Why James Bond?
CmdrAtticus
United StatesPosts: 1,102MI6 Agent
This has probably been answered a lot and there seems to be many
answers to my question, but what do members think is the largest reason
for the cultural longevity and fascination of Bond? Are there any other
characters on which a series has been based that have lasted half a
century in the history of film and print, and for that matter, to this degree of success? Though it's obvious that Star Trek and Star Wars and Doctor Who keep rolling on through various degrees of success and through different evolutions since the 1960's and 70's, and they are iconic in their place in the history of pop culture, these are sci-fi based characters and stories in the future (or alternate universes), whereas the Bond series is only about a contemporary man who is a spy.
answers to my question, but what do members think is the largest reason
for the cultural longevity and fascination of Bond? Are there any other
characters on which a series has been based that have lasted half a
century in the history of film and print, and for that matter, to this degree of success? Though it's obvious that Star Trek and Star Wars and Doctor Who keep rolling on through various degrees of success and through different evolutions since the 1960's and 70's, and they are iconic in their place in the history of pop culture, these are sci-fi based characters and stories in the future (or alternate universes), whereas the Bond series is only about a contemporary man who is a spy.
Comments
Like each, Bond has been successfully interpreted in the media, mostly print and on film, and by different actors in different ways according to the times, which adds to his longevity.
IMO, the secret of Bond's appeal is because he bridges the gap between man and superman - he does the kind of things we'd love to do but can't, and he's grounded in reality. I think Fleming said that Bond is "who every man wants to be.... And who every woman wants to have between the sheets". Bond is good at everything, which we'd all love to be, and lives a lifestyle most of us can only dream of - moments of great danger interspersed by moments of great luxury. He knows what he wants and, for the most part, he gets it. But there's just enough humanity about Bond that we can empathise with him, he's not a cartoon character, we can see ourselves in him.
And a final thing - we can all be a little bit like Bond every day. Whether it's when we say a witty line, or when we enjoy a bit of banter with the opposite sex, or when we wear a certain item of clothing, or drink a fine wine: it brings us a small step closer to feeling Bondian, and isn't that what it's all about?
Like Blackleiter says: what is not to like?
I have no affection for superheroes, although I did like the Batman movies. But James Bond, yeah, that is a man I would like to be when I grow up. Ah, forgot, I am already grown up
1. Connery 2. Craig 3. Brosnan 4. Dalton 5. Lazenby 6. Moore
What is Bond’s winning formula? One key factor is the balance between continuity and change, between staying reliably the same and seeming fresh and new. Certain elements of every Bond movie are unwavering, so we feel an affectionate familiarity with them; others are new each time, so we don’t feel as if we are watching the same film over and over again. A Bond film is licensed to get on with the story knowing that we have already bonded with Bond. It is a rare advantage. How many other characters are so iconic that they can survive a change of actors without any drop in popularity? The 007 formula may seem as rigid as one of Sean Connery’s toupees, but the space within it that is left open for variation and evolution is just as important. Each film can have a new villain, a different love interest and any number of exotic locations. What’s more, it can be set in different time periods, in that Bond always operates in the period when the film is made, whether that is the 1960s, the 21st century or at any point in between. This allows the films to adapt to the cinematic trend of the moment.
Look for that cocktail of stability and malleability in other franchises and you will not find it. Batman and Spider-Man, for instance, are restricted to their stomping grounds of Gotham and New York, where they encounter the same small roster of colourful antagonists. No wonder audiences wouldn’t put up with them for 50 years without a break. Zorro, The Three Musketeers, and the Pirates of the Caribbean are all tied to specific places and periods. Indiana Jones may not to be bound to a specific milieu, but he is synonymous with a specific actor. Meanwhile, at the other end of the spectrum, there are franchises which are so loose and indistinct that almost nothing connects the various instalments, leaving little for an audience to grow attached to (Die Hard or Mission Impossible series). Ask yourself this: would anyone get excited if a “Mission: Impossible” finished with the caption “Ethan Hunt Will Return”? It is unlikely. But when a Bond film finishes with the equivalent promise, it still leaves a tingle of anticipation, even after 50 years. Here is another viewpoint:
Professor James Chapman of Leicester University, author of Licence To Thrill: A Cultural History of the James Bond Films, said it that the reason for Bond's longevity was about the series ability to successfully negotiate change.
"They responded to changes in geopolitics, to technological change, and changes in the film industry," he said.
"Each generation gets its own Bond. They have managed to renew the franchise in such a way that it taps into what's going on not just in society but in the popular taste in film culture."
So I suppose we may always have Bond in film, as long as whoever owns the franchise in the future can keep up that balancing act in relation to cultural/technical and political change.
In a strange way, it's why such figures as Bugs Bunny or the other Looney Toon
characters are still enjoyed by millions. We already know them and what they're habits are. The enjoyment is riding along with them to see which next misadventure they will encounter and how they'll extract themselves from it. Put it another way: we know the Coyote is going to fail to catch the Road Runner. The fun is watching what his next trap is and just how it fails (usually with that long drop to the canyon floor).
I think you have explained it about as well as it can be explained. Kudos to you! -{
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Obviously everyone at AJB is a dedicated fan of the books and films. I'm not sure what I can add to what's already been said, but for me, there's this:
Bond is a lone gun. He is self reliant, worldly, fearless, impetuous and driven. Wouldn't we all like the chance to be given a mission with no restrictions, be totally self sufficient, able to wile our way into the enemy's nest, escape from our missteps and finally foil that dastardly villain a moment before disaster would have struck?
Why James Bond? Who else?
I think you've made some very good points. I'm still trying to
pin down just what it is about Bond that made me a fan.
My answer to what made me a fan is easy. I was a kid, saw Dr. No on first run at one of my local theatres and was hooked.
Nicely stated! Welcome aboard! -{
-{
In many ways it was the same for Me, Only it was when Dr No was shown on TV for the first time.
Although I'd already deen LALD as a kid ( Don't know why, that didn't hook me,I was too young
I guess
Even though it did look a little "Old" it moved along at such a pace never slowing, I too was hooked.
Infact that got me in to reading the Books, But as to what it is about Bond that makes me a fan ?
I guess it's his selfreliance, wit, and sence of duty. Also Fleming's imagination to write such brilliant
plots and characters. Whatever it was I'm just happy I became hooked. :007)
However, that theme has changed of late, as it's made clear that Bond has to be a different person at the end of the picture to who he was at the beginning, the writers have to follow the screenwriter's blueprint.
Roger Moore 1927-2017