Going Rogue - Trope of a post Cold War Bond

Absolutely_Cart

I mentioned this a bit in the Spectre forum, but now I'm realizing it's an overall pattern and not just something of the Craig era.

After The Living Daylights, Eon was learning how to use Dalton's strengths to their advantage. They marketed him as being dangerous and deadly if you get on his bad side. Allowing him to go rogue in License to Kill further added to his rebellious image, compared to the more gentle comforming personalities of Moore and Connery.

In the Brosnan era, Bond himself was more faithful to his assignments, but (in juxtaposition) the enemies were rogue. Trevelyan in Goldeneye was a traitorous former MI6 agent. The enemies in Tomorrow Never Dies and The World Is Not Enough were terrorists - rather than countries, since that was the new fear after the Cold War. In Die Another Day, both Brosnan and North Korean extremists went rogue.

Thunderpussy

As they weren't using any third party villains as they had in the past
Like SPECTRE, they had to have villains acting on their own agendas.
Or " Rogue ", that way you could still have for instance sympathetic
Russian characters, to show not all Russians were bad, only this non
Peace loving Rogue general. Which happened in OP, long before TLD.

Matt S

Rogue villains were a very common thing throughout the Bond series and are nothing new. Dr. No went rogue from the Chinese. Generals Orlov and Koskov were rogue Soviets. Zorin was a rogue KGB agent. Terrorists are also nothing new since SPECTRE was a terrorist organisation (the "T").

Matt S

Also, Bond first went rogue in OHMSS when he didn't get support from M in his search for Blofeld. But then after he found the information on his own and proved himself, he convinced M to reassign him. You may even be able to consider Bond not killing Pushkin in TLD to be rogue.

Gala Brand

Bond often went rogue in the sense that he went far beyond what he was assigned to do. In DN, his assignment is to find out who killed Strangways and he ends up blowing up a Caribbean island with a nuclear reactor. In GF he's supposed to find out how Goldfinger is smuggling gold but he ends up in an all-out war in Fort Knox.

Matt S

Gala Brand wrote:

Bond often went rogue in the sense that he went far beyond what he was assigned to do. In DN, his assignment is to find out who killed Strangways and he ends up blowing up a Caribbean island with a nuclear reactor. In GF he's supposed to find out how Goldfinger is smuggling gold but he ends up in an all-out war in Fort Knox.

Bond didn't blow up Dr. No's island just to blow up the island. He was assigned to find out what happened to Strangways and going to Dr. No's Island was all part of that. I don't think M was interested in finding out that the three blind mice killed Strangways but wanted to know who was behind it. Bond needed to find out if Dr. No was behind it. Nothing rogue about that.

The moment Bond finds out how Goldfinger is smuggling gold, he is captured and taken to Kentucky. By the time he finds out about the plan, he's not the one doing anything, it's all in the American's hands. Bond is simply just a prisoner until he is saved at Fort Knox. There's nothing rogue about being held prisoner and trying to do something other than sitting around in a cell. The only thing Bond did wrong in Goldfinger was sleep with Jill Masterson. That wasn't part of an agent's job by any means and caused problems.

Miles Messervy

Matt S wrote:

Also, Bond first went rogue in OHMSS when he didn't get support from M in his search for Blofeld. But then after he found the information on his own and proved himself, he convinced M to reassign him. You may even be able to consider Bond not killing Pushkin in TLD to be rogue.

Bond actually went rouge twice in OHMSS (when he teams with Draco at the end to assault Piz Gloria).

Miles Messervy

I think the "going rogue" trend, particularly in the Craig films, has nothing to do with the stories being set post-Cold War. Rather, I think it is a response to the increasingly interconnected nature of our world.

In the early Bond films, 007 could disappear and M was simply left to wonder where he might be (unless Q manages to put some radioactive lint in his pocket!). Now, we all leave a digital footprint everywhere we go all day every day. When Bond asks Q to "make me disappear", it resonates with a modern audience--we understand why that is a request that someone like Bond would need to ask of someone like Q.

Going rogue allows Bond to drop "off the grid" in a way that was a given during the first 30+ years of the franchise. It prevents technology from intruding on the atmosphere of the film. Skyfall showed this contrast: compare the beginning, when M is livestreaming the mission, to the end, when Bond and M are isolated and forced to adapt without support. For better or worse, going rogue is how they have chosen to allow Bond to be Bond, i.e. a lone wolf operating with just his instincts and his skills to get him out of harm's way.

Matt S

Miles Messervy wrote:

Matt S wrote:

Also, Bond first went rogue in OHMSS when he didn't get support from M in his search for Blofeld. But then after he found the information on his own and proved himself, he convinced M to reassign him. You may even be able to consider Bond not killing Pushkin in TLD to be rogue.

Bond actually went rouge twice in OHMSS (when he teams with Draco at the end to assault Piz Gloria).

Ah, of course!

Gala Brand

Matt S wrote:

Gala Brand wrote:

Bond often went rogue in the sense that he went far beyond what he was assigned to do. In DN, his assignment is to find out who killed Strangways and he ends up blowing up a Caribbean island with a nuclear reactor. In GF he's supposed to find out how Goldfinger is smuggling gold but he ends up in an all-out war in Fort Knox.

Bond didn't blow up Dr. No's island just to blow up the island. He was assigned to find out what happened to Strangways and going to Dr. No's Island was all part of that. I don't think M was interested in finding out that the three blind mice killed Strangways but wanted to know who was behind it. Bond needed to find out if Dr. No was behind it. Nothing rogue about that.

His assignment was to find out who killed Strangways. When he found it was Doctor No, the smart thing (but less dramatic) would be to call London and tell them to send a frigate to check out No's island. He could've confirmed that Dr. No was behind everything by interrogating Dent instead of needlessly (and sadistically) killing him.

Instead Bond storms Doctor No's well-fortified island with only Quarrel to help and promptly gets Quarrel killed.


The moment Bond finds out how Goldfinger is smuggling gold, he is captured and taken to Kentucky. By the time he finds out about the plan, he's not the one doing anything, it's all in the American's hands. Bond is simply just a prisoner until he is saved at Fort Knox. There's nothing rogue about being held prisoner and trying to do something other than sitting around in a cell. The only thing Bond did wrong in Goldfinger was sleep with Jill Masterson. That wasn't part of an agent's job by any means and caused problems.

Bond figures out how Goldfinger smuggles the gold and that the Chinese are working with him. At that point the smart thing to do is to get in his car, call London, and have the Swiss authorities raid the place. Instead, he decides to see what Tilly Masterson is up to and even after he should realize that an alarm has gone off he lays in the woods chit-chatting (way-laid, so to speak) until it's too late to make an escape.

These are two of my favorite Bond films but to think that Bond always did what he was told would be a mistake.

Miles Messervy

Connery's Bond routinely engaged in the type of reckless behavior for which Craig's Bond has been routinely scolded by M. The key difference is that Connery never bothered to check in and the M of yesteryear stayed put in London.