All things Bond...James Bond. Bond 24 Title announced.

[peterien]

Great show, wont say much as its not out in US but really enjoyed it. A bit lighter in tone than Skyfall but it works. I have it tied with Skyfall as my favourite Craig-era Bond film.

Craig owns it but Waltz is great.

[The Natural]

Me and my Dad went to see Spectre (2015) yesterday. Turns out it was the very first screening that day. The screen we went in was almost a sellout with ushers guiding us to our seats, never had them before.

 

I right enjoyed Spectre for the story and performances particularly by Daniel Craig, Christoph Waltz, Ben Whishaw and Lea Seydoux. Spectre is the longest Bond movie clocking in at 148 minutes but it flew by. The pre-credits sequence is one of the best from the series. I’d say this was the funniest of the Daniel Craig Bond films. Coming out of the cinema thinking how I’d rank the Daniel Craig Bond films, I’d certainly have Skyfall (2012) over Spectre and possibly Casino Royale (2006) as well with Quantum of Solace (2008) a distant last. I haven’t watched the first three in ages.

 

SPOILERS…You have been warned…

 

The title sequence was particularly well done with Daniel Craig, women, a lot of SPECTRE logo imagery and callbacks to the Craig films with faces of Le Chiffre and Judi Dench’s M.

 

Still not keen on Sam Smith’s Writing’s on the Wall theme for the film.

 

This film isn’t as good looking at its predecessor was, thanks to the great work by Roger Deakins.

 

Pleasant surprise seeing Judi Dench’s M return via a recording to Bond.

 

The train fight between Bond and Mr. Hinx is very good as is the lack of music. You just heard the contact between the two.

 

In this new timeline we’ve had Felix, M, Q, Moneypenny, the gadgets, Aston Martin reintroduced and now Blofeld once known as Franz Oberhauser in the shape of Christoph Waltz. Blofeld’s cat actually appears and he gets the signature eye scaring.

 

I spotted a few people cringing at the torture sequence by Blofeld to Bond. This sequence is the most disturbing in the film.

 

I really liked how the old MI6 building out of action since the attack in Skyfall is used in the film’s climax.

 

I’ve a feeling this will be Daniel Craig and Sam Mendes last James Bond film.

[TheVileOne]

The Brits may get to see the movie before I do, but I get to see the movie next week at IMAX HQ followed by a cocktail reception. 

[Brian Fowler]

What I'm finding somewhat surprising here is that people here apparently feel Skyfall was superior to Casino Royale.

[Jingus]

Eh, it's a close call. Casino Royale of course was the one that rewrote the rules of what the franchise is supposed to be, and rescued the series from the doldrums it had reached in the previous couple of films; but it sometimes felt more like a publicity stunt than a standalone story. Skyfall's got the better villain, a much better climactic battle, and is a bit less reboot-y and a bit more of a throwback to the classic Bond flicks (and it also feels much less like a Jason Bourne ripoff).

[Brian Fowler]

I've always felt Casino Royale was much more "what if the Bourne movies didn't suck" than a pure ripoff. It has a better, tighter plot, the best Bond girl ever, and were going to have to agree to disagree on the villain, because I thought Mads was light years better than Bardem.

Skyfall did have the better cinematography and a better theme song. That's about all I felt was better.

And I liked Skyfall a lot. But I have Royale second or third best of the whole series.

[Elsalvajeloco]

I've always felt Casino Royale was much more "what if the Bourne movies didn't suck" than a pure ripoff. It has a better, tighter plot, the best Bond girl ever, and were going to have to agree to disagree on the villain, because I thought Mads was light years better than Bardem.

 

This is basically how I feel. For some reason, I just couldn't get into Skyfall even though I do love Deakins' cinematography.

[Jiji]

I couldn't get into Skyfall much aside from the concluding showdown but even then the outcome was pretty obvious, so there wasn't a great deal of emotional connection to a fairly big scene in Bond history. The rest of the movie was too much of a Dark Knight knock off in terms of cinematography, locale, character, and script.

 

Never been a fan of the Bourne movies but I loved Casino Royale, so aside from how they filmed a few of the CQC scenes and Bond being a bit more brutish, in what ways did Casino Royale borrow from the Bourne franchise?

[Jingus]

I actually like two out of three Bourne films better than Casino Royale as standalone stories; I like their prosaic, workaday-style villains as being guys who are just trying to do their jobs but don't mind trying to do them in a fundamentally evil manner. You see that thing more often in paranoia thrillers of the Michael Clayton type way more often than you do in action films, and I welcomed these rare exceptions. Also, I thought Bourne's fight scenes were plain better than Royale's; the chases come to a draw, since Bond's opening parkour race is a bit better than anything in the Bourne films, but those win on sheer quantity of chase scenes (after that rousing opening, Royale never manages to top itself in terms of action). And it also doesn't hurt that I find poor amnesiac, confused, scared Jason to be an infinitely more sympathetic as a protagonist than a smooth sociopath like James.

