Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

General Bond discussion from Sean Connery to Pierce Brosnan
User avatar
avl_bmb
New Recruit
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 10:01 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: Casino Royale, Octopussy, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, The Spy Who Loved Me, No Time To Die
Contact:

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by avl_bmb »

bjmdds wrote: Mon Feb 21, 2022 8:46 pm
avl_bmb wrote: Mon Feb 21, 2022 4:41 pm Battle of the Bonds // Part 007 // Mission Report

We’ve come quite a long way since starting this journey together, haven’t we?
:cocktail:
You’ve been so kind in allowing me to inundate you with my countless thoughts, opinions, and musings on this franchise, its actors, and its films. For that I thank you.
:cocktail:
With the final entry in my Battle of the Bonds series, I leave you with rankings, reflections, and closing thoughts on the future of James Bond. :007:
You wrote:'At the time of this writing, actor Regé-Jean Page stands as the odds-on favorite to win the lauded role of the world’s 007th Bond. Call me full of s**t if you like, but he’s been my preferred choice since his name first entered the rumor mill. He has the look, he has the dramatic ability, and, as a man of British-Zimbabwean descent, he has the diversity this franchise so desperately needs. If the next Bond is just another white man, no matter how beloved or dramatically talented that white man might be, I think EON Productions will have missed an opportunity to push the franchise forward and continue the evolution of Bond.'-----------He does NOT come close to the look of Bond. Are you redefining a literary iconic character to be woke with the times? Sorry :!: That is NOT how this works. Diversity has nothing to do with the selection of the next Bond actor. Why not an Asian instead? If the next Bond actor is not Caucasian they can throw this franchise into the trash pile of celluloid waste material. This ridiculous notion of ethnically cleansing Bond to appeal to a lunatic notion of inclusion would result in a non-Fleming interpretation of the character. Darwin's theories have nothing to do with the ethnicity of the next Bond actor.
Thanks for reading. I also wrote:

"Connery wasn’t English or blue-eyed, neither was Lazenby. Moore and Craig are capital-E English and capital-B blue-eyed but don’t have black hair. Dalton and Brosnan both looked the part but are Welsh and Irish, respectfully.

I don’t think any of it matters as long as the actor can pull it off. It’s all just made-up rules for a made-up character. Why not try something new when you have the chance? Constant evolution of the James Bond film character from actor to actor is one of the greatest feats of this franchise. Smart money is on that trend continuing and I’m glad it is.

Some think it would be sacrilegious or a slap in the face to Bond’s creator if Bond were to be Black, Brown, Asian, or anything besides white. Why should we give a f**k what Fleming would think anyway? The man is the reason the character exists, sure, but he was also a terrible racist, sexist, and homophobe. Bond has evolved into something far beyond his original foundation, to say nothing of his wildest dreams.

Let’s keep that trajectory aimed upward, shall we?"

If one characteristic can be ignored and revised why can't the rest? M was never a woman in the books, nor was Felix Black or Q gay. So what's the real issue here? Your hyperbolic repulsion at the thought of a non-white Bond is a bit unsettling.
Kristatos wrote: Mon Feb 21, 2022 9:04 pm
bjmdds wrote:He does NOT come close to the look of Bond.
Aidan Turner remains my first choice for the next Bond, and Henry Cavill my second.
I'm definitely down with Aidan Turner. I haven't seen him in anything, but he has a dark mysterious vibe that really intrigues me.
User avatar
Kristatos
OO Moderator
OO Moderator
Posts: 12525
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:26 pm
Location: St. Cyril's

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by Kristatos »


avl_bmb wrote: I'm definitely down with Aidan Turner. I haven't seen him in anything, but he has a dark mysterious vibe that really intrigues me.
Definitely check him out in the BBC adaptation of Agatha Christie's And Then There Were None if you get the chance. It's practically his audition tape for the role. His character even introduces himself as "Lombard. Philip Lombard" at one point!

With regard to your other points, M and Q are job titles, not characters. Judi Dench and Ben Whishaw are not playing the same characters originated by Bernard Lee and Desmond Llewellyn (well, Norman Burton if you want to split hairs.) Felix has never been portrayed the way he was in the books - I always imagine him as looking a bit like Out Of Africa-era Robert Redford when I read them.

The other changes in Bond's physical characteristics that you mention don't really alter the character in any significant way, with the possible exception of Brosnan's Irish accent, and I wasn't wild about that either. Aidan Turner uses his native accent in some roles, but spoke with an RP accent in Poldark, and I hope that he would do so as Bond. Not because I have anything against Irish people, but because there has never been any mention of Bond having Irish ancestry in either the books or the movies.

