"Craig is Bond, but not necessarily Fleming's Bond"

[Saunders]

Film Bond is largely whoever the producers and actor make him out to be. So this site would be better if it emphasized more on how Craig's Bond differs from Fleming's Bond, rather than just the other film Bonds, in direct contrast to what the Craig supporters are trying to get across. Willy Wonka went through much the same thing - when Tim Burton released his Charlie and the Chocolate Factory adaptation his fans were all parroting how it was closer to Roald Dahl's original. While it was closer in general than the earlier 1970s version, the characterization of Wonka was wildly off. I do know the main page already has a Craig/Fleming section, and that Dahil wrote You Only Live Twice. Also hoping to start a discussion here how Craig's Bond differs from the book. A pity how "Craig is not Fleming's Bond" gets so few Google hits. I don't mean to say Craig's Bond has nothing in common with the book - both have the same names, both play cards and both get their balls thwacked. Characterization is key.

[Milton Krest]

Film Bond is largely whoever the producers and actor make him out to be. So this site would be better if it emphasized more on how Craig's Bond differs from Fleming's Bond, rather than just the other film Bonds, in direct contrast to what the Craig supporters are trying to get across. Willy Wonka went through much the same thing - when Tim Burton released his Charlie and the Chocolate Factory adaptation his fans were all parroting how it was closer to Roald Dahl's original. While it was closer in general than the earlier 1970s version, the characterization of Wonka was wildly off. I do know the main page already has a Craig/Fleming section, and that Dahil wrote You Only Live Twice. Also hoping to start a discussion here how Craig's Bond differs from the book. A pity how "Craig is not Fleming's Bond" gets so few Google hits. I don't mean to say Craig's Bond has nothing in common with the book - both have the same names, both play cards and both get their balls thwacked. Characterization is key.

The main decrepancies between Craig and Flemings Bond that come to mind are, Blond hair, he does not have "movie star looks" he is short in stature, fleming described Bond as athletic and lithe not pumped up on steroids. Craig is just a emotionless killing machine, Fleming Bond was a tortured soul who did not like killing! to name but quite a few! these people who say Craig fleming Bond are N.U.T.S!

[The Sweeney]

Depends on what we define as Fleming's Bond. If we are talking about physical appearance alone, probably Brosnan was the closest, and Craig the furthest away. Other than a cruel face and cold blue eyes, Craig doesn't fit the bill of Bond described in the books.

However, if we talk about the character of Bond himself, I think Craig is the closest, or on a par with Dalton, who also nailed the essence of the novel character. Fleming Bond was completely void of witty one-liners and humour. Instead, the book character was an introvert, someone with conflicting interests, a tortured soul, a restless animal that was caged when not on a mission, a `nasty looking customer' when described by SMERSH. Someone you probably wouldn't want to meet in real life. A cold blooded killer, who didn't particularly like doing what he did, but got on with the job anyway. Someone who enjoys `the sweet tang of rape'. Someone who gets bloodied and battered, screams out in pain when tortured, someone who deliberatley gets his face beaten to a pulp by Drax to distract him, when tied to a chair. Someone who gets kicked and stamped on by football boots from 2 hoodies. Someone who tries to kill himself by holding his breath under torture. These kinds of dark, nasty, sadistic moments I can really only see Craig playing. No other actor has captured this yet (or wasn't allowed to by the script).

This is a far cry from underwater tie straightening, invisible cars, jovial one-liners, eyebrow raising, nods and winks to the audience, does Tarzan yells while swinging from trees, tells snakes to `hiss off', etc. True, the other actors all carried off the suave part well, but there the similarities with Fleming's Bond ended. It got buried and muddied by all the heavy Carry On one-liners, sexual innuendos, gags, jokes, naff lines.

The suave and sophistication elements in the books were only really portrayed in Bond's thoughts anyway. We knew he was fussy on what he ate, drank and wore, and it is true we haven't really seen this part of the character develop fully yet under Craig. Maybe Bond 23 will bring out this side more, although we know he enjoys good drink, food and wears decent suits already by what we've seen so far in CR, and partly in QoS.

[carl stromberg]

I read You Only Live Twice again recently and thought Bond was very humourous. I could imagine Roger Moore as Bond when he is being trained up by Tiger. There goes my reputation!

[The Sweeney]

Apparently, when Fleming wrote YOLT, he'd now seen the Connery films at this stage, and decided to tailor his book more towards the screen version. In the Obit, Fleming even decides to give Bond a Scottish background because of Connery. The more light-hearted approach in parts of YOLT reflects this change.

[Mazer Rackham]

Apparently, when Fleming wrote YOLT, he'd now seen the Connery films at this stage, and decided to tailor his book more towards the screen version. In the Obit, Fleming even decides to give Bond a Scottish background because of Connery. The more light-hearted approach in parts of YOLT reflects this change.

