of darkness I am happy with.
However I am fed up with the rebelious, maverick Bond. LTK is an enjoyable film, but 007 going against the establishment and getting away with it shatters the illusion for me. Its not creadible.
As to worn out Bond, that puts me off. He's a fictional hero, one who usually enjoys lifestyle elements to envy - the locations, clothes cars, women. So to see him have some measure of fun and humour has to be there. All the Bonds (except perhaps Dalton) have had those uplifting moments. Who wants to watch two hours of someone being burnt out and thoroughly miserable? We get enough of that in the real world.

Re the dialogue this topics title comes from, I am fine with that. Bond is frustrated at others M, Saunders etc interfering in his ability to do his job properly. "Stuff my orders! That girl didn't know one end of a rifle from another! Go ahead, tell him what you like,...".
Pushkin adds to this later in the hotel room. "You are professional, you do not kill without reason." Underlining Bond's motives and (correct) instincts earlier.

+1

Firemass

chrisisall wrote:

Firemass wrote:

Craig said that line, not Dalton. ?:)

One of us is confused....

yup, i got my lines mixed up. I was thinking of Skyfall "Hire me or fire me. It's entirely up to you"

chrisisall

Firemass wrote:

I was thinking of Skyfall "Hire me or fire me. It's entirely up to you"

Okay, that's cleared up! -{

Higgins

Asp9mm wrote:

But Brozza, he just looks like a model with no physical danger about him at all, both on screen and off.

Plus he runs like a girl. I am surprised that nobody mentioned it so far.