You've mirrored my experience near-exact, minus a Senior Loeffelholz to introduce me to the novels. I had to learn about them on the streets....
In seriousness, I have no idea how I first stumbled upon the novels... I think it may have been in a local used bookstore. In any case, after reading a few tattered paperbacks, my whole take on the character and mythos was turned on its head, and I'm proud to call myself a staunch Flemingist these days. I now own three or four editions of each Bond novel and reread them often.
If I had to pick a party, it would be the Cinematic Bond Traditionalist party.
However, I really prefer elements of both parties. I like the Flemingist films like FRWL, TB, FYEO, and LTK. They have great elements of espionage, strong bond girls, a thrilling tone, seriousness, and an exucse for an actor to dig really deep while portraying 007.
I also love the fun, action-packed, sometimes humorous (sophisticated), roller-coaster rides like GF, LALD, TSLWM, OP, TLD, and GE. These films adapt the character to the cinema in a fantastic way. I'm not sure if my imagination could think up stuff like these films have if I read them in a novel.
I like how the films change in tone, thought, and focus. If they were all like FRWL, OHMSS, and CR, it would have gotten old and boring quick. If they had all been like LALD, TSWLM, OP, GE, and heaven forbid MR and DAD they would have been ridiculed even more. The producers need do what they did back in the day by changing it up to provide some versatility and differentiation while also pleasing all types of fans every so often.
I propose a new party, a sort of a "catch-all" party. Maybe we can call it the "Bond Cycles Party" or something like that since members of it prefer a change between the three or four types of 007 films every so often. 1) Dark spy thrillers like FRWL and OHMSS, 2) Fun roller coaster rides like GF, LALD, and GE, 3) Light-hearted, humorous adventures like DAF, TMWTGG, and OP, and 4) Borderline sci-fi extravaganzas like YOTL, MR, and DAD.
I know there are more people on here with this opinion. Let me hear you!
Oh Lord. . .this is the problem with American politics: you have to be either in one party or the other, so those who are socially liberal and economically conservative feel left out in the cold. Now we have this kind of rigid partisanship spreading to Bond fans? I like both elements of "Flemingists" and "Traditionistas," so what the heck does that make me?
I figured this might come up at some point; thanks, Hardy {[]
Obviously, a third party is called for---and I'm fairly certain this will be the dominant one...which should hopefully create enough of a separation between onerous real-life politics and just-for-fun BonditicsTM to satisfy even the most contrarian of moderators B-)
In all such human endeavours, mainstream moderates enjoy the company of the masses, their tastes encompassing elements from each of the two more disparate camps. They don't like being labeled, or pigeon-holed (which is where irony comes into play ), but...The Bond film that wins over this crowd wins it all.
Bond-Centrist - This Bond fan is possibly (or probably) well-read, re: Fleming, and finds value in transferring a bit of the literary heritage to the Big Screen---and yet, finds enough to like in Cinematic Bond's broader, lighter-tone outings (most of the time) to afford them a generous measure of dispensation, whilst condemning excesses on either side.
P.S. Just having fun here, folks! I'm a Flemingist, but I still enjoy TMWTGG and TSWLM...hopefully we can relax...just a little...?
Make me a Bond-Centrist but lean more toward Flemingist.
Bond: You don't think I enjoyed what we did this evening, do you? What I did tonight was for King and country! You don't think it gave me any pleasure, do you?
Fiona: But of course, I forgot your ego, Mr. Bond. James Bond, who only has to make love to a woman and she starts to hear heavenly choirs singing.
D_SomersetThe Direct Orient-ExpressPosts: 20MI6 Agent
edited June 2008
Well, as a newbie to the site, I carefully read everyone's entries before I asked myself where I stood.
I discovered Bond at the age of eight, with Moonraker, and over the next five years, I saw every Bond film ever made (no mean feat in the dawning years of VCRs), and read all the original Flemings, as well as stayed "up to date" with the new John Gardners.