Au contraire, mon frere. How do you reason that? He died August of 1964, the only Bond films he could have watched were Doctor No and FRWL, GF was released a month after he was dead. YOLT was published March of 1964, written 1963 or possibly 1962.

I find plenty of humor in Fleming's books although some how you read them and got a dark soulless Jason Bourne / Matt Helm action hero

[Dr. No]

Film Bond is largely whoever the producers and actor make him out to be. So this site would be better if it emphasized more on how Craig's Bond differs from Fleming's Bond, rather than just the other film Bonds, in direct contrast to what the Craig supporters are trying to get across. Willy Wonka went through much the same thing - when Tim Burton released his Charlie and the Chocolate Factory adaptation his fans were all parroting how it was closer to Roald Dahl's original. While it was closer in general than the earlier 1970s version, the characterization of Wonka was wildly off. I do know the main page already has a Craig/Fleming section, and that Dahil wrote You Only Live Twice. Also hoping to start a discussion here how Craig's Bond differs from the book. A pity how "Craig is not Fleming's Bond" gets so few Google hits. I don't mean to say Craig's Bond has nothing in common with the book - both have the same names, both play cards and both get their balls thwacked. Characterization is key.

Interesting points Saunders. Welcome to the forum!

[The Sweeney]

Apparently, when Fleming wrote YOLT, he'd now seen the Connery films at this stage, and decided to tailor his book more towards the screen version. In the Obit, Fleming even decides to give Bond a Scottish background because of Connery. The more light-hearted approach in parts of YOLT reflects this change.

Au contraire, mon frere. How do you reason that? He died August of 1964, the only Bond films he could have watched were Doctor No and FRWL, GF was released a month after he was dead. YOLT was published March of 1964, written 1963 or possibly 1962.

I find plenty of humor in Fleming's books although some how you read them and got a dark soulless Jason Bourne / Matt Helm action hero

Exactly. He'd seen 2 Bond films already before he died, and although these 2 films are fairly close to the novels, the humourous one-liners were already in play even at this stage (apparently injected to diffuse the violence, something which audiences back in the early 60's were not that comfortable with, from what I read somewhere).

As for the humour, I find very little, or no humour at all in hardly any of the novels. Guess we all interpret things differently....

[Kristatos]

Exactly. He'd seen 2 Bond films already before he died, and although these 2 films are fairly close to the novels, the humourous one-liners were already in play even at this stage (apparently injected to diffuse the violence, something which audiences back in the early 60's were not that comfortable with, from what I read somewhere).

I think it was more the censors than the audiences they were worried about. Desmond Llewellyn once said in an interview that they wouldn't have been able to get away with Bond electrocuting people and spearing them with harpoons if it hadn't been for the one-liners afterwards ("shocking, positively shocking" and "he got the point" respectively).

[The Sweeney]

Exactly. He'd seen 2 Bond films already before he died, and although these 2 films are fairly close to the novels, the humourous one-liners were already in play even at this stage (apparently injected to diffuse the violence, something which audiences back in the early 60's were not that comfortable with, from what I read somewhere).

I think it was more the censors than the audiences they were worried about. Desmond Llewellyn once said in an interview that they wouldn't have been able to get away with Bond electrocuting people and spearing them with harpoons if it hadn't been for the one-liners afterwards ("shocking, positively shocking" and "he got the point" respectively).

Was the very first one used `I think they were on their way to a funeral' in Dr. No? I can't remember now what other one-liners appear in that film.

There's `She had her kicks' and `She should have kept her mouth shut' in FRWL.

[Kristatos]

Was the very first one used `I think they were on their way to a funeral' in Dr. No? I can't remember now what other one-liners appear in that film.

I wasn't making notes, but I have a theory that the experience of having that film cut was what prompted EON to mitigate the violence with humour. I know the number of shots that Bond fired into Dent was cut from 7 to 2, and the scene where Bond is beaten by Dr. No's goons looked to me as though it had been cut as well.

[Saunders]

Ian Dunross's review of the Casino Royale novel and film (posted elsewhere by LilleOC) - brings up some interesting points, like that Fleming's Bond wasn't a rookie 00 in the novel, and that his specific dark-haired appearance was meant to link him to the "Byronic Hero".

Some other points:

Fleming's Bond disliked murder (paraphrasing The Man with the Golden Gun, which I've read) but did it when it was required. In "From a View to a Kill" (also read) he nearly gets killed because he hesitates to shoot a foe outright. In "For Your Eyes Only" he is troubled by his mission to kill the (criminal) murderer of M's family friends since he does not know either the victims or the perpetrators. He has to think of himself as a pest exterminator, and justifies his mission by labeling his target as a threat to British nationals.

Does this come across in Craig's Bond? One critic (university professor, I believe) has said the opposite.

