Are FYEO and TLD as serious as everyone says?

MilleniumForce

I'm watching FYEO again now, and there are bits of it that have made me think - is FYEO as serious as everyone says it is? Same goes for TLD.

I think these films are both similar in their tones. They're the perfect blend of seriousness and non seriousness. I would also put Skyfall in this category as well.

The thing is, neither FYEO or TLD are that serious, even though they are said to be 'Moore's most serious outing' or 'close to Fleming's Bond'. They feature some scenes that take you a bit further out of reality than the rest of the film, like the ending to FYEO or the cello scene in TLD. I'm not saying these are bad things, I love both films, but what would Fleming have thought about scenes like this, that would not be out of place in films like TSWLM or OP?

Absolutely_Cart

For Your Eyes Only is more serious than all of Connery's movies (bar From Russia With Love) and all of Moore's previous films. With Dalton, Brosnan and Craig the films got much darker, but compared to all previous films, FYEO was a big shift.

Similarly with The Living Daylights. It's not half as serious as the past 3 films, but it was a huge shift from Octopussy and A View to a Kill.

Thunderpussy

The film itself doesn't have to be totally serious for the lead actor to
Give a more serious performance.

chrisisall

The objective answer on this topic is extremely nebulous.
That's detente, comrade; You don't have it, I don't have it.

Barbel

I'd suggest the missing word here is comparatively. FYEO is serious when compared to MR, for instance.

chrisisall

Barbel wrote:

I'd suggest the missing word here is comparatively. FYEO is serious when compared to MR, for instance.

Heh, then NO Bond movie is serious compared to The Constant Gardener.... )

broadshoulder

Compared with the previous five - FYEO is very serious.

chrisisall

broadshoulder wrote:

Compared with the previous five - FYEO is very serious.

Agreed. )

AlphaOmegaSin

All of the 80s Bonds were more serious in Tone. Yes, even Bond dressed as a Clown )

chrisisall

AlphaOmegaSin wrote:

All of the 80s Bonds were more serious in Tone. Yes, even Bond dressed as a Clown )

Especially Bond dressed as a clown.

Thunderpussy

I thought that was very well done, Roger played it serious and it was a
Tense scene. -{

Sir Miles

chrisisall wrote:

AlphaOmegaSin wrote:

All of the 80s Bonds were more serious in Tone. Yes, even Bond dressed as a Clown )

Especially Bond dressed as a clown.

It's from there that Higgins draws his fashion tips...

AlphaOmegaSin

The Horror!

Firemass

Excellent topic MF.

Living Daylights feels like a traditional John Glen film like OP and AVTAK, but it thankfully lacks any single bad joke such as the 'tarzan yell' or 'California Girls.' Dalton dodged a bullet when that magic carpet ride ended up on the cutting room floor.

FYEO is a more "mature" Roger Moore film, but I don't see it as being more serious than the previous 4 films. Just less glamorous and less fun. Any traction gained by the "down to earth" storyline was offset by awful attempts at humor. Plus, think of how much screen time is spent on Bibi Dahl. Argh…. 8-)

Both films are over-hyped as being 'serious' IMO.

Barbel wrote:

I'd suggest the missing word here is comparatively. FYEO is serious when compared to MR, for instance.

FYEO is more plausible, but not necessarily more serious. The humor in MR is so well integrated I hardly even notice*, whereas the humor in FYEO is so jarring I cringe and instinctively glance away from the screen. MR also has a much darker storyline.