Sent from my SM-G986B using Tapatalk


"He's the one that doesn't smile" - Queen Elizabeth II on Daniel Craig
User avatar
bjmdds
001
Posts: 14309
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 10:14 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: Any without CR-egg in it.

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by bjmdds »

avl_bmb wrote: Tue Feb 22, 2022 12:49 am
bjmdds wrote: Mon Feb 21, 2022 8:46 pm
avl_bmb wrote: Mon Feb 21, 2022 4:41 pm Battle of the Bonds // Part 007 // Mission Report

We’ve come quite a long way since starting this journey together, haven’t we?
:cocktail:
You’ve been so kind in allowing me to inundate you with my countless thoughts, opinions, and musings on this franchise, its actors, and its films. For that I thank you.
:cocktail:
With the final entry in my Battle of the Bonds series, I leave you with rankings, reflections, and closing thoughts on the future of James Bond. :007:
You wrote:'At the time of this writing, actor Regé-Jean Page stands as the odds-on favorite to win the lauded role of the world’s 007th Bond. Call me full of s**t if you like, but he’s been my preferred choice since his name first entered the rumor mill. He has the look, he has the dramatic ability, and, as a man of British-Zimbabwean descent, he has the diversity this franchise so desperately needs. If the next Bond is just another white man, no matter how beloved or dramatically talented that white man might be, I think EON Productions will have missed an opportunity to push the franchise forward and continue the evolution of Bond.'-----------He does NOT come close to the look of Bond. Are you redefining a literary iconic character to be woke with the times? Sorry :!: That is NOT how this works. Diversity has nothing to do with the selection of the next Bond actor. Why not an Asian instead? If the next Bond actor is not Caucasian they can throw this franchise into the trash pile of celluloid waste material. This ridiculous notion of ethnically cleansing Bond to appeal to a lunatic notion of inclusion would result in a non-Fleming interpretation of the character. Darwin's theories have nothing to do with the ethnicity of the next Bond actor.
Thanks for reading. I also wrote:

"Connery wasn’t English or blue-eyed, neither was Lazenby. Moore and Craig are capital-E English and capital-B blue-eyed but don’t have black hair. Dalton and Brosnan both looked the part but are Welsh and Irish, respectfully.

I don’t think any of it matters as long as the actor can pull it off. It’s all just made-up rules for a made-up character. Why not try something new when you have the chance? Constant evolution of the James Bond film character from actor to actor is one of the greatest feats of this franchise. Smart money is on that trend continuing and I’m glad it is.

Some think it would be sacrilegious or a slap in the face to Bond’s creator if Bond were to be Black, Brown, Asian, or anything besides white. Why should we give a f**k what Fleming would think anyway? The man is the reason the character exists, sure, but he was also a terrible racist, sexist, and homophobe. Bond has evolved into something far beyond his original foundation, to say nothing of his wildest dreams.

Let’s keep that trajectory aimed upward, shall we?"

If one characteristic can be ignored and revised why can't the rest? M was never a woman in the books, nor was Felix Black or Q gay. So what's the real issue here? Your hyperbolic repulsion at the thought of a non-white Bond is a bit unsettling.
Kristatos wrote: Mon Feb 21, 2022 9:04 pm
bjmdds wrote:He does NOT come close to the look of Bond.
Aidan Turner remains my first choice for the next Bond, and Henry Cavill my second.
I'm definitely down with Aidan Turner. I haven't seen him in anything, but he has a dark mysterious vibe that really intrigues me.
What is unsettling is this concept of 'wokeness' redefining society in its own image to suit its need. Why not have Nicholas Cage do the Muhammed Ali story or Idris Elba do the Bruce Lee story? YOU dismiss the creator of the franchise as meaningless yet you are here writing all about his franchise. Maybe you should concentrate on the Matt Helm or Derek Flint films since your hatred of Fleming obviously runs deep.
User avatar
avl_bmb
New Recruit
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 10:01 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: Casino Royale, Octopussy, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, The Spy Who Loved Me, No Time To Die
Contact:

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by avl_bmb »

Is anyone else reminded of a certain scene from TMWTGG regarding a useful four-letter word when they read a bjmdds post?

