On the subject of Maibaum, IMHO there are only two films where he improved upon Fleming's work: GF and OHMSS. In the former, he emphasises different parts of the story (eg, Fleming spends more time on the golf game than he does on the raid on Fort Knox) to its cinematic advantage, and the use of the "atomic device" to irradiate the gold rather than open the doors (!) was a master touch.
In the latter, he restructures the opening scenes in chronological order (rather than Fleming's flashbacks) and integrates Tracy into the plot more than Fleming (her being kidnapped by Blofeld adds a personal dimension to Bond & Draco's assault on Piz Gloria).
Here's one of my unpopular opinions. Or should I say wishes?
I wish Lazenby would have done 4-5 films. I'm not saying he was great, but I love OHMSS and he wasn't nearly bad as some say. If this would have happened it likely would have meant Moore never being casted. And nothing against Sir Moore, I think he did a fine job as Bond, but I really would have liked to see Lazenby in a few more films.
Or Connery could have gone another 5-6 films easily because of his age.
Sounds like I'm bashing the Moore era. I'm not, but when I go back and watch the film's I find his films to be the far least watched for me.
I think that a number of people here are fans of Georgy boy. I would have loved to see him develop over 4 or 5 films. I could live happily in a Moore free Bondinverse which in itself is probably an unpopular position.
I'm a fan of George, but I also don't think he deserves all that much credit either. Peter Hunt and Richard Maibaum are who are truly responsible for OHMSS's brilliance, and who knows if DAF would have been a better movie if he stayed on. Connery's return isn't what made DAF the poor follow-up that it is. George might have ended up making the same movie, and it would have been worse with him.
You could be right as it's the road not traveled 'so we cannot know. I think that with more experience he could have built upon the great start he had made,particularly if Hunt had continued to work with him. What we can say with a little more certainty is that physically at least he would have looked better than the jowly couldn't give a toss Connery we got in DAF ( I say that without pleasure as a Sean fanboy)
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Nice to see some love for George here. Here's an opinion possibly only shared by me. In an alternate universe had Tim's Bond 17 seen the light and been released in 1991, I think it might have been interestingl for McClory to have had George in a rival Warhead entry around the same time. I could see it possibly as a television film as he had been trying to get a Bond project underway around then.
I often wonder what a prolonged Lazenby tenure might have looked like. I agree that there's no definitive way to evaluate this. There's also no doubt that Hunt did a fantastic job with OHMSS. But I also think that Lazenby doesn't get enough credit. There are scenes in that film where he is able to convey certain emotions more convincingly than any other Bond actor. One example of this is when he is sitting on the bench trying to hide from Blofeld's men, right before Tracy arrives. The mix of fear, anger, and hopelessness is so well done. Another great example is the hotel sequence with Tracy. He comes across as genuinely concerned for her well-being.
Lazenby had a lot of raw talent. Its not beyond the realm of possibility that he could've become a great Bond. We'll never know, but at least we have OHMSS.
I can't really imagine what any more Lazenby movies would be like. Plus, if Moore was never Bond, I tell you now I would have very little interest in Bond (as you can tell by my rankings). However, I do feel that Peter Hunt should have returned as director at some point. For all the things I don't like about OHMSS, Peter Hunt's unique direction styles and ideas are great for a Bond film.
I often wonder what a prolonged Lazenby tenure might have looked like. I agree that there's no definitive way to evaluate this. There's also no doubt that Hunt did a fantastic job with OHMSS. But I also think that Lazenby doesn't get enough credit. There are scenes in that film where he is able to convey certain emotions more convincingly than any other Bond actor. One example of this is when he is sitting on the bench trying to hide from Blofeld's men, right before Tracy arrives. The mix of fear, anger, and hopelessness is so well done. Another great example is the hotel sequence with Tracy. He comes across as genuinely concerned for her well-being.
Lazenby had a lot of raw talent. Its not beyond the realm of possibility that he could've become a great Bond. We'll never know, but at least we have OHMSS.
100% agree. IMO, very few scenes highlight he was a rookie, many scenes highlight his potential. The often talked about "who-cares" confidence that he had may have helped him a lot in the film but throwing everything at it.
