What makes Bond…Bond?
|
What makes Bond…Bond?
What indeed? Though every writer, or journalist that has chimed in on the Casino Royale—debacle (?) is scribing thoughts from their perspective, and/or point of view, I hope as I also do the same, I will still present a balanced view of what makes James Bond tick, and that you also recognize similar in why we like him so much. He is after all, a movie hero, and an icon. Dare I say an institution?
Consider that Fleming touched a nerve in us, fifty-three years ago with Casino Royale, his first novel, and when JFK said he enjoyed From Russia With Love, Bond in novel form really took off. Like any writer (me included) he did some basing of the character upon himself and some of his exploits and experiences in life, and it worked.
Fleming described Bond as a half-Scot, half-Swiss man standing 6-feet tall, weighing 187 lbs., with a brawny build, thin scar down his right cheek and blue-grey eyes. In fact, when Bond became intense, often when about to manhandle a woman, his eyes were described as blue slits. This was the motif that Bond producers, Saltzman and Broccoli would look for. I know first hand that Bond scribe, Tom Mankiewicz. said any actor to play James Bond, had to be at least six-feet tall. All actors to date have been more on the 6’ 2” level. Now you know the criteria or standard that was originally set.
Enter Sean Connery, the brawny Scotsman, who intrigued the producers with his cat like movements and sass. Great Bond should always have sass (not sarcasm) usually delivered in clever one-liners that convey character and move the story forward, or at least they did once upon a time. Consider the master of them all, the Big Tam, himself had the best of all, right from the start: “Tell me (to Dr. No.) does toppling American missiles really compensate for not having any hands?” “Well, congratulations on your promotion, Goldfinger (whose still in general’s uniform). Are you having lunch at the White House too?” When Bond is late for a meeting at the Home Secretary’s office, with M and the other 00’s, over the stolen nukes, in Thunderball, he mutters under his breath, “Somebody probably lost a dog.” These are just a few of the fabulous one-liners that made Bond—Bond!
Like Pierce Brosnan, I have hated and downright loathed most of the one-liners said in his films, with Halle Berry’s, “Oh, I got the thrust of it,” and Bond’s closing line in The World Is Not Enough “and here I thought Christmas only comes once a year.” I believe the term is called a groaner. There were many in the last of Roger Moore’s films, and I don’t really remember any in Dalton’s films. This by the by is just one of my many criticisms of the Spiderman movies. Having grown up with the original 1967 animated TV series and in my opinion the best Spiderman period, Spidey had SASS! His favourite line, and mine, “ Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.” As said after he bagged his villain at the end. And then the way he would sass J.J. Jameson, with Jameson blowing a gasket every time. It was funny and fabulous. How could we not love Spidey? Of course there was this fabulous theme song that is really never used in the films like it should be. It is just a throw away (which we’ ll cover later). Can any of you hum the new music? I thought so. Hopefully by now, you are getting that how your character lives and breathes matters as to how he/she will leave a lasting impression on you. The reason that there are remakes besides lack of imagination is that the movies, and TV shows from the past had something to them that made them a cult classic or at least memorable.
I will take exception to the idea that Bond needs the “layers peeled back.” Connery told and showed volumes of information about Bond. Think about how he reacted when he found Kermin Bey dead. We could see how he felt though he kept his cool professionalism up front, until he near ripped the sliding door open to a surprised Tania, and then got rough with her. This over emoting is hurting the flow of the story and character. It hurt Superman. The first movie, with Christopher Reeve, had the right balance of emotion and seriousness in it. None of these characters are robots, but they only need to emote just so much and then stop. How about keeping a compelling story moving and going forward? Just a thought.
So, I doubt if anyone would argue that Sean Connery IS James Bond, or was, but is the definition and mold/model that is set in stone and should, if not, must, be followed. I would say that nothing else would do. Of course it’s fair for a new actor taking on the role to bring something to the role, and by nature has no choice as in acting we all play ourselves just a bit. It’s our being that breathes life into a character, though a character can and will do things we ourselves would never contemplate. But, Sean’s Bond is long gone, on the order of decades, and fair enough, yet again, the pattern has been set. Bear in mind that half of the U.S. population saw Goldfinger, in 1964. Not even possibly Star Wars has even come close to that many tickets sold at a cinema near you. I think the point is powerfully made.
Bond, as in the movie existence had great people behind him. Terrance Young molded Sean into the gentleman agent we all came to love. His refining process was top notch and still holds up. Maurice Binder’s shot down the gun barrel, and Monty Norman’s most awesome of movie themes, even to this day, with a follow up with John Barry’s legendary scores. Not to be forgotten are the scribes who penned the screenplays. So much of that is lost now, but friends, this is part of the composite picture I am hopefully painting for you to see what made Bond—Bond! It’s many different elements linked together with craftsmanship and imagination. Yet, you without knowing it, take it for granted. Yet, for the most part is a subconscious expectation you now require when you take your seat in the cinema.
I think it is truly worth considering the actors who have and now could play Bond, for I tend to cringe when I read and hear of who should be the next James Bond.
To start with, I have never seen such a miscast as Daniel Craig. Yet, to tell you the truth, when it was rumoured that Pierce Brosnan was being considered for the role, after the departure of Roger Moore, back in the mid 80’s, I with gritted teeth yelled, “NO!!!!!” Then I calmed down and said, as if I had any say on the matter, but still interjected my personal requirements, that one, he get his hair properly cut, two, gain 30 pounds of muscle, as he had a chest more like Olive Oil than Sean Connery. Three, that he drop his voice an octave. My wife calls it a dark chocolate brown voice. Pierce did gain some muscle and his did look far better in Tomorrow Never Dies onward. The voice, well I guess 1.75 out of 3 ain’t bad. Yet, in style and charm he’s Bond. And I must give him kudos that he handles himself with wit and savvy and toughness on the whole quite well. Yes, I do miss him. On a personal level, I just like the man, as a person. As much as I and many of you would love to see Pierce return to the role he was born to play, I don’t see him wanting to spend so much as a moment in the company of Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli. Would you?
If any of the new Bond choices were also chosen, I would have the same nasty reacting I did, or still do to Daniel Craig. Get real, Orlando Bloom IS NOT James Bond. Neither is Russell Crowe, Hugh Jackman, Clive Owen, Ewan McGregor, or any of the current heartthrobs. It’s more than emotion, but also an intuitive feel and texture that makes an actor: James Bond. I know you think they may be close, but with all due respect to these fine actors, and to your entitled opinions, they are not the right persona of James Bond. In fact, the only actor, after Pierce that I have noticed that could play James Bond in a believable and trustworthy way is Gerard Butler. Not so much as his outing in the last Lara Kroft movie, but more in his portrayal of the Phantom. He was smooth and suave, but also a man of action. And he had, well on occasion, as he was singing much of his lines, the dark brown voice, less the Scottish brogue. Give it some thought. Remember, Terrence Young worked with and honed Sean to bring out the full potential of Bond in him. It’s a process; a composite picture, from the actor to the music, to the sets, locale, to the story as a whole.
I want to talk about Colin Salmon. I love this actor, but as I reject a blond Bond, a black Bond would not work, as Bond is not black, nor blond. Just as brown-eyed Brandon Routh wore blue contact lenses to keep Superman blue eyed, similar attention should be geared for the character, especially an iconic one. Incidentally, Roger Moore is not blonde. He has light brown hair, which I have always wished he had darkened it up for the role.
I don’t know if any of you saw Colin in a fabulous TV show called: Keen Eddie, but he played the Chief Inspector at Scotland Yard and was just great on the show. It only ran for 13 episodes before reality TV took its spot, with more Queer Eye for the Straight Guy shows to bombard us. I am still outraged by Bravo and NBC/Universal for doing this and taking away a true unique and smart, funny and truly entertaining show from us, which is typical of Hollywood anymore. Hollywood is full of M.G.W.’s and B.B.’s that think they know how to make a movie. In the case of Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli, if they were not born into this business from daddy Cubby, they could and would have never found themselves in such a position of power and control, of the greatest franchise that has ever existed. They simply are not qualified. My evidence is empirical. Just look at the films!
In regard to Colin could well play his own character that is an MI-6 agent. I have a small role for him to play in fact, in my up coming British comedy. He would be great. It is a small role, but a great one, and it would be fab to work with him. Heck, I’ll even design a show for him later. He is a treat to watch.
I think that Casino Royale will draw in the few curious moviegoers, but that’s about all. Could I be wrong? Sure, I could. If the Bond character had not been so indelibly inked into my soul, then there would not be this fuss, with me at least. But, it has been imprinted on me to the degree that it has to be right, as in correct, to make it work.
In the States, they just had an election, which many of the comments were that the Republicans lost so many seats in Congress, because they failed to listen to what the people wanted. They weren’t hearing the masses. I drew a similar picture in my first article about how Hollywood and politics are alike in that they like to tell us what we want, instead of the other way around. In the end, the people do the telling.
I have now read where Barbara Broccoli said that they were looking to make a more realistic Bond, with this reboot, yet she and her people are the ones that brought us an invisible car. Yes, the technology is being developed, but you have to be careful of over gadgetising these movies. Let Bond sweat! No more lasers in the watch rubbish! Please! I think back to the plot of Die Another Day. Here was a perfect and beautiful example of Bond being caught and then traded by the North Koreans. Perfect. But, bringing in DNA body changing and Icarus was totally unnecessary and downright stupid! Sorry folks but it was. It was way too corny. Think of the great adventure/thriller/political thriller we could have had instead of the “dumbing down” movie we saw. It is Barbara and Michael G. Wilson and their hack writers that brought all of this mush into what could have been a very compelling story. They don’t listen, we don’t need super gadgets; just a few will do.
I would have loved for Bond to have actually tried to kill M, as they borrowed this scene from the novel: The Man With The Golden Gun. Wow! That would have and could have been a real story, with Bond working to get his mind clear and redeem himself. THAT was the movie we should have seen, the human element at its best and worst. Bond’s breaking point. I would have rather seen Bond escape, but in a more severe manner and contact the last true friend he has on the planet…Felix Leiter! Jinx could have been sent to help Bond, and then their relationship could have moved forward. Her character could have been a helper to Bond, which would have made her a more endearing character. Bond is not even close to being 100% again, but he continues to improve as the story progresses, and of course it would be Bond’ s internal drive that keeps his steam rolling forward to get himself back to his true self. Simple enough, you use your resources.
The reason I mention it this way is because everyone keeps yelling “more emotion, more human.” Well, here in this capacity you would have had it. You would have had a vulnerable Bond, who keeps fighting his brain washing and its effects upon his mind.
Friends, as you can see there are alternatives to same old, same old storytelling fare.
Yes, I am a hard nose about good storytelling, structure and logic in a movie. That’s just me.
All I ever will hope to achieve with these articles besides a certain amount of venting for myself is to raise awareness, and hopefully your standards. To hold the art and science of storytelling to a higher standard, whether it be in a novel, a TV show, or movie, and especially the iconic ones. I just happen to have a 1960 printed copy of the novel Casino Royale, which I have pulled off the shelf. As I recall there was NOT a lot of info into Bond in this novel. I thought I would glean boatloads of information on Bond, M, Moneypenny, etc. but there was nothing like that. I do remember this was the first time Bond and Felix Leiter meet. But, I shall revisit it and see again. I wasn’t my favourite novel of Fleming, but it is the one that started it all. I am also reading Graham Greene, and I find I like him, but he doesn’t go into detail, and I love details. I am a details writer myself.
My final thoughts in this article are that there was a time when Bond led the pack, with second, a distant second. Now, he follows like the rest, feebly so, I’m afraid. No longer does he set the trend, but looks to see what others are doing and follows their course. Maybe I shouldn’t care so much, like the rest of you, but yet, I do.
Oh, is CommanderBond.net—passé? As the Bonds of before are now wiped clean, and Bond is no longer a commander. How about Sergeant Bond? Surely you would not suggest—Private Bond?
Sincerely,
S.P.E.C.T.R.E. No. 2
(SPecial—Executive for—Common sense—Talent—and— Resourceful—Entertainment)
|
|