I always knew that there was a fundamental difference in tone between the films and the novels, and I accepted this as two halves of the whole. I relished the more Flemingesque moments, but as the reality of the books became further rooted in the past, I resigned myself to just those odd moments where Fleming shone through, i.e.- Bond kicking Loque's car over the cliff in FYEO; Bond blasting the East German Border guard right between the eyes when he could have just knocked him out in OP. Even the fanfare of "Dalton read the books!" Proved to be more of a tempest in a teapot than anything else, even if I was pleased to see a more serious take on the cinematic interpretation.
Then the dark days of post-LTK, pre-GE. Years with nothing but my precious VCR dubs of rented bond flicks (and a few TV airings) to keep us aficionados ("fanboy" is such an ugly word) going.
And then, GE- straight up Bond spectacular with giant radar dishes, killer satellites, and the DB5 back in action- BUT, I felt something different- Bond sitting on the beach, melancholy and alone; the most vicious fight scene since the Orient Express fight in FRWL, and Alec's death- heat of passion perhaps, certainly justified, yet nevertheless, murder. Hmmm- rather Flemingseque...
Other moments followed-
TND- In a scene that could have sprung from Fleming's pen, Bond sits alone in his hotel, shooting straight vodka, waiting for one of Carver's men to come kill him and behaving like a right B'stard when Paris shows up. This is followed by Bond's cold-blooded execution of Dr. Kaufman.
TWINE- Bond is ready to execute Renard in the missile silo, and later does cold-bloodedly execute Elektra (007 kills a WOMAN!)
Even DAD- Bond is captured and tortured.
Something was going on- Fleming was, incrementally, leaking back into the films- almost as if Wilson and Broccoli were...testing the waters? Preparing us for something?
I began to hope against hope when Casino Royale became a possibility- I hoped for a reboot before that word was being used in the movie buisness- I even envisioned Bond being taken back to square one and being put back into the Cold War of 1954, when he was at his best. I dared to dream of never seeing a hollowed-out volcano ever again...
The hope of this die-hard, unapologetic, fundamentalist, jihadist, Flemingite still burns bright and I can't wait to see what Craig does next... -{
Nevertheless, I do have a couple of guilty pleasures, TSWLM and YOLT being two of them
I love the literary Bond, Fleming the most - I'm open to continuation novels if done well. I'm a fan of Higson's Young Bond, which I recommend to all people who have yet to discover them.
I also love the films, like most people it was how I was introduced to the character. I do prefer a more realistic Bond film in the vein of FRWL and LTK, but have no problem with the excess of Moore era type films - again, if done well. TSWLM in my opinion is the perfect template for this type of Bond film.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
sharpshooter, it's great to have you as a part of this community -{
You strike me as a centrist, which is excellent for overall balance. The (Fleming) books---and the films---are all so much fun...life is all about compromise, ultimately, and IMO Eon have done an admirable job of keeping us all inerested :007)
Once again, welcome to AJB {[]
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I guess I prefer the better films in the series, generally the ones that take themselves seriously and/or have a lot of Fleming in them (funny how I like that in a Bond film, heh). The more comedic, dirivative, or just plain bad Bond films (poorly written/directed, old/unbelievable actor in the lead) I pass on: if the film doesn't seem to care about telling a good and thrilling Bond story, I don't care to watch it (er, re-watch it). There's a few on the cusp like DAF and MR with their unique blend of Fleming and cinematic Bond, some fun to be had there, sure. But otherwise separating the wheat from the chaff is an easy thing for me - check my films list on the left there.
I identify with a good take on the character more than a specific actor: Connery plays a mostly bored and unappealling Bond in YOLT; Moore plays a compelling and darker (for him) Bond in TMWTGG; Brosnan even makes it through TND as Bond ( ). I don't mind the better cinematic Bonds (LALD, TMWTGG, TND), but I sure prefer the simply better Bonds (GF, OHMSS, FRWL, CR).
Oh Lord. . .this is the problem with American politics: you have to be either in one party or the other, so those who are socially liberal and economically conservative feel left out in the cold. Now we have this kind of rigid partisanship spreading to Bond fans? I like both elements of "Flemingists" and "Traditionistas," so what the heck does that make me?
Unlike politics, where basic principles about civilization provide the context for differences, we are talking about movies; products produced for entertainment purposes only. So, while it may be easy to try and cookie cut ourselves to make things more easily understood, there really is no right and wrong when it comes to appreciating the Bond films. As long as one appreciates them, that's really all that matters.