The word "woke" has been hijacked by the world's hateful. I subscribe to journalist Charles M. Blow's interpretation of the word: "Be aware of and alert to how racism is systemic and pervasive and suffuses American life. Wake up from the slumber of ignorance and passive acceptance...The opponents of wokeness are fighting over an abandoned word, like an army bombarding a fort that has been vacated: They don’t appear fierce, but foolish.”

All that said, wokeness has nothing to do with my opinion. And the interpretation that my opinion equates to a hate of Fleming is unequivocally false. His backward beliefs are anything but, however.

Look, I don't like to flaunt the fact that I'm American, but I am, in fact, American, so perhaps there's simply a psychological/sociological difference in my opinion on this matter than those across the pond that hold the formative idea of Bond more preciously than I do. I think evolution is both a great thing and something that will happen whether we like it or not.

To toss away support of the franchise over the leading man's skin color is silly at best and downright ignorant at worst.
User avatar
bjmdds
001
Posts: 14309
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 10:14 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: Any without CR-egg in it.

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by bjmdds »

Being a child of the 90s as you say, your experiences with the franchise are mostly by reading about it and watching old movies. Many here LIVED the Bond experience LIVE decades before you were born. Being a proud American I can tell you people loved Connery as Bond and still consider him the #1 Bond over any one else. You use the word IGNORANT to describe an opposing view to your 90s attitude. Talk about being SILLY at best. What has been hijacked is the morality authority that this "woke" generation thinks it has on the rest of the world. You won't understand this but IF Broccoli goes along with your train of thought this franchise will suffer dramatically.
User avatar
straightup
New Recruit
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2022 12:31 am

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by straightup »

This might be a hot take but I’d take an unfaithful representation over another whipping boy, and it may indeed be one or the other, these days. Do you think if Craig was a POC they could have allowed as much defeatism, emasculation and humiliation? “White bond had dignity, now that he’s black you want to flog his balls, have him speak in grunts, and make him beg on his knees!”
User avatar
Kristatos
OO Moderator
OO Moderator
Posts: 12525
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:26 pm
Location: St. Cyril's

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by Kristatos »

I too hate the word "woke", It has become so overused in so many different contexts as to be virtually meaningless, what is known as a floating signifier. But you raise a valid question: how much can you change a character before it ceases to be that character? It is the logic of an entertainment industry centred around the notion of intellectual property, which treats brands as more important than characters. At its worst, it leads to the "James Bond is a codename theory", the ultimate expression of the idea that all that is important about Bond is his name. But Ian Fleming created a character, not a brand, one with defined traits.

Again, I must stress that I wouldn't regard the casting of Rege-Jean Page as the end of the world, in fact I don't even think he's the worst choice out of the popular candidates (that would be James Norton, IMO). But it would do nothing to change my opinion that Timothy Dalton is the last actor to play Bond the way Fleming wrote him.
"He's the one that doesn't smile" - Queen Elizabeth II on Daniel Craig
User avatar
bjmdds
001
Posts: 14309
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 10:14 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: Any without CR-egg in it.

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by bjmdds »

straightup wrote: Thu Feb 24, 2022 6:45 am This might be a hot take but I’d take an unfaithful representation over another whipping boy, and it may indeed be one or the other, these days. Do you think if Craig was a POC they could have allowed as much defeatism, emasculation and humiliation? “White bond had dignity, now that he’s black you want to flog his balls, have him speak in grunts, and make him beg on his knees!”
Hello Straightup :!: Nice to see you here. How did you find out about this forum?
User avatar
bjmdds
001
Posts: 14309
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 10:14 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: Any without CR-egg in it.

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by bjmdds »

Kristatos wrote: Thu Feb 24, 2022 11:51 am I too hate the word "woke", It has become so overused in so many different contexts as to be virtually meaningless, what is known as a floating signifier. But you raise a valid question: how much can you change a character before it ceases to be that character? It is the logic of an entertainment industry centred around the notion of intellectual property, which treats brands as more important than characters. At its worst, it leads to the "James Bond is a codename theory", the ultimate expression of the idea that all that is important about Bond is his name. But Ian Fleming created a character, not a brand, one with defined traits.