I will say that I think the fact he did one film does help his cause a little bit, I think Dalton would receive the same treatment if TLD was his only film.
I often wonder what a prolonged Lazenby tenure might have looked like. I agree that there's no definitive way to evaluate this. There's also no doubt that Hunt did a fantastic job with OHMSS. But I also think that Lazenby doesn't get enough credit. There are scenes in that film where he is able to convey certain emotions more convincingly than any other Bond actor. One example of this is when he is sitting on the bench trying to hide from Blofeld's men, right before Tracy arrives. The mix of fear, anger, and hopelessness is so well done. Another great example is the hotel sequence with Tracy. He comes across as genuinely concerned for her well-being.
Lazenby had a lot of raw talent. Its not beyond the realm of possibility that he could've become a great Bond. We'll never know, but at least we have OHMSS.
100% agree. IMO, very few scenes highlight he was a rookie, many scenes highlight his potential. The often talked about "who-cares" confidence that he had may have helped him a lot in the film but throwing everything at it.
I will say that I think the fact he did one film does help his cause a little bit, I think Dalton would receive the same treatment if TLD was his only film.
Fortunately for us, Charles Helfenstein wrote "Making of" books about OHMSS and TLD! Based on what I gathered from those, Lazenby and Dalton would actually be an interesting compare and contrast examination. Lazenby had no actual feature film or TV acting experience, whereas Dalton not only had film experience, but a just as extensive list of stage credits which makes their interpretations unique from the other Bond actors, in actually weird ways if you think about it. Lazenby acted out the Bond character imprinted by Connery in the previous films, whereas Dalton went back to the literary sources and resynthesized a movie Bond based on that, i.e., not a straight adaptation. Nonetheless, considering those things, Lazenby actually did a great job.
As for the single film "what if" scenarios, the great difference between these two case studies are the scripts; despite the many iterations of the OHMSS script, the shooting script was largely customized for the new actor (they eventually had a considerable amount of time preparing for a Bond movie without Connery), whereas Dalton inherited a script modified for him despite retaining elements that retained a flavor for a Roger Moore Bond movie. It was finally with his next movie that Dalton got to enjoy a treatment that wholistically fit his interpretation as Bond.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
I've never understood that TLD retains a Moore flavour critique. The opening act is really only tonally similar to For Your Eyes Only's most serious moments, and the Bond/Kara relationship is a romance as opposed to a fling. Moore didn't have that kind of relationship with any of his leading ladies. And if the car chase is what stamps TLD as a 'Moore flavour' kind of film, there was the DB5 before the Lotus.
I think TLD is one of the most balanced and focused Bond films, and as much as I like Moore's films, balanced and focused aren't words I'd use to describe them (except for FYEO and maybe AVTAK).
Film: Tomorrow Never Dies | Girl: Teresa di Vicenzo | Villain: Max Zorin | Car: Aston Martin Volante | Novel: You Only Live Twice | Bond: Sir Sean Connery
I've never understood that TLD retains a Moore flavour critique. The opening act is really only tonally similar to For Your Eyes Only's most serious moments, and the Bond/Kara relationship is a romance as opposed to a fling. Moore didn't have that kind of relationship with any of his leading ladies. And if the car chase is what stamps TLD as a 'Moore flavour' kind of film, there was the DB5 before the Lotus.
I think TLD is one of the most balanced and focused Bond films, and as much as I like Moore's films, balanced and focused aren't words I'd use to describe them (except for FYEO and maybe AVTAK).
I can see the connection between TLD and the Moore films - but only as a matter of continuity really. Plenty of differences, but quite a few similarities - even in production - with the other 80s films. Glenn probably has quite a bit to do with that...
I miss the Glen films, really. With the exception of LTK, there was a similar narrative structure in his films. For instance you could always count on Bond having a fight scene with 2 or more opponents about 3/4 into the film. In addition there was always a scene when Bond steals a jacket as a disguise, the OP circus jacket, the Zorin Industries jacket, and the Russian uniform coat in TLD. These little touches I thought were cool in his films. I'd be thrilled if Glen were ever given an opportunity to come back Unlikely now, as Babs loves to hire directors like Apted and Mendes.