All that said, cast me with the Flemingists.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Oh Lord. . .this is the problem with American politics: you have to be either in one party or the other, so those who are socially liberal and economically conservative feel left out in the cold. Now we have this kind of rigid partisanship spreading to Bond fans? I like both elements of "Flemingists" and "Traditionistas," so what the heck does that make me?
Unlike politics, where basic principles about civilization provide the context for differences, we are talking about movies; products produced for entertainment purposes only. So, while it may be easy to try and cookie cut ourselves to make things more easily understood, there really is no right and wrong when it comes to appreciating the Bond films. As long as one appreciates them, that's really all that matters.
All that said, cast me with the Flemingists.
Well said, Mr. Crown, and thanks! {[]
I would merely add that the entire notion of BonditicsTM---to include the Flemingist, Cinematic Bond Traditionalist and Bond Centrist parties---is, like pinball, For Amusement Purposes Only... B-)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I think I'm Bondcentric with Flemingist leanings. I love the books and films equally, although I find the quality of the books rather more constant than the films, which sometimes promise much and disappoint. I like and respect Roger Moore, as I feel he did a difficult job in taking the part and making it his, and also I feel that a darker Bond may not have survived the 70s. So I think Moore needs much credit for carrying the role through that rather peculiar period in time.
Plus the car roll, the Union Flag parachute - these cannot be dismissed. I love them.
However, J. W. Pepper I can live without.
I loved GoldenEye, but can quite happily live without the rest of Brosnan's legacy. Particularly bad CG surfing.
Daniel Craig doesn't look like Bond, but he sure as hell acts like Bond, and I'm not ashamed to admit I was wrong to doubt him. Then again, I always respected him as a bloody good actor, so I kind of expected him to make a good fist of it.
Whichever side of the political divide I find myself, I can seem to find reasons to be traitorous! )
ahhh, this thread. I feel like I am now much more part of AJB, as I know that most of these words are the back bone to the AJB Glossary, and as I've been taking a walk down memory lane (with old posts) I'm glad I've now got the full meanings of these phrases and a context to put them in.
I would say I'm a Centrist, with Fleming tendancies (although I have yet to read IF...BUT I WILL...I AM, it's my next book...promise! ) as I prefer the more darker films, CR, OHMSS, DN..although TSWLM is in my top 5, but I think that was one of Moore's more serious roles.
Please correct me if I'm wrong...but that's where I'm headed....
She's worth whatever chaos she brings to the table and you know it. ~ Mark Anthony
I would say I'm a Centrist, with Fleming tendancies (although I have yet to read IF...BUT I WILL...I AM, it's my next book...promise! ) as I prefer the more darker films, CR, OHMSS, DN..although TSWLM is in my top 5, but I think that was one of Moore's more serious roles.
I can't say that this surprises me. :v I'm delighted to hear that you aren't a Flemingist (not that I have anything against Flemingists of course; :v after all, some of my best friends are Flemingists. ) )
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
I'm delighted to hear that you aren't a Flemingist (not that I have anything against Flemingists of course; :v after all, some of my best friends are Flemingists. ) )
:v
)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I'm delighted to hear that you aren't a Flemingist (not that I have anything against Flemingists of course; :v after all, some of my best friends are Flemingists. ) )
:v
)
) -{
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Tee HeeCBT Headquarters: Chicago, ILPosts: 917MI6 Agent
Same here Dan. As they say, "keep your friends close and your enemies closer." :v
) So true. :v
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Thunderbird 2East of Cardiff, Wales.Posts: 2,817MI6 Agent
Bond-Centrist - This Bond fan is possibly (or probably) well-read, re: Fleming, and finds value in transferring a bit of the literary heritage to the Big Screen---and yet, finds enough to like in Cinematic Bond's broader, lighter-tone outings (most of the time) to afford them a generous measure of dispensation, whilst condemning excesses on either side.
{[] That one's got my vote!
Yup, I'm in this party as well!
This is Thunderbird 2, how can I be of assistance?
This thread is a lot of fun, allthough probably ancient history for most of you guys!
I guess I'm a Centrist leaning heavily towards a Flemingist...