[Jiji]

Eh, that's why I like Fleming's Bond so much. He's not a typical protagonist. He's a misogynistic, as you say - sociopathic, racist, piece of shit and  he's an extension of the government. I choose to read Fleming's Bond as a symbol of few of the main things I dislike so much of 20th (and for the most part 21st) century western-style government.

[TheVileOne]

I thought Skyfall was superior since it brought a lot of the traditional Bond elements back into the mix.  It felt like Craig's Bond had finally come full circle.

 

Also, since when is James Bond racist?

[Brian Fowler]

I HATE the action scenes in the Bourne movies. All the quick cutting that obscures whatever the fuck is happening on screen. It was terrible and ruined action films for a good decade.

[odessasteps]

I thought Skyfall was superior since it brought a lot of the traditional Bond elements back into the mix.  It felt like Craig's Bond had finally come full circle.

 

Also, since when is James Bond racist?

Dr. no?

[Jiji]

The books. I was referring to the books, which are drenched in a colonial racist worldview and Orientalism. 

[Raziel]

I thought Skyfall was superior since it brought a lot of the traditional Bond elements back into the mix.  It felt like Craig's Bond had finally come full circle.

 

Also, since when is James Bond racist?

In the books, Live and Let Die.

[J.T.]

Eh, that's why I like Fleming's Bond so much. He's not a typical protagonist. He's a misogynistic, as you say - sociopathic, racist, piece of shit and  he's an extension of the government. I choose to read Fleming's Bond as a symbol of few of the main things I dislike so much of 20th (and for the most part 21st) century western-style government.

 

Not exactly a fair assessment.

 

Sure, Bond really isn't much different that his Jingoist influence, Bulldog Drummond, but even Fleming has clearly stated that those elements are included in Bond's persona to make him a more believable and tragic character.  The awful traits that are seen in Drummond as proper British virtues are seen in Bond for the horrible human frailties as they are, and we realize that Bond isn't fit for any work other than the near suicidal tasks he's sent out to accomplish for Queen and Country.

 

We wonder aloud how a man so flawed and troubled could do such great things in defense of his country and we learn much to our horror that it is no accident as governments the world around actively seek out and recruit such amoral and unprincipled men to serve in their clandestine ranks in similar capacities.

 

Bond, in Orwellian fashion, is the man with rough hands that we send out into the night to do horrible things on our behalf so that the we can sleep soundly and innocently in our beds. 

 

I forget the name of the short story, but it is the one where Bond is convalescing in a hospital and his injuries have caused him to completely lose his memory.. 

 

Fleming then brilliantly implies that this may be the best thing for Bond as amnesia will do what those vodka martinis cannot:  allow him to completely forget what a brutal and violent menace he really is.  I am positive that if I ever met Bond, I'd think he was a smug asshole but yeah, happy to have him out there doing the things he does that I am better off not knowing about.

[Jiji]

You have a far more positive image of the American (or any major Western) government and a much more romantic/tragic take on Bond than I do and that's okay. And maybe it's naive of me but I don't think there are boogeymen (bogey, I suppose... it's INGURLISH, dammit) around every corner that need doing away with. Snuffing out "threats" with violence is a short-term solution to a long-term problem.

 

Your initial thoughts also speak to the idea that it was the only thing he could do in life, and therefore people cannot change (or at least Bond cannot). I would certainly disagree with everything behind that notion. Fundamentally, people are dynamic, incredibly elastic, and always learning and changing. It's the only way we've survived for so long. There's nothing about the character James Bond in which all of his other opportunities are narrowed that he MUST KILL FOR COUNTRY, like some automaton. Fleming fleshed out his background in OHMSS, I believe. Well educated, multilingual, upper middle class orphan who served in the war. Must be an assassin, I guess. *shrug* The acceptance of a job that may very well eat away at his soul is a choice. He's not a beast of burden (*Mick Jagger dance*). Neither of our countries have compulsory military service, and neither does Britain. Fuck people like Chris Kyle, who "reluctantly" take on that role for the good of others. He was a racist sociopath who had fun killing people (all of whom were bad, of course). "I hate the damn savages... I couldn’t give a flying fuck about the Iraqis.” And I also loathe the idea that civilians are sheep, purported bag guys are wolves, and whatever law enforcement/military service it is thinks they are the sheepdogs. Big John McCarthy wrote about that very thing in his biography and it creates a very dangerous mentality to hold for a person put in a position of authority. These are underlying ideas that connect with Bond or any other hero, though. Just not a fan of the martyrdom people in those positions can take on. It reflects on an inflated ego, that they're the only ones fit to do it and the world would crumble without them. 