I've never understood that TLD retains a Moore flavour critique. The opening act is really only tonally similar to For Your Eyes Only's most serious moments, and the Bond/Kara relationship is a romance as opposed to a fling. Moore didn't have that kind of relationship with any of his leading ladies. And if the car chase is what stamps TLD as a 'Moore flavour' kind of film, there was the DB5 before the Lotus.
I think TLD is one of the most balanced and focused Bond films, and as much as I like Moore's films, balanced and focused aren't words I'd use to describe them (except for FYEO and maybe AVTAK).
I think it's the canvas or overall framework of TLD that gives it such a Moore feel, as if the change of locales and action sequences were engineered around Bond like he was just being carried along; I concede that a lot of Bond movies felt that way, but I associate that most with Roger Moore, which why he seems to be the most unflappable Bond. Of course in TLD certain scenes were customized to be more hands-on for Dalton, like the PTS. However, LTK felt dramatically different by the way the plot was brutally driven by Bond like a vengeful force of nature that forced events like a mini-invasion.
The differences can be very subtle because it can be argued that on paper, in every sequence of any Bond movie, Bond somehow adapts, survives or takes dominance of a situation and thus "becomes the Bond," but the way it's written can sway the feel of an active Bond vs. a passive Bond.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
You can tell that some more restraint was brought into TLD, evidence provided in the deleted scenes. Imagine TLD with that awful flying carpet scene. That's not even Glenn, that's Gilbert!
Another opinion on mine that may not be shared by a lot of people: NSNA has one of the best cast line ups in all of Bond, but most are utterly wasted.
Connery brings in his best performance since Thunderball, whilst Klaus Maria Brandauer is a far superior Largo that would be much more suited to a more eccentric OTT Moore villain. Barbara Carrera brings so much personality to the role and is a joy to watch, but killed off in a convuluted way that serves as a punchline to a sort-of joke that Felix made earlier about the pen, I guess. Casey is a great Felix that would have worked well with Dalton, and Rowan Atkinson is perfect for an amusing sidekick. I don't know what it is, but I kind of like Fox as M too, he's nothing like what we've seen before or since and looks like he could be an M that is a real pain to Bond. We also have Max Von Sydow wasted as the weakest performance of Blofeld, no doubt due to the limited screen time and general lack of menace from Blofeld or SPECTRE itself
On the other hand, whilst some people may enjoy him in the role, I don't like McCowen as Q. I'm all for different interpretations and portrayals of characters, but he's just not what you'd expect from someone like Q. Llewlyn and Cleese were Q's that got along with Bond, but were just annoyed with his lack of respect and gratefulness of Q's work. McCowen is just sort of like a mad professor, and it really, really doesn't work.
Another opinion on mine that may not be shared by a lot of people: NSNA has one of the best cast line ups in all of Bond, but most are utterly wasted.
Connery brings in his best performance since Thunderball, whilst Klaus Maria Brandauer is a far superior Largo that would be much more suited to a more eccentric OTT Moore villain. Barbara Carrera brings so much personality to the role and is a joy to watch, but killed off in a convuluted way that serves as a punchline to a sort-of joke that Felix made earlier about the pen, I guess. Casey is a great Felix that would have worked well with Dalton, and Rowan Atkinson is perfect for an amusing sidekick. I don't know what it is, but I kind of like Fox as M too, he's nothing like what we've seen before or since and looks like he could be an M that is a real pain to Bond. We also have Max Von Sydow wasted as the weakest performance of Blofeld, no doubt due to the limited screen time and general lack of menace from Blofeld or SPECTRE itself
On the other hand, whilst some people may enjoy him in the role, I don't like McCowen as Q. I'm all for different interpretations and portrayals of characters, but he's just not what you'd expect from someone like Q. Llewlyn and Cleese were Q's that got along with Bond, but were just annoyed with his lack of respect and gratefulness of Q's work. McCowen is just sort of like a mad professor, and it really, really doesn't work.