Glad you're enjoying it, Mister White! Most people have taken it in the spirit intended, but it does rankle in some quarters... ...Especially when I postulated that the appeal of QoS might hinge on a Bonditical 'Party Line' vote It turned out to not be the case---far from it, as many fans of Craig and CR hated QoS---and some detractors of Craig and CR actually enjoyed QoS more than CR...so one never knows...
Oh well! B-) There's no pigeon-holing Bond fandom; this thread is merely an 'all in fun' attempt to do so...
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Why? Because for my love of the character portrayed by his creator. The movies that follow the novels are usually (always) superior in quality then those that do not
:shrug:
Comments
You've mirrored my experience near-exact, minus a Senior Loeffelholz to introduce me to the novels. I had to learn about them on the streets....
In seriousness, I have no idea how I first stumbled upon the novels... I think it may have been in a local used bookstore. In any case, after reading a few tattered paperbacks, my whole take on the character and mythos was turned on its head, and I'm proud to call myself a staunch Flemingist these days. I now own three or four editions of each Bond novel and reread them often.
Here's to you my Literary Bond Comrade... {[]
However, I really prefer elements of both parties. I like the Flemingist films like FRWL, TB, FYEO, and LTK. They have great elements of espionage, strong bond girls, a thrilling tone, seriousness, and an exucse for an actor to dig really deep while portraying 007.
I also love the fun, action-packed, sometimes humorous (sophisticated), roller-coaster rides like GF, LALD, TSLWM, OP, TLD, and GE. These films adapt the character to the cinema in a fantastic way. I'm not sure if my imagination could think up stuff like these films have if I read them in a novel.
I like how the films change in tone, thought, and focus. If they were all like FRWL, OHMSS, and CR, it would have gotten old and boring quick. If they had all been like LALD, TSWLM, OP, GE, and heaven forbid MR and DAD they would have been ridiculed even more. The producers need do what they did back in the day by changing it up to provide some versatility and differentiation while also pleasing all types of fans every so often.
I propose a new party, a sort of a "catch-all" party. Maybe we can call it the "Bond Cycles Party" or something like that since members of it prefer a change between the three or four types of 007 films every so often. 1) Dark spy thrillers like FRWL and OHMSS, 2) Fun roller coaster rides like GF, LALD, and GE, 3) Light-hearted, humorous adventures like DAF, TMWTGG, and OP, and 4) Borderline sci-fi extravaganzas like YOTL, MR, and DAD.
I know there are more people on here with this opinion. Let me hear you!
Make me a Bond-Centrist but lean more toward Flemingist.
Fiona: But of course, I forgot your ego, Mr. Bond. James Bond, who only has to make love to a woman and she starts to hear heavenly choirs singing.
I discovered Bond at the age of eight, with Moonraker, and over the next five years, I saw every Bond film ever made (no mean feat in the dawning years of VCRs), and read all the original Flemings, as well as stayed "up to date" with the new John Gardners.
I always knew that there was a fundamental difference in tone between the films and the novels, and I accepted this as two halves of the whole. I relished the more Flemingesque moments, but as the reality of the books became further rooted in the past, I resigned myself to just those odd moments where Fleming shone through, i.e.- Bond kicking Loque's car over the cliff in FYEO; Bond blasting the East German Border guard right between the eyes when he could have just knocked him out in OP. Even the fanfare of "Dalton read the books!" Proved to be more of a tempest in a teapot than anything else, even if I was pleased to see a more serious take on the cinematic interpretation.
Then the dark days of post-LTK, pre-GE. Years with nothing but my precious VCR dubs of rented bond flicks (and a few TV airings) to keep us aficionados ("fanboy" is such an ugly word) going.
And then, GE- straight up Bond spectacular with giant radar dishes, killer satellites, and the DB5 back in action- BUT, I felt something different- Bond sitting on the beach, melancholy and alone; the most vicious fight scene since the Orient Express fight in FRWL, and Alec's death- heat of passion perhaps, certainly justified, yet nevertheless, murder. Hmmm- rather Flemingseque...