Again, I must stress that I wouldn't regard the casting of Rege-Jean Page as the end of the world, in fact I don't even think he's the worst choice out of the popular candidates (that would be James Norton, IMO). But it would do nothing to change my opinion that Timothy Dalton is the last actor to play Bond the way Fleming wrote him.
Dalton still is considered the poorest Bond by many due to his 2 underachieving films at the box office. I don't dislike his 2 films but I am not thrilled with them either. Bond quitting MI6 was a big deal in 1989 when LTK was released, but in a negative way by the public's reaction to the film.
User avatar
Kristatos
OO Moderator
OO Moderator
Posts: 12525
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:26 pm
Location: St. Cyril's

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by Kristatos »

bjmdds wrote: Thu Feb 24, 2022 6:14 pm Dalton still is considered the poorest Bond by many due to his 2 underachieving films at the box office. I don't dislike his 2 films but I am not thrilled with them either. Bond quitting MI6 was a big deal in 1989 when LTK was released, but in a negative way by the public's reaction to the film.
He was always more popular with hardcore Bond fans, the ones who have actually read some Fleming, than with casual moviegoers. Mark Gatiss called him "the connoisseur's Bond." But I think his reputation has gone up in recent years, even if it is because he "paved the way for Craig" (no he didn't, unlike Craig, he actually was Fleming's Bond.)
"He's the one that doesn't smile" - Queen Elizabeth II on Daniel Craig
User avatar
straightup
New Recruit
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2022 12:31 am

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by straightup »

I probably found this forum from a google search recently? I haven't read or posted on other Bond forums.
bjmdds wrote: Thu Feb 24, 2022 6:14 pmBond quitting MI6 was a big deal in 1989 when LTK was released, but in a negative way by the public's reaction to the film.
And yet he's been chronically quitting ever since!
User avatar
Kristatos
OO Moderator
OO Moderator
Posts: 12525
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:26 pm
Location: St. Cyril's

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by Kristatos »

straightup wrote: Thu Feb 24, 2022 9:03 pm I probably found this forum from a google search recently? I haven't read or posted on other Bond forums.
bjmdds wrote: Thu Feb 24, 2022 6:14 pmBond quitting MI6 was a big deal in 1989 when LTK was released, but in a negative way by the public's reaction to the film.
And yet he's been chronically quitting ever since!
Yes, the first time (if you don't count the resignation letter that Moneypenny refused to file in OHMSS) was an interesting twist on the Bond formula. Half a dozen resignations later, you wonder why MI6 don't just say "bye then".
"He's the one that doesn't smile" - Queen Elizabeth II on Daniel Craig
Veronica
Agent
Posts: 1804
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2015 9:08 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: From Russia With Love,GoldenEye,The Spy Who Loved Me,Goldfinger,Dr.No
Favorite Movies: After the Sunset,The Devil Wears Prada,The Thomas Crown Affair,To Catch a Thief,Midnight in Paris,North by Northwest, Purple Noon, La piscine.

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by Veronica »

Kristatos wrote: Mon Feb 21, 2022 9:04 pm
bjmdds wrote:He does NOT come close to the look of Bond.
Weeeell...in some ways, I think he'd be an improvement on Craig, in that he is at least suave and handsome. But Veronica raises a good point about his ancestry. Bond's family tree is spelled out in some detail in the books, and in supplemental material, such as John Pearson's authorised biography of Bond. Aidan Turner remains my first choice for the next Bond, and Henry Cavill my second.

Sent from my SM-G986B using Tapatalk
Honestly, even putting Bond's ancestry aside for a moment I just don't see it when it comes to this man. Is he handsome? Yes, absolutely. Is he suave? Sure, light years away from Craig, certainly. But despite that his on-screen presence is sort of... eh, at least to me. In Bridgerton he fell flat quite often tbh and I thought Jonathan Bailey had a stronger "leading man" quality the whole time (not in a "I could see him as Bond way" but still)
User avatar
Kristatos
OO Moderator
OO Moderator
Posts: 12525
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:26 pm
Location: St. Cyril's

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by Kristatos »


Veronica wrote: Honestly, even putting Bond's ancestry aside for a moment I just don't see it when it comes to this man. Is he handsome? Yes, absolutely. Is he suave? Sure, light years away from Craig, certainly. But despite that his on-screen presence is sort of... eh, at least to me. In Bridgerton he fell flat quite often tbh and I thought Jonathan Bailey had a stronger "leading man" quality the whole time (not in a "I could see him as Bond way" but still)
That's where you have the advantage over me, because I've never seen Bridgerton. My assessment of him is based mostly on still images, and hearing female friends and acquaintances swoon over him.