*Except for Jaws flapping his wings.

superado

As it's been already mentioned in the thread, "serious" is relative, particularly to the immediately preceding films. It's cyclical and the pattern isn't necessarily fixed and all depends on the shape of the series at a given time. OHMSS was a "serious" reaction to YOLT, but if you want to quibble if OHMSS was truly serious, I suppose it wasn't because of the midget whistling Goldfinger! But seriously speaking, audiences and the producers alike thought that OHMSS was too serious which explains in part why DAF became what it is, only to be followed up by the relatively "serious" LALD. Fast-forward to the excesses of DAD, we saw the strongest dose of caffeine seriousness with CR and the DC reboot, to boot ) ...and as the cycle predicted, we saw the GF Aston Martin in SF doing what it was made to do, which was to wow audiences with pure outlandishness and accordingly we can predict that the return of Bond goofiness has not peaked in this latest cycle, goodness help us...but it's all necessary to keep audiences from getting bored and thus, guaranteeing the longevity of the series, right?

AlphaOmegaSin

1+

The current Question is, will the next Bond Actor be in more light hearted Outings?

superado

AlphaOmegaSin wrote:

1+

The current Question is though, will the next Bond Actor be in more light hearted Outings?

I think so, if they can successfully find someone who fits the personality. I think the discovery of Connery was serendipitous, but the producers feel that they flopped with the next "unknown," Lazenby. Arguments could go both ways whether Craig and Dalton were relative unknowns though they were already established actors when they became Bond and I think relative unknowns are okay when taking a serious direction. However, if the producers do deem it important to have a lighter Bond, it would be hard to go with a relative unknown and they'd need to rely on somewhat, established star power, like they did with Moore and Brosnan (I know, I know, I did say LALD was "serious" but Moore came with his Saint baggage and the producers welcomed the fact that he brought his own audience into the role).

AlphaOmegaSin

I doubt we will see a return of Moore's Style of Humor though. Perhaps more in Line with Brosnan?

superado

AlphaOmegaSin wrote:

I doubt we will see a return of Moore's Style of Humor though. Perhaps more in Line with Brosnan?

Maybe. IMO, they need to get a personality whose reputation precedes him, or someone (if a relative unknown) who instantly appeals to audiences as a guy you'd want to immediately want to like.

Gassy Man

Both films are relatively light on the gags, especially the ones at the expense of the story and character as opposed to being a function of them.

For instance, while things get rather campy in the teaser for For Your Eyes Only, one could argue that the point is for Bond to be savoring the moment. Had Connery done that bit, he would have been funny, too, but with more of an element of sadistic pleasure. Moore plays it more for laughs. Despite this, it's never as silly as, say, the bird doing a double-take in Moonraker or the stupid Beach Boys song in A View to a Kill.

The same thing goes for The Living Daylights, which tonally is closer to an Indiana Jones movie than some of the other Bonds. To me, the concept is right in this respect -- it's a Bond adventure that's tense in some scenes and light hearted in others. Where it breaks down is in the execution rather than the idea. Dalton is never quite comfortable in the scenes requiring him to loosen up, for instance, though he is fine in the scenes where he has to be "serious."

Blackleiter

Gassy Man wrote:

Both films are relatively light on the gags, especially the ones at the expense of the story and character as opposed to being a function of them.

For instance, while things get rather campy in the teaser for For Your Eyes Only, one could argue that the point is for Bond to be savoring the moment. Had Connery done that bit, he would have been funny, too, but with more of an element of sadistic pleasure. Moore plays it more for laughs. Despite this, it's never as silly as, say, the bird doing a double-take in Moonraker or the stupid Beach Boys song in A View to a Kill.

The same thing goes for The Living Daylights, which tonally is closer to an Indiana Jones movie than some of the other Bonds. To me, the concept is right in this respect -- it's a Bond adventure that's tense in some scenes and light hearted in others. Where it breaks down is in the execution rather than the idea. Dalton is never quite comfortable in the scenes requiring him to loosen up, for instance, though he is fine in the scenes where he has to be "serious."

+1 {[]

chrisisall

Gassy Man wrote:

Dalton is never quite comfortable in the scenes requiring him to loosen up

I think that might have well been a conscious choice by Dalton to show the man is a marvelous killing machine & a great lover, but lacking in the appreciation for and comfort with all the everyday little things we as civvies take for granted. -{