Fed up with Judi Dench playing M?

[007]

I am.

[Harvey Wallbanger]

Your post is eerily similar to a political hit advert.
But you are right, Dench’s M is old hat they should gotten ride of years ago.
Did she annoy any one else be sides me in Royale?

[Captain Nash]

I am.

Any reason for your dislike of Dame Judi in the role OO7?
I think she's very good in the role, CasinoRoyale was her best performance as M since her debut in GoldenEye. I'll be happy to keep her as long as she wants to play the role.

[007]

For me she saves her worst performances for the Bond films. She frequently has to give some sort of plot exposition and spits her dialogue out quickly ending up out of breath. She was a PC addition to Bond in the nineties reflecting real life events in the real MI6 but I think she should have gone with Brosnan, Cleese etc.

[BondFan007]

I don't mind her in the role. Who do you think should replace her as M?

[Skywalker]

In Goldeneye M introduces herself to Bond as the replacement M. Bond has been a OO Agent for some time. In CR, Dame Judi is already in the role of M before Bond gets his OO status.

Time to go Judi.

[Dr. No]

Never cared for Judy’s M.
A reboot should have a new M.

[Commander 0077]

Never cared for Judy’s M.
A reboot should have a new M.

Sorry to be politically incorrect, but I would like a salty sea dog male named Sir Miles Messervy brought back. I don't recall if in the films M has every been called by his actual name, so it would be a treat. There was an actor in the first Under Siege. He was the admiral in the war room. Although American, he was perfect as an admiral and perfect for M : crusty but trustworthy. In the books, Bond and M had great affection for one another, although they kept it under wraps. But you knew that each would go the distance for each other as former navy men, etc.
One thing nice about YOLT (the film) is M in a naval uniform. Hope they bring him back and he can brief Bond aboard a surface ship.

[Kristatos]

Never cared for Judy’s M.
A reboot should have a new M.

It's a pity they've already used Geoffrey Palmer in TND. He would have made a great M.

[Skywalker]

Never cared for Judy’s M.
A reboot should have a new M.

It's a pity they've already used Geoffrey Palmer in TND. He would have made a great M.

Good call.

[Dr. No]

Never cared for Judy’s M.
A reboot should have a new M.

It's a pity they've already used Geoffrey Palmer in TND. He would have made a great M.

He does have that old admiralty look about him

[Dr. No]

This sums up what I don't like about Dench's M

Another interesting review:

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=26835


Perhaps most distressing of all in Casino Royale is the single holdover from the previous Bond films: Judi Dench as M. I had no qualms, back when she first showed up as M in GoldenEye, in saying that her inclusion as Bond's boss was a horribly mistake for the series. And I still feel the same way today (but obviously, after hearing Barbara Brocolli talk about "responsibility" and "judgement," the Bond films aren't made for men anymore). Why should I, as a loyal Bond fan, need to hear dialogue from Dench that castigated the character I love, calling Bond among other things, a "misogynist dinosaur" (a line from GoldenEye, and an attitude that carries right over into Casino Royale, as evidenced by Dench's and producer Barbara Brocolli's own comments in Casino Royale's featurette). I thought that was one of the pleasure of going to see a Bond film – to see the gratuitous sex and violence, to revel in Bond's carefree attitude towards women, guns, drink, good food, gambling, and most sensuous of all -- death. This is, as I've said before, male fantasy time. I'm not looking for a dressing down and a lecture from Oprah when I go see Agent 007. Not only is it apparent, particularly here in Casino Royale, that her role is being beefed up to satisfy Dame Dench, it's distorting the M character beyond all recognition. M would never go out into the field to give Bond info that he could have gotten from any researcher, as she does here in Casino Royale, nor would Bond have to constantly rely on M for all the endless exposition in the film, either, to keep him up to speed.

That being said, how are we to disassociate Dench's previous turns as M, in Casino Royale? After all, this is a prequel, if you will, and M and Bond are supposedly new to each other here. But Dench's M still carries over a powerful distaste for Bond's aggressive, essentially "male" manner (hence all the lectures on "ego" she gives him), so we're treated to more disapproving looks from Dench (it's obvious she still thinks of him as a "misogynist dinosaur"). The problem with casting M as a woman is that it totally subverts the original intention of Bond and M's relationship in the books and previous movies. M's surrogate "father" role was tenuous, at best. Hardly looking out for Bond, crusty M knew what Bond could achieve and he let him do it -- but after first giving him a load of grief. M was a gigantic pain in the ass to 007; that's why Bond was always going off on his own, doing things his own way. He wasn't trying to prove anything to M, nor please him; in fact, Bond took supreme pleasure in pissing off M. But with Dench in the role, the dynamics have changed drastically. Bond now comes off as essentially a naughty little boy whose pranks are to be endured by disapproving, but ultimately indulgent, Mommy. There are constant shots of Dench giving Bond these winsome little half-smiles that say, "Everything is okay – Mummy's here," that totally undercut the ruthlessness of the Bond character. When the hell did Bond ever need a woman to tell him everything was okay? If you find that sexist or misogynist, so be it. As I wrote in my other Bond review for this site: keep your P.C. hands off Bond; get "sensitive" with some other franchise.

[paco chaos]

i like Judi Dench, but one of my greatest issues with Casino Royale had to be the fact that they are rebooting the franchise, and yet they kept the same actress in a key role.
It would have been like keeping Michael Gough as Alfred for Batman Begins.
It was a big distraction from what could have been a clean break from the older films. I would prefer to see her gone in the next film and have a new "M" in the role, should they continue on with Craig as Bond.

[stockslivevan]

I'm glad Dench is still around because I find her to be the best M since Benard Lee's take. Her best performances were in GoldenEye and once they had a better actor for Bond in Casino Royale she didn't have to dumb down her performance to the star's level to prevent stealing the scenes anymore, which she did in GoldenEye.

IMO, she's a better M for Craig's Bond than she was for Brosnan's Bond.

[carl stromberg]

I'm not entirely sure that the Bond series - Casino Royale included - has seen the most challenging or superlative performances of Dame Judi's long and distiguished career. I think she sees Bond as the chance to earn some quick cash.

Eon should out "post-modern" themselves and have Pierce Brosnan as M!

[paco chaos]

I'm not entirely sure that the Bond series - Casino Royale included - has seen the most challenging or superlative performances of Dame Judi's long and distiguished career. I think she sees Bond as the chance to earn some quick cash.

Eon should out "post-modern" themselves and have Pierce Brosnan as M!

I think the fact that Judi Dench also appeared in the Chronicles of Riddick shows that as great of an actress that she is, she is not above doing something strictly for the money. had the next Bond been a spoof starring Adam Sandler as Bond, she probably would have done it.

[Capt. Sir Dominic Flandry]

Like Paco Chaos I believe Judi Dench does Bond for the money. It's an undemanding guaranteed wage every few years. She is Barbara Broccoli's close friend as well, so she will not fire Dench like she did with Cleese and Brosnan.