Sent from my SM-G986B using Tapatalk

"He's the one that doesn't smile" - Queen Elizabeth II on Daniel Craig
User avatar
avl_bmb
New Recruit
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 10:01 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: Casino Royale, Octopussy, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, The Spy Who Loved Me, No Time To Die
Contact:

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by avl_bmb »

bjmdds wrote: Thu Feb 24, 2022 4:57 am Being a child of the 90s as you say, your experiences with the franchise are mostly by reading about it and watching old movies. Many here LIVED the Bond experience LIVE decades before you were born. Being a proud American I can tell you people loved Connery as Bond and still consider him the #1 Bond over any one else. You use the word IGNORANT to describe an opposing view to your 90s attitude. Talk about being SILLY at best. What has been hijacked is the morality authority that this "woke" generation thinks it has on the rest of the world. You won't understand this but IF Broccoli goes along with your train of thought this franchise will suffer dramatically.
I take about as much pride in being a person born in the 90s as I do being a person born in America. I had no say in either of those decisions and don't let them define me. Not sure why you're bringing Connery into this. I have parents, grandparents, and older friends that exemplify the impact Connery's Bond has had on both American and global popular culture. Nothing has been hijacked (aside from this thread by you), you just can't get with the times. Something you'd think a person of the Connery era would have a clearer perspective on. You won't understand this, but the Barbara Broccoli train of thought has done great things for the franchise and for the fans outside this niche forum.
User avatar
Kristatos
OO Moderator
OO Moderator
Posts: 12525
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:26 pm
Location: St. Cyril's

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by Kristatos »

avl_bmb wrote: Sat Feb 26, 2022 2:47 pm You won't understand this, but the Barbara Broccoli train of thought has done great things for the franchise.
Sorry, but I couldn't read this without thinking of Ollivander's quote in the first Harry Potter film "Terrible things, but great." Seriously, though, I think most of us understand that the Bond franchise has to move with the times in order to survive. It doesn't mean we have to like the results. And I would question how much the franchise has evolved in the last 15 years. When Casino Royale was released, it was the Bond films' response to the Bourne films and Batman Begins. Those films defined the zeitgeist in 2006, not in 2022. But the Craig films haven't really changed in that time. I think whoever is the next Bond will have to be a Bond for the Marvel age.
"He's the one that doesn't smile" - Queen Elizabeth II on Daniel Craig
Veronica
Agent
Posts: 1804
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2015 9:08 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: From Russia With Love,GoldenEye,The Spy Who Loved Me,Goldfinger,Dr.No
Favorite Movies: After the Sunset,The Devil Wears Prada,The Thomas Crown Affair,To Catch a Thief,Midnight in Paris,North by Northwest, Purple Noon, La piscine.

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by Veronica »

But the job of playing James Bond is to remain watchable despite not being believable. That’s harder than acting – it requires magnetic star power.

David Mitchell always was a smart man.
Veronica
Agent
Posts: 1804
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2015 9:08 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: From Russia With Love,GoldenEye,The Spy Who Loved Me,Goldfinger,Dr.No
Favorite Movies: After the Sunset,The Devil Wears Prada,The Thomas Crown Affair,To Catch a Thief,Midnight in Paris,North by Northwest, Purple Noon, La piscine.

Re: Introducing my 007-part passion project: Battle of the Bonds

Post by Veronica »

Kristatos wrote: Sat Feb 26, 2022 4:51 pm
avl_bmb wrote: Sat Feb 26, 2022 2:47 pm You won't understand this, but the Barbara Broccoli train of thought has done great things for the franchise.
Sorry, but I couldn't read this without thinking of Ollivander's quote in the first Harry Potter film "Terrible things, but great." Seriously, though, I think most of us understand that the Bond franchise has to move with the times in order to survive. It doesn't mean we have to like the results. And I would question how much the franchise has evolved in the last 15 years. When Casino Royale was released, it was the Bond films' response to the Bourne films and Batman Begins. Those films defined the zeitgeist in 2006, not in 2022. But the Craig films haven't really changed in that time. I think whoever is the next Bond will have to be a Bond for the Marvel age.
I've read this great description of NTTD and it went sth like "It's a movie that obviously doesn't want to be a Bond movie but also isn't really sure what exactly it should be".
I feel like this describes the whole Craig tenure quite well.
The producers seem to be playing catch-up for more than 15 years now. The first two movies wanted to be like Bourne and then Skyfall wanted to feel like Nolan's Batman and the the last two movies wanted... well, I'm not sure what they wanted really. Other than to throw "personal connections" left and right no matter how flimsy they might be. I mean how else to explain the fact Blofeld was "the autor of all of Bond's pain" because the later spent... I want to say two years? - in a foster home with him?
Post Reply