Longing for the Bond/M literary relationship

Thomas Crown

Last night I began to re-read Moonraker, and discovered an appreciation for the kind of relationship Bond and M have in the novel. It is almost paternal, while being that of a good friend, and one's cold superior all at once. This kind of relationship, save a few moments in From Russia With Love and On Her Majesty's Secret Service, as well as some other of the early films, seems entirely lost in the films. To an extent, I can understand this as I do not think a female M is capable of having this kind of relationship with 007, making her's far more maternal and a bit more prickly. Does anyone else long for this kind of relationship to return between Bond and M, and if so, care to speculate on how that could happen with the current state of the films?

*Oh, and I posted this in the literary section because I had been inspired to post this based on one of the Bond novels and was hoping that other posters might use other literary examples to accentuate where they want to see the Bond/M relationship go in the future. But as this does involve the films, I would not be offended if a moderator moved this to the films section.

7289

The first three Bond films mirrored the novels fairly well, but once Fleming died, all bets were off - and the M/Bond relationship has been all over the place.

In the films Bond has become the "naughty boy", too smart and a touch rebellious. This mirrors an overall reduction in the respect for authority that began evolving after WW2.

Fleming's Bond, really is quite dog-like in his devotion to "M", I can think of only two instances in which oo7 bucks his boss, in Dr.No he remains peevish to the end of the novel about the confiscation of his Beretta. In OHMSS he contemplates resignation in order to get out of the hunt for Blofeld, even thought this never materializes.

In the rest of the novels oo7 pretty much jumps to "M"'s tune. In YOLT he doesnt fight for his job at the begining - just assumes the old man is going to fire him and puts his head on a plate. Only in "Mooraker" does the realtionship seem less one-sided, and in that novel it seems apparent that these two men have a history that goes back further than is revealed in the novels.

Do I long for the novel's relationship in the films?

I liked the "Casino Royale" relationship since it mixed a loyal and devoted Bond and a critical M. I enjoyed the way "M" used Bond to accomplish her goals - no matter the toll on oo7. It was clear Bond was being used by MI6 in a rather ruthless way - cutting him loose when that worked to get Dimitrios, then regining him in when set after LeChiffre. What will tell the tale is how this evolves in QOS. At least it made sense.

Since there is such a giant divide between the novels and the films, I can accept the tinkering around here. I don't think the literary relationship would work today unless the films were period pieces.

stjimmy456

I think a lot of the relationship between M and Bond in the books particular is based on undertones. M does care for James, he respects him as an agent, wouldn't '"send him to his death" as the film M has said before.

However -- Fleming can explore these personal thoughts of M in writing in a depth it is impossible to explore on screen.

Often there are moments of heated disagreement between the two in the books; there are however aspects of appreciation between the two.

I just think it is a lot easier and therefore more often that the somewhat icy relationship between the two has appeared in film.

There are a lot of moments though where you can see that M does keep an eye out for Bond -- never more so than with Judi Dench's M in my opinion. She plays that emotion brilliantly I think, and sometimes on screen, just the way she looks at Bond, you can tell there's a lot more to her consideration of 007 than just that of a superior.

Thomas Crown

I do see similarities between the Connery/Lee interaction in the first three films to the level of respect and comradery between each other in the novels. Though I would not limit that to just the first three films. M is willing to accept Bond’s hunch in Thunderball about Domino in the Bahamas as “enough [evidence] to initiate inquiries” Even in the Moonraker cinematic version, there is a reliance upon Bond’s instincts by M even when the Defense Minister doubts him. And I would argue the relationship between Bond and M in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service is reminiscent of the novels.

I agree that a level of tinkering is warranted and to be expected within the cinematic version, and while I’d be interested to see how Craig’s Bond would adapt to a male superior that hey may have a history with, Judi Dench’s M has allowed for a great relationship between Bond and M. Even in the Brosnan films, we see an evolution from M as one who does not respect 007 to one that, by The World Is Not Enough sees him as a confidant (something Bond appreciates in the Moonraker novel). I also like your analysis about how Dench’s Bond really sees him as the blunt instrument the service needs him to be, while providing a level of maternal respect towards Bond (asking him if he “needs time” after Vesper’s death). This, I think, will make for a great level of comradery to develop before our eyes as Craig’s Bond matures and Dench’s M aids him in that process.

7289

Dame Judi being a very talented actress is a asset to the series. She does manage very well to project the complex emotions that enhance the story, the paternal desire to bring Bond along and into the fold, and the necessity of using him as a pawn in the "big picture".

That said prehaps after QOS she could be replaced with a male, and we could have an interesting subplot of having oo7 deal with the change - at least it is something that hasn't been done before.

Smoke_13

I think you have to look at the literary James Bond and his loyalty to his employer as a reflection of the era. The Bond novels were written during a time when employee loyalty was commonplace. A loyal employee was the sign of a good man. I really enjoyed the relationship the two shared early in the novels. Flemings portrayal of Bond was that of a "new hire" looking for approval from his superiors and it was a natural fit.

In this day and age an employee who is subservient, seldom questions authority, and longs for approval from a superior would be seen as a bit of a weak trait. So I don't think you'll ever see a resurfacing of type of Bond in today's media.

That said, I still like the newish Bond. I find it natural that he and M have disagreements. He sees the world from the level of an operative and M sees the world from the level of someone who is privy to more information. But when push comes to shove, as she showed in her apartment, M is still the boss.

Loeffelholz

7289 wrote:

In the films Bond has become the "naughty boy", too smart and a touch rebellious. This mirrors an overall reduction in the respect for authority that began evolving after WW2.

Very astute, 7289! Perhaps the most cogent and concise observation on the subject I've ever read {[] Balancing that, of course, is M's grudging respect for Bond's ability to accomplish the mission at hand, which arguably is a thread which runs through all films and novels alike (even YOLT and TMWTGG---what agent could get away with...

...attempting to assassinate his own boss!!!

...and then simply be put back into the field?!)...

This (cinematic) post-modern challenging of authority is quite difficult to reconcile with the literary source material, to be sure! In fact, I know of a few erstwhile Flemingists^TM on AJB who hugely disapprove of this disparity...

All of this makes me yearn, wistfully, for a violent transition in MI6's leadership in the (hopefully!) near future... :v

7289

No doubt a change is due for the brass at MI6, but will we see it during Craig's tenure.

Although it is probably more "real world" to have MI6 brass and staff all be users, traitors and backstabbers (like George Smiley's Circus), it would be refreshing to see protrayed a fictional MI6 in which people were united in a common goal, like the WW2 atmosphere Fleming protrayed.

Of course that could spell the end for Captain Troop!


P.S.

Thanks for the compliment Loeffelholz! Nice to know that once in a while you get one right!