I can agree with every point. NSNA is hamstrung and handicapped from the get go because it's not EON, but by its ingredients (the actors lined up, the director, the soundtrack's composer and artist, locales, etc.) it had the strong potential to be a great Bond movie though something went wrong with the execution. For the wasted scenes of Max Von Sydow as you mentioned, he otherwise did have presence. The use of Michel Legrand for the soundtrack IMO had the potential to capture the mood Fleming might have had in mind if the novels had background music, a jazz more exotic and continental than the brassy variety of the EON Bonds.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
Another opinion on mine that may not be shared by a lot of people: NSNA has one of the best cast line ups in all of Bond, but most are utterly wasted.
Connery brings in his best performance since Thunderball, whilst Klaus Maria Brandauer is a far superior Largo that would be much more suited to a more eccentric OTT Moore villain. Barbara Carrera brings so much personality to the role and is a joy to watch, but killed off in a convuluted way that serves as a punchline to a sort-of joke that Felix made earlier about the pen, I guess. Casey is a great Felix that would have worked well with Dalton, and Rowan Atkinson is perfect for an amusing sidekick. I don't know what it is, but I kind of like Fox as M too, he's nothing like what we've seen before or since and looks like he could be an M that is a real pain to Bond. We also have Max Von Sydow wasted as the weakest performance of Blofeld, no doubt due to the limited screen time and general lack of menace from Blofeld or SPECTRE itself
On the other hand, whilst some people may enjoy him in the role, I don't like McCowen as Q. I'm all for different interpretations and portrayals of characters, but he's just not what you'd expect from someone like Q. Llewlyn and Cleese were Q's that got along with Bond, but were just annoyed with his lack of respect and gratefulness of Q's work. McCowen is just sort of like a mad professor, and it really, really doesn't work.
I can agree with every point. NSNA is hamstrung and handicapped from the get go because it's not EON, but by its ingredients (the actors lined up, the director, the soundtrack's composer and artist, locales, etc.) it had the strong potential to be a great Bond movie though something went wrong with the execution. For the wasted scenes of Max Von Sydow as you mentioned, he otherwise did have presence. The use of Michel Legrand for the soundtrack IMO had the potential to capture the mood Fleming might have had in mind if the novels had background music, a jazz more exotic and continental than the brassy variety of the EON Bonds.
I'm glad to see someone else has respect for Legrand, even if NSNA isn't among his best works.
Another opinion on mine that may not be shared by a lot of people: NSNA has one of the best cast line ups in all of Bond, but most are utterly wasted.
Connery brings in his best performance since Thunderball, whilst Klaus Maria Brandauer is a far superior Largo that would be much more suited to a more eccentric OTT Moore villain. Barbara Carrera brings so much personality to the role and is a joy to watch, but killed off in a convuluted way that serves as a punchline to a sort-of joke that Felix made earlier about the pen, I guess. Casey is a great Felix that would have worked well with Dalton, and Rowan Atkinson is perfect for an amusing sidekick. I don't know what it is, but I kind of like Fox as M too, he's nothing like what we've seen before or since and looks like he could be an M that is a real pain to Bond. We also have Max Von Sydow wasted as the weakest performance of Blofeld, no doubt due to the limited screen time and general lack of menace from Blofeld or SPECTRE itself
On the other hand, whilst some people may enjoy him in the role, I don't like McCowen as Q. I'm all for different interpretations and portrayals of characters, but he's just not what you'd expect from someone like Q. Llewlyn and Cleese were Q's that got along with Bond, but were just annoyed with his lack of respect and gratefulness of Q's work. McCowen is just sort of like a mad professor, and it really, really doesn't work.
I always thought NSNA had an excellent cast. Even the MI6 staff I like- M, Moneypenny and Q. In some ways I prefer this lineup to later post Dalton entry regulars. I feel NSNA is criminally overlooked for not being an EON production. It captures Fleming's world fairly well, and IMHO, some ways even more than the Craig CR. I remember after seeing the film in the cinema with my folks commenting on the lack of the Bond theme and GB, and my Dad of the opinion the film was in fact more of a straight adaptation of the TB novel than a typical James Bond movie. I imagine many fans unaware of the logistics behind this film when it came out felt the same.
As for Legrand, he is a very good composer even though his work here is decidedly un Bondian.
1. The World is Not Enough, Octopussy, and A View to a Kill could have been some of the Best Bond movies ever with a few tweaks.
