- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Where did bond go wrong?
Posted on 7/19/12 at 1:07 pm to 19
Posted on 7/19/12 at 1:07 pm to 19
As great as a film as it is, Thunderball began the decline.
First of all, it was supposed to be the first Bond film, but legal troubles prevented that from happening. Thunderball, the orginal script, gave birth to Blofeld, who became incorporated into the films from the start, but the producers didn't have the right to do so.
I say Thunderball because this was really the start of having gadgets out the yin-yang and Bond starting to really do stuff that would get any other regular person killed, much less a spy.
The producers needed bigger and bigger explosions and gadgets. It killed the cloak and dagger aspect of Bond that was there in Dr. No and From Russia With Love.
Lazenby and OHMSS were actually good. Anyone who says otherwise is talking out of their arse and I would bet have never seen the movie. Until Casino Royale, it was the closst of all the films to the books.
Dalton rooted the character in more realism, and if it had been released when Casino Royale was with Craig, the reception would have been better. Unfortunately, people got used to Roger Moore's yuk-yuk Bond universe, and it killed Dalton's chances. Imagine what would have happened if The Dark Knight would have been released in 1970, two years after Adam West went off of the air. That's the best parallel I can give at the moment. It would have be shouted down mercilessly. After being fed crap for the Moore duration (aside from LALD and maybe MWTGG), people weren't ready for edgy, brooding, Bond...You know, the way Ian Fleming wrote him.
Brosnan was born to play the part. Here's another thing where Bond went wrong. If not for Remington Steele, Brosnan would have replaced Moore. Bond would have retained the suavness and had an edge if that had happened. It didn't. Dalton was in, and for the public it was too much of a culture shock.
Casino Royale is great, but Craig is not Bond. He's a blunt instrument the way he is supposed to be, but there's no foil to balance that. I don't look at Craig and see style or worldliness. He's a brute and a killing machine without style.
First of all, it was supposed to be the first Bond film, but legal troubles prevented that from happening. Thunderball, the orginal script, gave birth to Blofeld, who became incorporated into the films from the start, but the producers didn't have the right to do so.
I say Thunderball because this was really the start of having gadgets out the yin-yang and Bond starting to really do stuff that would get any other regular person killed, much less a spy.
The producers needed bigger and bigger explosions and gadgets. It killed the cloak and dagger aspect of Bond that was there in Dr. No and From Russia With Love.
Lazenby and OHMSS were actually good. Anyone who says otherwise is talking out of their arse and I would bet have never seen the movie. Until Casino Royale, it was the closst of all the films to the books.
Dalton rooted the character in more realism, and if it had been released when Casino Royale was with Craig, the reception would have been better. Unfortunately, people got used to Roger Moore's yuk-yuk Bond universe, and it killed Dalton's chances. Imagine what would have happened if The Dark Knight would have been released in 1970, two years after Adam West went off of the air. That's the best parallel I can give at the moment. It would have be shouted down mercilessly. After being fed crap for the Moore duration (aside from LALD and maybe MWTGG), people weren't ready for edgy, brooding, Bond...You know, the way Ian Fleming wrote him.
Brosnan was born to play the part. Here's another thing where Bond went wrong. If not for Remington Steele, Brosnan would have replaced Moore. Bond would have retained the suavness and had an edge if that had happened. It didn't. Dalton was in, and for the public it was too much of a culture shock.
Casino Royale is great, but Craig is not Bond. He's a blunt instrument the way he is supposed to be, but there's no foil to balance that. I don't look at Craig and see style or worldliness. He's a brute and a killing machine without style.
1
Posted on 7/19/12 at 1:15 pm to Michael T. Tiger
quote:
I say Thunderball because this was really the start of having gadgets out the yin-yang and Bond starting to really do stuff that would get any other regular person killed, much less a spy.
Goldfinger was really the start of the gadgetry stuff. I've always thought of Thunderball as when Connery really peaked. The rest of the series up until Casino Royale seems to have been an attempt to copy those films.
Yes, OHMSS and The Living Daylights are great movies. If Connery had been in OHMSS, it would've been epic.
This post was edited on 7/19/12 at 1:16 pm
Posted on 7/19/12 at 1:21 pm to FairhopeTider
Thunderball might be the best in the series.
The problem is the looney tunes gadgets and while that worked in earlier films, the series didn't grow with the times. Some people hate the Craig movies but they are great because that is the bond that fits with this time
The problem is the looney tunes gadgets and while that worked in earlier films, the series didn't grow with the times. Some people hate the Craig movies but they are great because that is the bond that fits with this time
Posted on 7/19/12 at 1:21 pm to FairhopeTider
quote:People hate on Moonraker but it was just Goldfinger ot the extreme.
Goldfinger was really the start of the gadgetry stuff
And who hates Dalton? License to Kill just sucked.
Posted on 7/19/12 at 1:23 pm to CGB Spender
Posted on 7/19/12 at 1:35 pm to Michael T. Tiger
This is the order of bond actors with arrows to indicate the gap between them:
Connery>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Moore>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Brosnan>Craig>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Lazenby>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Dalton.
Connery>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Moore>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Brosnan>Craig>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Lazenby>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Dalton.
Posted on 7/19/12 at 1:38 pm to DanTiger
You're screwing up the thread.
Posted on 7/19/12 at 2:03 pm to alajones
Never Say Never Again was the worst film for me...Connery just took the money and phoned it in.
Posted on 7/19/12 at 2:34 pm to Skywalker
I don't think that was an official Bond film.
Posted on 7/19/12 at 3:07 pm to alajones
quote:
I don't think that was an official Bond film.
It wasn't. It was also a purposeful parody of Bond. The title of the movie was even a reference to Connery's comment that he would never play Bond again. It was meant to be a farce.
Posted on 7/19/12 at 3:11 pm to alajones
quote:
I don't think that was an official Bond film.
It's not...and that goes back to the Thunderball issue. Kevin McClory, who was named a producer for Thunderball, invented Spectre and Blofeld for the movie with Fleming. When the deal to originally make the movie fell through, Fleming still released Thuderball as a novel with those elements. McClory sued and won. He was named a producer for Thunderball when it was made and was given the righ to those elements.
This is why Bond kills "Blofeld" at the beginning of For Your Eyes Only by dropping him into a giant smokestack. Blofeld's face is never shown, and he is never names (he is actually played by Ken Hollis in that scene, same guy who played Lobot in The Empire Strikes Back). It was basically the producers big F U to McClory, saying that the series was bigger than Blofeld and Spectre.
McClory, however, was allowed to make more Bond films, provided, they only contain the same elements as Thunderball. That is why "Never Say Never Again" was made and is why McClory was developing ANOTHER remake of it called "Warhead 2000" before he died.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News