I believe that Le Chiffre is meant to be Albanian, and I don't recall it being confirmed that Dominic is French (whatever the actor may be). Silva isn't British, but he did work for them.
There have been loads of double agents/traitors in the Bond films prior to the last three- to add to Gala Brand's list: Miss Taro, Andrea Anders, Koskov, arguably Elektra King, Pussy Galore, Domino... some of them betrayed the bad guy in favour of the good guy of course!
Hmmm, the villains in the Craig Bonds have been Le Chiffre (French or some other kind of continental) Green (French) and Silva (Spanish). Mr. White is sort of undetermined but he's played by a Scandinavian actor. As for henchmen/lackeys, Dimitrios in CR was Greek, General Medrano (QOS) was Bolivian, Vesper's boyfriend (QOS) looks decidely non-British and his name is Kabira, and Patrice (SF) doesn't sound too British.
I think EON is doing its bit in terms of upholding British chauvanism. )
Also, Kim Philby was a good friend of Fleming's. I always wonder how he took that.
3 out of 3 consecutive films in which traitors play in key plot elements, that's too frequent.
Vesper was a Fleming creation, you'll have to take it up with him. Mitchell had about five minutes of screen time. Silva's not a traitor and he's not British--he's not betraying anybody. In Skyfall, the betrayal lies elsewhere (with M).
But you're right there have never been any double agents/traitors in the pre-Craig Bond films except for Professor Dent, Rosie Carver, Zukovsky (or was he a triple agent?), Kristatos, Trevelyan, Miranda Frost, Leiter's partner in LTK and probably others.
But it's true that trust and betrayal are strong themes in Craig's Bond films.
I didn't make such claims of no double agents/traitors in the pre-Craig Bond films, did I? I did point out this feature appeared in the past 3 consecutive films. Lastly, my comment was not a Craig thing, it's just that you went to some length to disprove an earlier post stating that the last 3 films involved double agents/traitors in the past 3 Bond films, and all I did was present data that you left out.
The thing with facetious arguments is that one can make out any conclusion with selected information. Mitchell's 5 minutes of screen time? I wonder how much time and money the producers spent for such a throw away sequence. They could have saved money by having a detained Mr. White saying, "hey, what's that behind you... "
As for Silva, imagine if he survived to go on trial, "Terrorist? Yes! Murderer? Most definitely! Traitor? No, I'm not British, so you need to go back to your lawyering dictionary and figure out the correct legal term for a former non-British MI6 officer who committed treacherous acts against my former organization while using information I learned while working there!"
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
3 out of 3 consecutive films in which traitors play in key plot elements, that's too frequent
Vesper was a Fleming creation, you'll have to take it up with him. Mitchell had about five minutes of screen time. Silva's not a traitor and he's not British--he's not betraying anybody. In Skyfall, the betrayal lies elsewhere (with M).
But you're right there have never been any double agents/traitors in the pre-Craig Bond films except for Professor Dent, Rosie Carver, Zukovsky (or was he a triple agent?), Kristatos, Trevelyan, Miranda Frost, Leiter's partner in LTK and probably others.
But it's true that trust and betrayal are strong themes in Craig's Bond films.
3 out of 3 films where traitors play in key plot elements, that's too frequent. - exactly what you said.
At the back of my mind I had Kristatos nagging away. The key element in FYEO was him switching sides and working for the Russians.Let alone Georgi Koskov...
So plenty of traitors in those films..
1. For Your Eyes Only 2. The Living Daylights 3 From Russia with Love 4. Casino Royale 5. OHMSS 6. Skyfall
I think the main problem with Pierce Brosnan's films (including GE) is that they felt very Frankenstein, mish mashing most of their material from the earlier 1960s to 1980s Bond films in the mid to late 90s/turn of the millennia era. The first two films were OK, the latter two pretty blah.
'Alright guard, begin the unnecessarily slow moving dipping mechanism...'
The first 3 Brosnan films are easily better than most Bond films based on my criteria of stuff that annoys me.
1. They are not ever slow or tedious like some of the 60's films. (FRWL, TB, YOLT, OHMSS)
2. They don't have bad comic relief characters like JW Pepper and Bibi Dahl. (LALD, TMWTGG, FYEO)
3. They don't have excessive wacky humor. (DAF, OP, DAD)
4. They have a proper gun barrel sequence. (Unlike CR, QoS, SF)
My current 10 favorite:
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
I think the main problem with Pierce Brosnan's films (including GE) is that they felt very Frankenstein, mish mashing most of their material from the earlier 1960s to 1980s Bond films in the mid to late 90s/turn of the millennia era. The first two films were OK, the latter two pretty blah.