2. Love it or hate it, Skyfall has nothing remotely to do with Fleming Bond.
3. About 25 to 30% of the commercial success of Skyfall can be attributed to the Adele theme song.
4. The World is Not Enough is closest EON has gotten to Fleming since 1987.
5. I find Casino Royale boring and the Vesper death scene kind of silly.
6. I think Vogel in Spectre was modeled after Frau Farbissina from Austin Powers.
"And if I told you that I'm from the Ministry of Defence?" James Bond - The Property of a Lady
1. The World is Not Enough, Octopussy, and A View to a Kill could have been some of the Best Bond movies ever with a few tweaks.
2. Love it or hate it, Skyfall has nothing remotely to do with Fleming Bond.
3. About 25 to 30% of the commercial success of Skyfall can be attributed to the Adele theme song.
4. The World is Not Enough is closest EON has gotten to Fleming since 1987.
5. I find Casino Royale boring and the Vesper death scene kind of silly.
6. I think Vogel in Spectre was modeled after Frau Farbissina from Austin Powers.
I agree with most of these, but Skyfall actually has a number of things to do with Fleming Bond, particularly taking some elements from You Only Live Twice.
I know this will definitely be an unpopular opinion, but the original recording of the Bond theme is one of my least favourite versions. It doesn't have the power that later versions would have, it just doesn't seem to fit with any action scenes it's used for.
I know this will definitely be an unpopular opinion, but the original recording of the Bond theme is one of my least favourite versions. It doesn't have the power that later versions would have, it just doesn't seem to fit with any action scenes it's used for.
John Barry never intended for the original recording to be used for any action scenes (or any other scenes). That's why it doesn't fit.
My definition of what Fleming Bond is has little to do with the actual lifting of material from any particular novel but the ethos and attitude of the novel Bond.
"And if I told you that I'm from the Ministry of Defence?" James Bond - The Property of a Lady
My definition of what Fleming Bond is has little to do with the actual lifting of material from any particular novel but the ethos and attitude of the novel Bond.
Okay, I agree with you there. In that sense, I don't even see Casino Royale as Fleming Bond, even if the heart of the story is Fleming's. My most unpopular opinion is that Craig never captured Fleming's Bond at all. Dalton and Lazenby (and some of Connery) are the only ones that ever did that for me.
My definition of what Fleming Bond is has little to do with the actual lifting of material from any particular novel but the ethos and attitude of the novel Bond.
Skyfall captures Fleming because all the conventions of a Fleming novel are in full swing in the film. The bird with one wing down is a staple of a Fleming Bond girl, and it's presented excellently in the form of Severine. There's a sense of bizarre with the Komodo dragons and Silva, which we get from Bond's fight with the giant squid, and characters such as Horror, Oddjob and Blofeld (esp. in YOLT), we get a reflective, beaten James Bond, which becomes more apparent in the later novels. Less action sequences, emphasis on culture (eg. in the brief moments we're in Turkey, we get the markets and stalls and the action is staged around it) and the discourse into the state of Britain and its place in the world - which is highly reflective of Fleming's works - he'd almost always provided some social and political commentary and that's why SF works so well for me, and why SF feels like a Fleming Bond novel.
Film: Tomorrow Never Dies | Girl: Teresa di Vicenzo | Villain: Max Zorin | Car: Aston Martin Volante | Novel: You Only Live Twice | Bond: Sir Sean Connery
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,652MI6 Agent
My definition of what Fleming Bond is has little to do with the actual lifting of material from any particular novel but the ethos and attitude of the novel Bond.
If it works for you. But the problem with that is how far you carry it while leaving out foundational aspects of the Bond's literary roots. It's like saying that Marvel's Hawkeye is Green-Arrowish, which would not satisfy someone who wants Green Arrow.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
My definition of what Fleming Bond is has little to do with the actual lifting of material from any particular novel but the ethos and attitude of the novel Bond.
If it works for you. But the problem with that is how far you carry it while leaving out foundational aspects of the Bond's literary roots. It's like saying that Marvel's Hawkeye is Green-Arrowish, which would not satisfy someone who wants Green Arrow.
