I don't think it was the "point" of GoldenEye so much as a passing observation. In fact if anything the point of GoldenEye was that yes, Bond CAN make the transition to the modern post-Cold War world.
I enjoyed The Man from UNCLE and I think it could have been improved in places, but worked well enough. I think MfrUNCLE actually showed that it can indeed be done and I think that if anyone can pull it off it's the team behind 007.
Ultimately I think the biggest obstacle to a modern Bond is less the changing times or culture and more the changing technology that makes certain key Bond tropes either less plausible or less impressive- that could be an issue with all action spy movies mind.
No Time to Die [SPOILERS]
- CharlesPhipps
- Captain
- Posts: 4963
- Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:06 pm
Re: No Time to Die [SPOILERS]
Honestly, it'd be weird to go back now when Bond has been massively successful as a modern assassin.
-
- Captain
- Posts: 857
- Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2018 12:04 pm
Re: No Time to Die [SPOILERS]
Eh. I'm sure they said the same about the other Bonds.
- Makeshift Python
- Captain
- Posts: 1599
- Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 2:37 pm
Re: No Time to Die [SPOILERS]
The man out of time aspect is rooted in the original novels. Bond as written by Ian Fleming is supposed to represent the last of the British Empire, before WWII drastically changed the dynamic of world powers. There’s chapters in YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE where Bond and Tiger Tanaka (head of the Japanese secret service) contemplate their place in a world that has moved beyond them and their empires that fell. That’s why Bond is a fantasy figure of Fleming’s and you often see the Russians and Americans as kind of bumbling idiots contrasted against the calm and collected English gentleman saving the world.
Of course the man out of time aspect isn’t really there in the early films much. But it works recontextualized in GOLDENEYE when he is referred to as a “relic of the Cold War”, and is even brought up again in SKYFALL where Silva mocks Bond for his loyalty to “The Empire”. And the idea of Bond does seem antiquated which I think is part of his appeal.
Of course the man out of time aspect isn’t really there in the early films much. But it works recontextualized in GOLDENEYE when he is referred to as a “relic of the Cold War”, and is even brought up again in SKYFALL where Silva mocks Bond for his loyalty to “The Empire”. And the idea of Bond does seem antiquated which I think is part of his appeal.
- CharlesPhipps
- Captain
- Posts: 4963
- Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:06 pm
Re: No Time to Die [SPOILERS]
Craig's Bond also highlights that he's an old school black ops agent when the future is in cyberwarfare like Q and Silva to an extent.Makeshift Python wrote: ↑Mon Oct 04, 2021 5:36 am The man out of time aspect is rooted in the original novels. Bond as written by Ian Fleming is supposed to represent the last of the British Empire, before WWII drastically changed the dynamic of world powers. There’s chapters in YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE where Bond and Tiger Tanaka (head of the Japanese secret service) contemplate their place in a world that has moved beyond them and their empires that fell. That’s why Bond is a fantasy figure of Fleming’s and you often see the Russians and Americans as kind of bumbling idiots contrasted against the calm and collected English gentleman saving the world.
Of course the man out of time aspect isn’t really there in the early films much. But it works recontextualized in GOLDENEYE when he is referred to as a “relic of the Cold War”, and is even brought up again in SKYFALL where Silva mocks Bond for his loyalty to “The Empire”. And the idea of Bond does seem antiquated which I think is part of his appeal.
Re: No Time to Die [SPOILERS]
I kind of wish Skyfall was Craig's final film so that his era wouldn't have ended on such a divisive note.
-
- Captain
- Posts: 857
- Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2018 12:04 pm
Re: No Time to Die [SPOILERS]
I think old school black ops will still have it's place for a while to come, even if it gets more difficult. Kind of like how people have been saying "print is dead" for decades now despite it being very much alive.
Pure cyber warfare and espionage is pretty useless unless you have feet on the ground, and there will always be people who are better protected from one rather than the other. I don't like that the Craig movies tend to overstate this stuff- even when they seem to debunk it, it feels like the writers believe it but just have an action story to tell.
As to Skyfall...that wasn't exactly an undivisive movie. It was better and more popular than the film before or after it, but it still has a ton of annoying parts, like how Bond is suddenly "too old for this sh*t" despite being a fresh recruit in the previous two movies, or the convolution that was Silva's plan and execution of said plan.
Pure cyber warfare and espionage is pretty useless unless you have feet on the ground, and there will always be people who are better protected from one rather than the other. I don't like that the Craig movies tend to overstate this stuff- even when they seem to debunk it, it feels like the writers believe it but just have an action story to tell.
As to Skyfall...that wasn't exactly an undivisive movie. It was better and more popular than the film before or after it, but it still has a ton of annoying parts, like how Bond is suddenly "too old for this sh*t" despite being a fresh recruit in the previous two movies, or the convolution that was Silva's plan and execution of said plan.
- Makeshift Python
- Captain
- Posts: 1599
- Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 2:37 pm
Re: No Time to Die [SPOILERS]
To be fair, SF is set 6 years after CR/QOS. I think the filmmakers just wanted to bring back Bond as a 00 veteran for his 50th anniversary. I wasn’t a fan of how QOS was set literally after CR and continue the Bond Begins story, which already had a satisfying conclusion at the end of CR.Jonathan101 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 04, 2021 5:01 pm As to Skyfall...that wasn't exactly an undivisive movie. It was better and more popular than the film before or after it, but it still has a ton of annoying parts, like how Bond is suddenly "too old for this sh*t" despite being a fresh recruit in the previous two movies, or the convolution that was Silva's plan and execution of said plan.
-
- Captain
- Posts: 857
- Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2018 12:04 pm
Re: No Time to Die [SPOILERS]
It's still more than bit jarring how the classic series went through 40 years, twenty movies and 5 actors without getting hung up on his age and now the new one is asking if he should retire after film 3. It was Skyfall as much as anything else that set up the possibility of killing this version of Bond off for good, which means we will likely be getting another reboot.Makeshift Python wrote: ↑Mon Oct 04, 2021 10:57 pmTo be fair, SF is set 6 years after CR/QOS. I think the filmmakers just wanted to bring back Bond as a 00 veteran for his 50th anniversary. I wasn’t a fan of how QOS was set literally after CR and continue the Bond Begins story, which already had a satisfying conclusion at the end of CR.Jonathan101 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 04, 2021 5:01 pm As to Skyfall...that wasn't exactly an undivisive movie. It was better and more popular than the film before or after it, but it still has a ton of annoying parts, like how Bond is suddenly "too old for this sh*t" despite being a fresh recruit in the previous two movies, or the convolution that was Silva's plan and execution of said plan.
- CharlesPhipps
- Captain
- Posts: 4963
- Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:06 pm
Re: No Time to Die [SPOILERS]
"It's not the years but the mileage."
I don't actually have a problem with Bond's reaction because its established in Casino Royale that Craig Bond has the decidedly un-Bond-like quality of not liking to kill people. He realized being a 007 wasn't for him with Vesper and was already having second thoughts after his first kill. Which is an interesting take.
This Bond was never suitable for being a black ops agent but just managed it for awhile.
I don't actually have a problem with Bond's reaction because its established in Casino Royale that Craig Bond has the decidedly un-Bond-like quality of not liking to kill people. He realized being a 007 wasn't for him with Vesper and was already having second thoughts after his first kill. Which is an interesting take.
This Bond was never suitable for being a black ops agent but just managed it for awhile.