I wouldn't agree that this was the main problem, but I do think that Brosnan's films had what you describe -- a kind of "designed by committee and compromise" quality that coupled with the weak writing made his films seem derivative. Good observation.
The first 3 Brosnan films are easily better than most Bond films based on my criteria of stuff that annoys me.
1. They are not ever slow or tedious like some of the 60's films. (FRWL, TB, YOLT, OHMSS)
2. They don't have bad comic relief characters like JW Pepper and Bibi Dahl. (LALD, TMWTGG, FYEO)
3. They don't have excessive wacky humor. (DAF, OP, DAD)
4. They have a proper gun barrel sequence. (Unlike CR, QoS, SF)
It might be generational, but I find many of these problems with the Brosnan films. For example:
1. There are whole sections of each I can either fast forward through or just tune out because they don't accomplish anything interesting -- usually, the middle of these movies. I fall asleep with the shenanigans among Alec and the Russians in Goldeneye, for instance, and I find the scenes with Bond and Paris in Tomorrow Never Dies to be remarkably without chemistry.
2. The awful Boris in Goldeneye; Dr. Kaufman in Tomorrow Never Dies ("Dit yew kall zee Ottoklub?"; "I em a profezzor of forenzeek medicine. Beleef me, Mr. Bont, I cuwd shoot yew from Schtuttgart and steel mek it zeem like un ackseedent.")
3. Bond freefalling and then chasing the airplane in Goldeneye; Bond straightening his tie for no particular reason while submerged in The World is Not Enough -- the cops being soaked by him while putting a boot on a car, both of which harken back to humor from the Moore films.
4. I'm more or less with you on the gunbarrel after Casino Royale, though it's not a make or break for me. I thought the gunbarrel from Die Another Day, though, was just silly and excessive.
It might be generational, but I find many of these problems with the Brosnan films.
Agreed. Much like my list, those are things that annoy you personally. I :x Boris, Dr. Kaufman and Paris.
I have found that many Bond fans think Dr. Kaufman was a highlight of TND.
The guy putting the boot on the car was one of the most infamous Parking Enforcement officers in London. I'm not a big fan of that scene either, but it seemed like a good bit of throwaway fun.
Straightening the tie while underwater is totally unnecessary. I still get a chuckle out of it though.
Piece's upside-down intro and the free-fall after the plane are probably the worst bits of his 90's films.
My current 10 favorite:
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
What makes them different for me, though -- aside from the fact that I think the execution in the Brosnan films is vastly inferior -- is that in earlier Bond films, these kinds of characters and approaches were at least fresher . . . not necessarily fresh, but they weren't as obvious or stale. By the time Dr. Kaufman goosesteps onto the scene, for instance, we've seen dozens and dozens of Nazi-esque parodies and movie accents in everything from Hogan's Heroes to Laugh In to The Producers. It was odd to see such a campy character inserted into what purports be a very dramatic scene . . . it would be like inserting a couple of zany pratfalls on Professor Dent's part or having him twirl a mustache before Bond dispatches him in the played-straight execution scene with a similar idea in Dr. No. In the Brosnan films, things seem not just recycled but badly.
The first 3 Brosnan films are easily better than most Bond films based on my criteria of stuff that annoys me.
1. They are not ever slow or tedious like some of the 60's films. (FRWL, TB, YOLT, OHMSS)
Whole great chunks of TWINE. Pretty much every scene when they arrive in ~Istanbul.That notorious scenes where he asks Electra "what was Bond like as a lover?" The whole tine M was locked away and has to reach the broom handle.
Boris Grischenko and his tedious rants of "I am invincible"
Want to know why he doesn't count. Because he's a comic relief character used to make a contrast between the serious characters. He doesn't present himself as a serious character and then make his development really corny and over the top like Renard and Elliot Carver.
Boris Grischenko and his tedious rants of "I am invincible"
Want to know why he doesn't count. Because he's a comic relief character used to make a contrast between the serious characters. He doesn't present himself as a serious character and then make his development really corny and over the top like Renard and Elliot Carver.