The thing is, in the cinematic Casino Royale, while all the plot points are inherently Fleming, the rest of the film (writing, director, cinematography, music) lack the atmosphere, character and spirit that is in the novel counterpart. Whereas Skyfall encapsulates it for the aforementioned reasons.
Film: Tomorrow Never Dies | Girl: Teresa di Vicenzo | Villain: Max Zorin | Car: Aston Martin Volante | Novel: You Only Live Twice | Bond: Sir Sean Connery
Comments
Can I put a word in for John Barry? ;%
Sure! -{
In the latter, he restructures the opening scenes in chronological order (rather than Fleming's flashbacks) and integrates Tracy into the plot more than Fleming (her being kidnapped by Blofeld adds a personal dimension to Bond & Draco's assault on Piz Gloria).
You could be right as it's the road not traveled 'so we cannot know. I think that with more experience he could have built upon the great start he had made,particularly if Hunt had continued to work with him. What we can say with a little more certainty is that physically at least he would have looked better than the jowly couldn't give a toss Connery we got in DAF ( I say that without pleasure as a Sean fanboy)
Lazenby had a lot of raw talent. Its not beyond the realm of possibility that he could've become a great Bond. We'll never know, but at least we have OHMSS.
100% agree. IMO, very few scenes highlight he was a rookie, many scenes highlight his potential. The often talked about "who-cares" confidence that he had may have helped him a lot in the film but throwing everything at it.
I will say that I think the fact he did one film does help his cause a little bit, I think Dalton would receive the same treatment if TLD was his only film.
"Better make that two."
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Fortunately for us, Charles Helfenstein wrote "Making of" books about OHMSS and TLD! Based on what I gathered from those, Lazenby and Dalton would actually be an interesting compare and contrast examination. Lazenby had no actual feature film or TV acting experience, whereas Dalton not only had film experience, but a just as extensive list of stage credits which makes their interpretations unique from the other Bond actors, in actually weird ways if you think about it. Lazenby acted out the Bond character imprinted by Connery in the previous films, whereas Dalton went back to the literary sources and resynthesized a movie Bond based on that, i.e., not a straight adaptation. Nonetheless, considering those things, Lazenby actually did a great job.
As for the single film "what if" scenarios, the great difference between these two case studies are the scripts; despite the many iterations of the OHMSS script, the shooting script was largely customized for the new actor (they eventually had a considerable amount of time preparing for a Bond movie without Connery), whereas Dalton inherited a script modified for him despite retaining elements that retained a flavor for a Roger Moore Bond movie. It was finally with his next movie that Dalton got to enjoy a treatment that wholistically fit his interpretation as Bond.
I think TLD is one of the most balanced and focused Bond films, and as much as I like Moore's films, balanced and focused aren't words I'd use to describe them (except for FYEO and maybe AVTAK).
I can see the connection between TLD and the Moore films - but only as a matter of continuity really. Plenty of differences, but quite a few similarities - even in production - with the other 80s films. Glenn probably has quite a bit to do with that...
"Better make that two."
I think it's the canvas or overall framework of TLD that gives it such a Moore feel, as if the change of locales and action sequences were engineered around Bond like he was just being carried along; I concede that a lot of Bond movies felt that way, but I associate that most with Roger Moore, which why he seems to be the most unflappable Bond. Of course in TLD certain scenes were customized to be more hands-on for Dalton, like the PTS. However, LTK felt dramatically different by the way the plot was brutally driven by Bond like a vengeful force of nature that forced events like a mini-invasion.
The differences can be very subtle because it can be argued that on paper, in every sequence of any Bond movie, Bond somehow adapts, survives or takes dominance of a situation and thus "becomes the Bond," but the way it's written can sway the feel of an active Bond vs. a passive Bond.
"Better make that two."