 

The amnesia story is from You Only Live Twice. I like Fleming's usage of the title in his story rather than the movie's . Fucking Bond-san's transformation to Japanese is one of the best/worst moments of the entire series. 

 

Speaking of the politics behind Bond, has anybody read Simon Winder's The Man Who Saved Britain? It's a really fun read about the cultural impact Bond, particularly the film series, had on Britain during the post-war years as its political and military clout declined. It also discusses to some depth just how elastic the character of Bond was, to best suit the times. 

[J.T.]

Your initial thoughts also speak to the idea that it was the only thing he could do in life, and therefore people cannot change (or at least Bond cannot). I would certainly disagree with everything behind that notion. Fundamentally, people are dynamic, incredibly elastic, and always learning and changing. It's the only way we've survived for so long.

 

Society is certainly malleable, but people rarely are.   We have physical and mental gifts and certain aptitudes that cause us to excel or lag behind in certain things more than others.   We have likes and dislikes and these things lead us down certain paths when it comes to professional and personal pursuits. 

 

I am an excellent computer specialist but I am a crap singer.   I am a very good martial artist but I couldn't ski down a hill if my life depended on it and I hate cold weather so fuck skiing anyway.  If I am at the movies, I would pick the horror film over the comedy.

 

You get the idea.

 

I agree that we can do pretty much anything we set our minds to, but ultimately we tend to stay in our lanes of excellence or zones of comfort and Bond is no exception. 

 

He has a perfect storm / toxic stew of aptitudes, attitudes, skills, and motivations that make him the ideal assassin.  He could change if he wanted to, but does he really want to?  Bond traditionally chafes under the bit of his chosen profession, but note that his main complaint is about the bureaucracy that restricts him from doing as he pleases rather than the fact that he has to kill people for a living.

 

Bond likes what he does, he's REALLY good at what he does, and he operates under an air of justification that is tyrannical and irrational.. 

 

More importantly, in his line of work defeat is NOT an option, so his zealotry knows no bounds and his secret for triumph is that he will not heistate to go more batshit than his enemies in order to come out on top.  The fate of the FREE world hangs in the balance and Bond will go megaton at the drop of a hat for Queen and Country..

 

I think that like most of us, Fleming viewed his own creation with equal parts admiration and sheer terror, especially since we all realize that there are people on the other side of the fence that mirror Bond's make-up that are out to exploit the world (or worse, conquer or destroy the world) rather than preserve it. 

 

Bond refuses to take the best advice Nietzsche ever gave.  Bond has willingly transformed himself a monster in order to combat other monsters and I think that the concept of Bond as Necessary Evil is a deliberate and integral theme in Ian's work..

 

And maybe it's naive of me but I don't think there are boogeymen (bogey, I suppose... it's INGURLISH, dammit) around every corner that need doing away with. Snuffing out "threats" with violence is a short-term solution to a long-term problem.

 

I don't think that violence is always a viable or preferable solution, but the Boston Marathon bombing and other terror attacks and atrocities performed worldwide tend to prove that there are most certainly "boogeymen" out there who are willing to cause harm to random innocent citizens of any nation (arguably over the actions of certain governments, but that is another discussion for another thread) for their own motivations.

 

That's not even considering random violent criminal acts we here about everyday that have nothing to do with politics.  Its the world we live in and people being people, negative symptoms have to be managed since there is thankfully no cure for individuality or sentient thought.  Sometimes they manifest themselves in benevolent ways and sometimes they don't.

[Ryan]

I hope the next Bond is an androgynous asexual non-verbal that refuses to kill. Also they have telekinetic powers for no reason. Also, their skin is translucent as well.

[_MJ_]

Daniel Craig is my favorite James Bond, and I don't even think it's a controversial point anymore. Who is with me?

I like Pierce's Bond but looking back without nostalgic glasses, most of his Bond flicks were kind of lame.

[Jiji]

J.T., I enjoyed your post but I'm still in strong disagreement with you on the first part. You're speaking to a fixed mindset, where people are more or less born to do something. The opposite view, growth mindset, is all about the process of embracing and eventually overcoming failures to improve (not necessarily master or even become good at things). It speaks to our ability as humans to adapt and overcome. I'm sure with your time in the military, you've seen countless examples of people doing just that.