I'd say he was a comic relief character
1. For Your Eyes Only 2. The Living Daylights 3 From Russia with Love 4. Casino Royale 5. OHMSS 6. Skyfall
Comments
There have been loads of double agents/traitors in the Bond films prior to the last three- to add to Gala Brand's list: Miss Taro, Andrea Anders, Koskov, arguably Elektra King, Pussy Galore, Domino... some of them betrayed the bad guy in favour of the good guy of course!
"No."
"Good, you learned your lesson."
AJB007 Favorite Film Rankings
Pros and Cons Compendium (50 Years)
I didn't make such claims of no double agents/traitors in the pre-Craig Bond films, did I? I did point out this feature appeared in the past 3 consecutive films. Lastly, my comment was not a Craig thing, it's just that you went to some length to disprove an earlier post stating that the last 3 films involved double agents/traitors in the past 3 Bond films, and all I did was present data that you left out.
The thing with facetious arguments is that one can make out any conclusion with selected information. Mitchell's 5 minutes of screen time? I wonder how much time and money the producers spent for such a throw away sequence. They could have saved money by having a detained Mr. White saying, "hey, what's that behind you... "
As for Silva, imagine if he survived to go on trial, "Terrorist? Yes! Murderer? Most definitely! Traitor? No, I'm not British, so you need to go back to your lawyering dictionary and figure out the correct legal term for a former non-British MI6 officer who committed treacherous acts against my former organization while using information I learned while working there!"
3 out of 3 films where traitors play in key plot elements, that's too frequent. - exactly what you said.
At the back of my mind I had Kristatos nagging away. The key element in FYEO was him switching sides and working for the Russians.Let alone Georgi Koskov...
So plenty of traitors in those films..
+1. That's the point I was making.
1. They are not ever slow or tedious like some of the 60's films. (FRWL, TB, YOLT, OHMSS)
2. They don't have bad comic relief characters like JW Pepper and Bibi Dahl. (LALD, TMWTGG, FYEO)
3. They don't have excessive wacky humor. (DAF, OP, DAD)
4. They have a proper gun barrel sequence. (Unlike CR, QoS, SF)
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
1. There are whole sections of each I can either fast forward through or just tune out because they don't accomplish anything interesting -- usually, the middle of these movies. I fall asleep with the shenanigans among Alec and the Russians in Goldeneye, for instance, and I find the scenes with Bond and Paris in Tomorrow Never Dies to be remarkably without chemistry.
2. The awful Boris in Goldeneye; Dr. Kaufman in Tomorrow Never Dies ("Dit yew kall zee Ottoklub?"; "I em a profezzor of forenzeek medicine. Beleef me, Mr. Bont, I cuwd shoot yew from Schtuttgart and steel mek it zeem like un ackseedent.")
3. Bond freefalling and then chasing the airplane in Goldeneye; Bond straightening his tie for no particular reason while submerged in The World is Not Enough -- the cops being soaked by him while putting a boot on a car, both of which harken back to humor from the Moore films.
4. I'm more or less with you on the gunbarrel after Casino Royale, though it's not a make or break for me. I thought the gunbarrel from Die Another Day, though, was just silly and excessive.
You're totally right... **** the Craig movies.
AJB007 Favorite Film Rankings
Pros and Cons Compendium (50 Years)
Agreed. Much like my list, those are things that annoy you personally. I :x Boris, Dr. Kaufman and Paris.
I have found that many Bond fans think Dr. Kaufman was a highlight of TND.
The guy putting the boot on the car was one of the most infamous Parking Enforcement officers in London. I'm not a big fan of that scene either, but it seemed like a good bit of throwaway fun.
Straightening the tie while underwater is totally unnecessary. I still get a chuckle out of it though.
Piece's upside-down intro and the free-fall after the plane are probably the worst bits of his 90's films.
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
Whole great chunks of TWINE. Pretty much every scene when they arrive in ~Istanbul.That notorious scenes where he asks Electra "what was Bond like as a lover?" The whole tine M was locked away and has to reach the broom handle.
Boris Grischenko and his tedious rants of "I am invincible"
Wasn't DAD a Brosnan entry? Also the straightening of tie during the chase scenes
Strangely enough I luv the proper gun barrel sequence at the end - sets you up for the next one..
Most of these i put down to the directors. 4 films, 4 directors was too much
Want to know why he doesn't count. Because he's a comic relief character used to make a contrast between the serious characters. He doesn't present himself as a serious character and then make his development really corny and over the top like Renard and Elliot Carver.
AJB007 Favorite Film Rankings
Pros and Cons Compendium (50 Years)
I'd say he was a comic relief character