Connery brings in his best performance since Thunderball, whilst Klaus Maria Brandauer is a far superior Largo that would be much more suited to a more eccentric OTT Moore villain. Barbara Carrera brings so much personality to the role and is a joy to watch, but killed off in a convuluted way that serves as a punchline to a sort-of joke that Felix made earlier about the pen, I guess. Casey is a great Felix that would have worked well with Dalton, and Rowan Atkinson is perfect for an amusing sidekick. I don't know what it is, but I kind of like Fox as M too, he's nothing like what we've seen before or since and looks like he could be an M that is a real pain to Bond. We also have Max Von Sydow wasted as the weakest performance of Blofeld, no doubt due to the limited screen time and general lack of menace from Blofeld or SPECTRE itself
On the other hand, whilst some people may enjoy him in the role, I don't like McCowen as Q. I'm all for different interpretations and portrayals of characters, but he's just not what you'd expect from someone like Q. Llewlyn and Cleese were Q's that got along with Bond, but were just annoyed with his lack of respect and gratefulness of Q's work. McCowen is just sort of like a mad professor, and it really, really doesn't work.
I can agree with every point. NSNA is hamstrung and handicapped from the get go because it's not EON, but by its ingredients (the actors lined up, the director, the soundtrack's composer and artist, locales, etc.) it had the strong potential to be a great Bond movie though something went wrong with the execution. For the wasted scenes of Max Von Sydow as you mentioned, he otherwise did have presence. The use of Michel Legrand for the soundtrack IMO had the potential to capture the mood Fleming might have had in mind if the novels had background music, a jazz more exotic and continental than the brassy variety of the EON Bonds.
I'm glad to see someone else has respect for Legrand, even if NSNA isn't among his best works.
I always thought NSNA had an excellent cast. Even the MI6 staff I like- M, Moneypenny and Q. In some ways I prefer this lineup to later post Dalton entry regulars. I feel NSNA is criminally overlooked for not being an EON production. It captures Fleming's world fairly well, and IMHO, some ways even more than the Craig CR. I remember after seeing the film in the cinema with my folks commenting on the lack of the Bond theme and GB, and my Dad of the opinion the film was in fact more of a straight adaptation of the TB novel than a typical James Bond movie. I imagine many fans unaware of the logistics behind this film when it came out felt the same.
As for Legrand, he is a very good composer even though his work here is decidedly un Bondian.
2. Love it or hate it, Skyfall has nothing remotely to do with Fleming Bond.
3. About 25 to 30% of the commercial success of Skyfall can be attributed to the Adele theme song.
4. The World is Not Enough is closest EON has gotten to Fleming since 1987.
5. I find Casino Royale boring and the Vesper death scene kind of silly.
6. I think Vogel in Spectre was modeled after Frau Farbissina from Austin Powers.
I agree with most of these, but Skyfall actually has a number of things to do with Fleming Bond, particularly taking some elements from You Only Live Twice.
John Barry never intended for the original recording to be used for any action scenes (or any other scenes). That's why it doesn't fit.
Okay, I agree with you there. In that sense, I don't even see Casino Royale as Fleming Bond, even if the heart of the story is Fleming's. My most unpopular opinion is that Craig never captured Fleming's Bond at all. Dalton and Lazenby (and some of Connery) are the only ones that ever did that for me.
Really? Like your other points {[]
"Better make that two."
Skyfall captures Fleming because all the conventions of a Fleming novel are in full swing in the film. The bird with one wing down is a staple of a Fleming Bond girl, and it's presented excellently in the form of Severine. There's a sense of bizarre with the Komodo dragons and Silva, which we get from Bond's fight with the giant squid, and characters such as Horror, Oddjob and Blofeld (esp. in YOLT), we get a reflective, beaten James Bond, which becomes more apparent in the later novels. Less action sequences, emphasis on culture (eg. in the brief moments we're in Turkey, we get the markets and stalls and the action is staged around it) and the discourse into the state of Britain and its place in the world - which is highly reflective of Fleming's works - he'd almost always provided some social and political commentary and that's why SF works so well for me, and why SF feels like a Fleming Bond novel.
If it works for you. But the problem with that is how far you carry it while leaving out foundational aspects of the Bond's literary roots. It's like saying that Marvel's Hawkeye is Green-Arrowish, which would not satisfy someone who wants Green Arrow.
The thing is, in the cinematic Casino Royale, while all the plot points are inherently Fleming, the rest of the film (writing, director, cinematography, music) lack the atmosphere, character and spirit that is in the novel counterpart. Whereas Skyfall encapsulates it for the aforementioned reasons.