 

You also touch on a key element of the character, that Bond deep down enjoys the power his job gives him. Even in the ads for the new movie, he jokes about it was either being an assassin or a priest. Disillusioned Bond is the best Bond, and that's why I have such an affinity for Dalton's take - which I think captures the essence of Fleming's character the best. Craig's version is a distant second. If MGM had hired a more experienced actor to play Bond for OHMSS, they could've pulled that off a great deal better than Lazenby could have. 

 

And yeah, I feel you on the butterfly effect coming from the actions of hate-filled people on both sides of conflict harming innocent civilians. Random acts of violence in day-to-day life are generally only put down after the fact though and those cases are such a small percentage of the general population and those too are often influenced by politics. Also, shooting up a church or school gets a lot more attention than volunteering at a hospital or some other altruistic act. 

 

We're coming from very different perspectives, though I think there's a lot of common ground. I appreciate you taking the time to discuss this with me. 

 

I hope the next Bond is an androgynous asexual non-verbal that refuses to kill. Also they have telekinetic powers for no reason. Also, their skin is translucent as well.

Har har. I have always enjoyed the Bond movies and in the last 5-10 years, loved the novels even more so. My appreciation for the series has changed since I was a kid watching TBS' Bond marathons during Christmas break to now. I used to think he was the ideal man, the coolest motherfucker on the planet. Now I enjoy the franchise as an introspective look at Western colonialism and morality (and general entertainment value... And John Barry's scores).

[Basara]

Went to see it last night. I thought it was good but not the best of the new Bond films. I probably got caught up in the hype, it's rare to see a film sell out here. We had to go a day later than we planned and book tickets. So I guess maybe my expectations were a little high.

I definitely enjoyed Skyfall more. Am I right in thinking it's the longest Bond film yet? I think if they could cut out 30 mins and tighten up the pacing i would have enjoyed it more.

[J.T.]

J.T., I enjoyed your post but I'm still in strong disagreement with you on the first part. You're speaking to a fixed mindset, where people are more or less born to do something.

 

Oh, on the contrary.  You don't figure out what you're good at until you try to do different things.  You're not just born to do something.  You figure that out through life discovery and self improvement comes when you hone those skills so that you are really good at what you are good at... if that makes sense.

 

That's not really a static thing, it is very dynamic because the things you may be asked to do or the concepts you need to have a good grasp on in your chosen profession are ever changing thanks to things like technology.  The "computer" has evolved nine thousand fold since I first put my hands on one back in the 80's and I have not been able to stay competitive and relevant in my field without being knowledgeable about today's new applications. 

 

I am constantly evolving even though my basic aptitudes and attitudes have more or less remained the same.

 

It speaks to our ability as humans to adapt and overcome. I'm sure with your time in the military, you've seen countless examples of people doing just that..

 

Humans as individuals are very durable and adaptive, but one thing I have learned as an Army civilian is that humans excel when they are allowed to focus on one or two particular strengths that they can play to.  That may seem like a static mindset, but it isn't.

 

As Agent Smith said, it is purpose that drives us and the aptitudes you sharpen over time as a person and a professional tend to support the purpose that you passionately fulfill.

 

I enjoy training Soldiers ( one purpose of many) and I am pretty good with computers (one aptitude of many), but in order to fulfill my purpose, I have to constantly keep my skills sharp and relevant to the changing times. 

 

You also touch on a key element of the character, that Bond deep down enjoys the power his job gives him. Even in the ads for the new movie, he jokes about it was either being an assassin or a priest.

 

The nonchalant manner in which Bond views his job is one of the more amusing and frightening faces of the character.   Bond is almost flippant when he talks about the people he's killed.  The infamous Bond one liners that he snaps off after dispatching some henchman or BBEG is a staple of the movie franchise.

 

I am never sure if Bond is dismissive of human life in general or if his gallows humor just part of a huge coping mechanism ala the people I killed deserved to die anyway because they were a threat to society at large so let's just joke about how inept they were compared to me and then I will drink a lot of vodka to help me forget what a total fucking hot mess I am and how much blood I have on my hands.

[Jingus]

Am I right in thinking it's the longest Bond film yet?

Yes, but just barely. Spectre is 148 minutes, Skyfall was 143, Casino Royale was 144. Although technically On Her Majesty's Secret Service still has the most actual amount of movie; it clocks in at 142 minutes, but that's without the ten minutes of end credits which inflate the running times of the modern movies.

[ArtVanderlay]

Is it me or is Daniel Craig really starting to show his age in that Heineken "water skiing" commercial?

 

Craig with a "Dan Rather" style haircut is not a good look for the guy.