Jonathan101 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 06, 2021 7:36 pm
Not a single Bond enjoys killing unless it is someone particularly nasty.
I think Connery's bond absolutely revels in the deaths of his enemies and why shouldn't he?
Ditto Moore.
It's a weird idea that they're ashamed of killing murderers, terrorists, and genocidal madmen.
More often then not, they try to portray him as a a professional killer. The job's just a job to him and thus, the killings just a part of said job, unless the one infront of his gun barrel has REALLY messed with him or his allies. Manipulate him, torture him, kill his lover, put up an exceptional fight, well then he'll play with you a bit.
It's a modernistic detail that tends to iron out protagonists and even antagonists over time. Narrative vacuums tend to kill about any character off otherwise, so it will start to drag with mainstream audiences needless to say and for main characters all the same.
Like, Bruce Willis plays a hitman in the whole nine yards. In one scene in the movie he jokingly threatens the waiter who puts mayonnaise on his burger. In the sequel they put him in a situation where he rebukes another customer's consistent disaffection towards a waitress.
Jonathan101 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 06, 2021 9:22 pm
But I never saw him and Vesper as Bond escaping. I think that's a disservice to his feelings for her. Madeliene on the other hand...by the time he meets HER he might be thinking that kind of thing, but that's only after years of stress and betrayal.
I think he’s doing it for both escaping that life and for love.
Admittedly I’m inferring a lot from the novel, in which Bond had already been a 00 agent for years instead of being the novice as presented in the film. However, Bond does say this in the film which always evoked the idea of leaving for a better life.
“Like you said...you do what I do for too long and there won't be any soul left to salvage. I'm leaving with what little I have left. Is that enough for you?”
My headcanon is Safin's "Millions" he's planning to kill are the 1% and/or corrupt government officials but they worried the audience would find that too sympathetic.
Jonathan101 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 06, 2021 9:22 pm
But I never saw him and Vesper as Bond escaping. I think that's a disservice to his feelings for her. Madeliene on the other hand...by the time he meets HER he might be thinking that kind of thing, but that's only after years of stress and betrayal.
I think he’s doing it for both escaping that life and for love.
Admittedly I’m inferring a lot from the novel, in which Bond had already been a 00 agent for years instead of being the novice as presented in the film. However, Bond does say this in the film which always evoked the idea of leaving for a better life.
“Like you said...you do what I do for too long and there won't be any soul left to salvage. I'm leaving with what little I have left. Is that enough for you?”
The main difference between the book and the film is that Bond hates her at the end of the book for betraying him. Fleming's Bond would sooner have shot her himself than ran away with her.
Jonathan101 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 06, 2021 9:22 pm
But I never saw him and Vesper as Bond escaping. I think that's a disservice to his feelings for her. Madeliene on the other hand...by the time he meets HER he might be thinking that kind of thing, but that's only after years of stress and betrayal.
I think he’s doing it for both escaping that life and for love.
Admittedly I’m inferring a lot from the novel, in which Bond had already been a 00 agent for years instead of being the novice as presented in the film. However, Bond does say this in the film which always evoked the idea of leaving for a better life.
“Like you said...you do what I do for too long and there won't be any soul left to salvage. I'm leaving with what little I have left. Is that enough for you?”
The main difference between the book and the film is that Bond hates her at the end of the book for betraying him. Fleming's Bond would sooner have shot her himself than ran away with her.
There is a bit in the film where Gettler grabs her after spotting Bond and threatens to kill her, and then Bond quietly says “allow me” and is about to take a shot until someone starts shooting at him. So even movie Bond is super pissed enough to want to kill her for her betrayal.
But as we see in a later book, and finally this new film, Bond visits Vesper’s grave and still misses her after all the time that has passed.
After a large opening weekend in the UK it looks like the film is now on to be a box office flop after massively disappointing US figures. Covid is of course a factor. Personally I blame the fact that they didn't open it worldwide simultaneously. Of course the twist was blown for US audiences immediately.
I also think that Bond has the same problem that Star Wars does - it is no longer a ''must see'' franchise. It used to be an event to go and see James Bond. But no one queues around the corner to see Bond anymore. There are many reasons for this. You can argue that Bond is a distinctly old-fashioned property in its tone and main character. Similarly though, those who liked the tone and main character do not want a James Bond who drives a Prius and eats carrots (I exaggerate of course, but I am doing so for effect). Making Bond fit for 2021 means leaving behind 1960 and that is not what millions want. In many ways, I feel as if Sean Connery casts a long shadow over this franchise.
Except it did extremely well on the second week internationally. It's just the US that Bond is underperforming. But that doesn't surprise me, because the demographics for Bond have skewed older for a long time now, especially since Craig's run. His movies don't have the same kind of appeal that other franchises have like Fast & Furious, Marvel, and Star Wars (THE MANDALORIAN is immensely popular).
I think Bond lost its biggest marketing machine for younger audiences: Video games. Pierce Brosnan's run was adjacent with a good line of video games up until the end of his run. GOLDENEYE, AGENT UNDER FIRE, NIGHTFIRE, and EVERYTHING OR NOTHING were popular titles that helped the brand as much as the films did. I can personally attest, because I had no interest in watching Bond movies until I played GOLDENEYE 64. I was so addicted to that game that it really quenched my thirst for Bond movies, and I know my generation is not alone on that.
After EA Games lost the license and Activision took over, that's when it all started to fall apart. On the one hand, the games they were releasing seemed to be just a bunch of CALL OF DUTY clones and eventually the license was terminated in 2012 after 007 LEGENDS flopped and there hasn't been any video games made since. Also, I don't think the Craig era ever lended itself well to the video game medium. His films don't really play up the tropes like with gadgets because the films were more grounded. Also with a darker and more mature tone, it was hard to translate his style of films for games compared to Pierce Brosnan's.
It'll be interesting to see how they'll approach Bond for the next iteration. At the moment, there's a video game with the working title PROJECT 007 by IO Interactive, which for Bond will be the first foray into gaming in a decade. Not much is known, but if successful it could at least have the potential to restore a more youthful audience for Bond. But for that to work, EON will also have to put work into making their films appealing for younger audiences.