[stockslivevan]

Doesn't seem to come across for Connery's Bond yet no one has made a fuss over that. Heck they would even have him shoot a bloke holding a club who was 20 feet away. Here's a quote I grabbed awhile ago, can't remember which novel it was from though:

It was a part of his profession to kill people. He had never liked doing it and when he had to kill he did it as well as he knew how and forgot about it. As a secret agent who held the rare double-O prefix-the licence to kill in the secret service-it was his duty to be as cool about death as a surgeon. If it happened,it happened.

Sounds like the Bond from the films, including Craig's. It's just Bond's disdain for killing was never an aspect that was expressed in the films. I believe the closest Bond expressed disgust with killing was Brosnan, although in context he was actually talking about cold blooded murder when he was preparing to execute Renard once and for all.

One thing is certain, Fleming's Bond would have never made a quip after killing someone, explaining why Dalton seemed uncomfortable delivering them because it didn't necessarily fit his characterization which was pure Fleming.

So while most of the aspects of Bond made it on screen, his disdain for murder, excessive smoking and overly cynical attitude are the only aspects that never truly blossomed in cinema. I wish someone could make TV films of faithful adaptions of Fleming novels. Set in the '50s, Bond with the comma and scar on cheek and totally disregard of the film series' trademarks Bond theme/gunbarrel/formula. An alternative to cinema Bond. Therefore the Cinema Bond fans can enjoy their crazy gadgets and wacky plots with wacky villains while Fleming enthusiasts enjoy straight adaptions of the novels.

But that'll probably never happen, at least in our lifetime.

[carl stromberg]

Doesn't seem to come across for Connery's Bond yet no one has made a fuss over that. Heck they would even have him shoot a bloke holding a club who was 20 feet away. Here's a quote I grabbed awhile ago, can't remember which novel it was from though:

It was a part of his profession to kill people. He had never liked doing it and when he had to kill he did it as well as he knew how and forgot about it. As a secret agent who held the rare double-O prefix-the licence to kill in the secret service-it was his duty to be as cool about death as a surgeon. If it happened,it happened.

Sounds like the Bond from the films, including Craig's. It's just Bond's disdain for killing was never an aspect that was expressed in the films. I believe the closest Bond expressed disgust with killing was Brosnan, although in context he was actually talking about cold blooded murder when he was preparing to execute Renard once and for all.

One thing is certain, Fleming's Bond would have never made a quip after killing someone, explaining why Dalton seemed uncomfortable delivering them because it didn't necessarily fit his characterization which was pure Fleming.

So while most of the aspects of Bond made it on screen, his disdain for murder, excessive smoking and overly cynical attitude are the only aspects that never truly blossomed in cinema. I wish someone could make TV films of faithful adaptions of Fleming novels. Set in the '50s, Bond with the comma and scar on cheek and totally disregard of the film series' trademarks Bond theme/gunbarrel/formula. An alternative to cinema Bond. Therefore the Cinema Bond fans can enjoy their crazy gadgets and wacky plots with wacky villains while Fleming enthusiasts enjoy straight adaptions of the novels.

But that'll probably never happen, at least in our lifetime.

It is a shame that Bond is in the hands of Eon, unlike Sherlock Holmes who has been used in millions of TV programmes and films.

A HBO series would be wonderful. Set in the 1950's, it could have a bit of extra violence and swearing.

Craig's Bond is as about as close to Fleming's Bond as Jack Bauer. The Craig Bond and Bauer are both troubled tough spies in a modern setting.

[Saunders]

Ian Dunross's review of the Casino Royale novel and film (posted elsewhere by LilleOC) - brings up some interesting points, like that Fleming's Bond wasn't a rookie 00 in the novel, and that his specific dark-haired appearance was meant to link him to the "Byronic Hero".

Had to emphasize this bit. Goes against the "Bond Begins" premise of EON... Casino isn't Bond's first adventure as a 00, it's just the first novel.

These kinds of dark, nasty, sadistic moments I can really only see Craig playing. No other actor has captured this yet (or wasn't allowed to by the script).

Thus the "return to Fleming" is more of chance?

[The Sweeney]

Then credit for bringing more of Fleming to the screen primarily goes to the writers and not the actor.

Characterisation is key you said, initially. Now you admit the characterisation of Bond Craig was playing is closer to Fleming, and yes, credit must go to the writers.

However, if Craig didn't have the acting chops to pull it off, those scenes would never have worked, so credit must also go to the actor.

Out of interest, which of the other actors do you think nailed the character of Fleming Bond, as opposed to cinematic Bond?

[Saunders]

Closer but not as close as some make it out to be. For other actors I'll say Dalton.

[Mazer Rackham]

Closer but not as close as some make it out to be. For other actors I'll say Dalton.

Normally when I hear this kind of clap trap about Craig I cringe. But I understand what you are saying and why.

The Bond is CR was a far cry from the Bond Fleming wrote about. From initial concept to the execution the character Craig proffered was devoid of Fleming. Gutted in fact. That was different and empty and apparently some think that because it was so neutered and alien it must be closer to what Fleming intended.

Dalton did a good job and was a decent choice, too bad the franchise was on autopilot when LTK rolled out.