Other moments followed-
TND- In a scene that could have sprung from Fleming's pen, Bond sits alone in his hotel, shooting straight vodka, waiting for one of Carver's men to come kill him and behaving like a right B'stard when Paris shows up. This is followed by Bond's cold-blooded execution of Dr. Kaufman.
TWINE- Bond is ready to execute Renard in the missile silo, and later does cold-bloodedly execute Elektra (007 kills a WOMAN!)
Even DAD- Bond is captured and tortured.
Something was going on- Fleming was, incrementally, leaking back into the films- almost as if Wilson and Broccoli were...testing the waters? Preparing us for something?
I began to hope against hope when Casino Royale became a possibility- I hoped for a reboot before that word was being used in the movie buisness- I even envisioned Bond being taken back to square one and being put back into the Cold War of 1954, when he was at his best. I dared to dream of never seeing a hollowed-out volcano ever again...
The hope of this die-hard, unapologetic, fundamentalist, jihadist, Flemingite still burns bright and I can't wait to see what Craig does next... -{
Nevertheless, I do have a couple of guilty pleasures, TSWLM and YOLT being two of them
I also love the films, like most people it was how I was introduced to the character. I do prefer a more realistic Bond film in the vein of FRWL and LTK, but have no problem with the excess of Moore era type films - again, if done well. TSWLM in my opinion is the perfect template for this type of Bond film.
You strike me as a centrist, which is excellent for overall balance. The (Fleming) books---and the films---are all so much fun...life is all about compromise, ultimately, and IMO Eon have done an admirable job of keeping us all inerested :007)
Once again, welcome to AJB {[]
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I identify with a good take on the character more than a specific actor: Connery plays a mostly bored and unappealling Bond in YOLT; Moore plays a compelling and darker (for him) Bond in TMWTGG; Brosnan even makes it through TND as Bond (
A Flemingist with Centrist leanings? :007)
Unlike politics, where basic principles about civilization provide the context for differences, we are talking about movies; products produced for entertainment purposes only. So, while it may be easy to try and cookie cut ourselves to make things more easily understood, there really is no right and wrong when it comes to appreciating the Bond films. As long as one appreciates them, that's really all that matters.
All that said, cast me with the Flemingists.
Well said, Mr. Crown, and thanks! {[]
I would merely add that the entire notion of BonditicsTM---to include the Flemingist, Cinematic Bond Traditionalist and Bond Centrist parties---is, like pinball, For Amusement Purposes Only... B-)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I think I'm Bondcentric with Flemingist leanings. I love the books and films equally, although I find the quality of the books rather more constant than the films, which sometimes promise much and disappoint. I like and respect Roger Moore, as I feel he did a difficult job in taking the part and making it his, and also I feel that a darker Bond may not have survived the 70s. So I think Moore needs much credit for carrying the role through that rather peculiar period in time.
Plus the car roll, the Union Flag parachute - these cannot be dismissed. I love them.
However, J. W. Pepper I can live without.
I loved GoldenEye, but can quite happily live without the rest of Brosnan's legacy. Particularly bad CG surfing.
Daniel Craig doesn't look like Bond, but he sure as hell acts like Bond, and I'm not ashamed to admit I was wrong to doubt him. Then again, I always respected him as a bloody good actor, so I kind of expected him to make a good fist of it.
Whichever side of the political divide I find myself, I can seem to find reasons to be traitorous!
I would say I'm a Centrist, with Fleming tendancies (although I have yet to read IF...BUT I WILL...I AM, it's my next book...promise! ) as I prefer the more darker films, CR, OHMSS, DN..although TSWLM is in my top 5, but I think that was one of Moore's more serious roles.
Please correct me if I'm wrong...but that's where I'm headed....
:v
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Same here Dan. As they say, "keep your friends close and your enemies closer." :v
-Roger Moore
Yup, I'm in this party as well!
I guess I'm a Centrist leaning heavily towards a Felmingist...
Glad you're enjoying it, Mister White! Most people have taken it in the spirit intended, but it does rankle in some quarters...
Oh well! B-) There's no pigeon-holing Bond fandom; this thread is merely an 'all in fun' attempt to do so...
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Why? Because for my love of the character portrayed by his creator. The movies that follow the novels are usually (always) superior in quality then those that do not
:shrug: