bond vs smersh

Sir Gawain Moore 008

I am just starting the book From Russia with Love and was just struck that the Sean Connery films wasn't about Bond vs SMERSH, as far as I can recall, it was SPECTRE that were the recurring bad guys and the odd mad billionaire (Goldfinger, the Cold War was ignored except for the film FRWL, and even then, SPECTRE was playing MI6 against SMERSH.

Which was the first truly Cold War Bond film?

There was a news report in the last couple of weeks that there were more active Russian spies operating now in England than there was in the Cold War, mainly industrial and technological espionage.

In the third Daniel Craig Bond film, do you think Bond should be opposing the FGB (or whatever the current Russian Secret Service is called)?

highhopes

Sir Gawain Moore 008 wrote:

I am just starting the book From Russia with Love and was just struck that the Sean Connery films wasn't about Bond vs SMERSH, as far as I can recall, it was SPECTRE that were the recurring bad guys and the odd mad billionaire (Goldfinger, the Cold War was ignored except for the film FRWL, and even then, SPECTRE was playing MI6 against SMERSH.

Which was the first truly Cold War Bond film?

There was a news report in the last couple of weeks that there were more active Russian spies operating now in England than there was in the Cold War, mainly industrial and technological espionage.

In the third Daniel Craig Bond film, do you think Bond should be opposing the FGB (or whatever the current Russian Secret Service is called)?

I think one of the reasons they picked a non-denominational villain for the FRWL film was to be politically correct and not make the Russians the bad guys. I doubt they would do that now. They seemed reluctant to make the terrorists in CR middle eastern. Granted not all terrorists are middle-eastern, but that would seem like the logical way to go if their goal was to mirror current events).
But I think you'll notice that the movie's plot is actually improved by the addition of SPECTRE. The motivation for SMERSH in the novel always seemed a little flimsy for me (an awful lot of trouble just to embarass MI6). SPECTRE would be able to ransom the lektor machine, so there was a substantive financial motive for the caper in the movie.

s96024

It's the same as the lame way 24 goes about making sure they don't mention any countries. It's ridiculous!

Walther PPK

Well by the time From Russia with Love started filming SMERSH was no more, it's functions having been transfered to the KGB in the mid nineteen fifty's. As for being the first Cold War Bond film that honor belongs to Dr. No since like the novel, MI6 and the CIA first beleive that a major foriegn power is behind the toppling of American guided missiles when it is actually SPECTRE playing the two sides to futher thier own goals of world domination.

If you read most of Fleming's oringinal books you will find that unlike their film counterparts the villians usally have concetions to the Soviet Union or another Communist power.

It was the producers idea to rather mirror the real world that to have the villians work for SPECTRE in the early films or carry thier plans on thier own in Goldfinger's case.

superado

s96024 wrote:

It's the same as the lame way 24 goes about making sure they don't mention any countries. It's ridiculous!

24 hasn't been shy to mention the Russian (though renegage cadres) and Chinese as enemy operatives, yes, I noticed they've gone the LTK/"Isthmus" route by occasionally fictionalizing small nations.

What I like about Tom Clancy is in the world of his character, Jack Ryan, the US and its allies have gone off against some real but unlikely enemies such as Japan, India and China in full-scale, all out conflict, which is interesting to explore in fiction vs. real life.

Barbel

FYEO is the first film in which 007 actually works directly against Russia, in that agents of the USSR and the UK are seeking the same device in competition. TSWLM starts off with them working against each other but later teaming up against a common enemy.

taity

Sir Gawain Moore 008 wrote:

In the third Daniel Craig Bond film, do you think Bond should be opposing the FGB (or whatever the current Russian Secret Service is called)?

Perhaps. But quite frankly I enjoyed that Casino Royale didnt deal with Russian teror communists in any way. On thing I disliked about TWINE and DAD is that it felt like the writers were drastically trying to look for some type of communist enemy to fight and only found...former communists and the Koreans - who never quite seemed as scary as the russians.

s96024

superado wrote:

s96024 wrote:

It's the same as the lame way 24 goes about making sure they don't mention any countries. It's ridiculous!

24 hasn't been shy to mention the Russian (though renegage cadres) and Chinese as enemy operatives, yes, I noticed they've gone the LTK/"Isthmus" route by occasionally fictionalizing small nations.

What I like about Tom Clancy is in the world of his character, Jack Ryan, the US and its allies have gone off against some real but unlikely enemies such as Japan, India and China in full-scale, all out conflict, which is interesting to explore in fiction vs. real life.

That's true maybe that just shows that they realise the Chinese and Russians realise it is just a tv show and won't start burning effigies of Jack Bauer and trying to kill the producers or something.

Sir Gawain Moore 008

Just looked up the real SMERSH on Wikipedia. Interesting. They had few successful operations in the then British Empire but had many successful operations in the US.