20 replies to this topic

[Licensed Troubleshooter]

Has anyone else noticed that Bond tends to handle his gun differently now than he used to? It seems like Brosnan's Bond tends to hold his gun at about chin level, with his arm fully extended....whereas in olden days Bond was more likely to keep his gun close to himself, at chest level or even waist level. I'm not saying there are no exceptions, but I think it holds true most of the time.

Compare the scene when Brosnan sneaks behind Zukovsky in the caviar warehouse in TWINE with the scene in YOLT when Connery walks into Henderson's bedroom. Different situations will call for different things, I know, but to my taste, I prefer the old way. It makes Bond seem more cool and in-control. (Not being a secret agent myself, I have no idea what the really proper way of doing it would be. )

[Tanger]

The proper way is to hold it down low below the waist with both hands and arms straight. This is because it is quicker and easier to bring it up and find a target than it is to bring it down.

[Mr. Somerset]

[quote name='Licensed Troubleshooter' date='13 April 2005 - 22:52']Has anyone else noticed that Bond tends to handle his gun differently now than he used to?

[Mr_Wint]

They started with this when Dalton was introduced as Bond. A silly attempt to make Bond look more professional - It makes Bond look less 'Bondish' and more like any other action hero out there...

Everyone knows how a true British gentleman handles his gun.

[Trident]

Are you sure it began with Dalton? I always had the impression, he handled his Walther the way, Roger and Sean did. For example the scene when he fakes the assasination of the KGB executive in Tangier. I seem to remember he held the gun in his right hand, his arm outstreched and fired singlehandedly. With the Walther lacking a certain hard "kick" a practiced shooter (as Bond undoubtedly is) should be able to do this. The same handling was seen during the pre-titles of LTK but this time with a Beretta 92 and with at least a 9mm caliber. That seems to me a bit awkward although I won't state its impossible. Out there there are hundreds of gun aficionados able to pull the same trick, I'm sure.

With the advent of Brosnan there came a new quality to Bonds shooting. Somewhere I have read, Pierce took lessons in shooting for every film he did. And at the range of the Walther Arms Company, I seem to remember (could be, I read it on their hompage). From then on he handled his guns always in the way a combat shooter would, no matter what the caliber was.

[Almadjian]

There are two schools of thought (with many variations) regarding combat shooting. The old-school method (Connery came close to it) is called point shooting, popularized by Sykes and Fairbairn. The following article is most informative: http://www.spw-duf.info/point.html

The modern method you have discussed above is that popularized by such gun gurus as Jeff Cooper: http://www.radix.net...ng/training.htm

Despite how cool Bond looks, actual combat situations call for different tactics. Shooting one-handed may be called for when in close quarters and you're fending off an assailant or when your other hand is occupied. It is necessary to be able to shoot one handed. It is a requirement to obtain a CCW here in Nevada, (with both right and left hands, too!).

Two-handed aimed shooting is more useful for combat at distances from 7 metres and beyond, IMHO.

For close quarters, I prefer to use the method described that Sykes and Fairbairn used. It is easier to defend oneself and one is less likely to be disarmed if a gun is employed thusly.

[Trident]

Thank you for the articles! They are most informative. I completely forgot about the Sykes/Fairbairn school of shooting though I once read an article about it back in '88 or '89.

[Bryce (003)]

Excellent details there Almadjian!

I whole heartedly agree.

Great links BTW.

I'm "old-school" in most of my firearms training. Never been grazed. Still alive. Guess it works.

Next time I'm in Vegas Almadjian - we should "punch some paper".

"Shall we make it a schilling a hole?"

Now, all that aside, I liked the way both Connery and Moore drew their guns. Of those two, I think of Connery in the Gypsy camp and Roger in FYEO at the warehouse. You have to appreciate Roger's two-handed stance and taking a bead on Locque's Mercedes bearing down on him.

Settle in. Lock the wrists. Triple-tap.

Dalton and Lazenby looked good, although I ever got why Dalton wasted his shots at Whitaker after it was clear he was wearing body armor and had a blast guard on the machine pistol. Body armor aside, after two rounds, I would have aimed low. Tried a few at the knees. Just my thinking.

Pierce looked good and his two shoot outs in GE and TND with the PPK were great and you could believe he was an experienced operative. He never looked like he was "posing". He looked like he meant business.

[Mr_Wint]

To be honest, I don't care much how Bond actually shoots with his gun. More how he reacts in a typically dangerous situation. And the Walther plays a key role in these scenes. Bond's treatment of Goldie ("I insist") in TWINE is classic Bond. While the dreadful look-at-me-I'm-experienced-entrance to the hotel room (TND) is not...

[Genrewriter]

Dalton and Lazenby looked good, although I ever got why Dalton wasted his shots at Whitaker after it was clear he was wearing body armor and had a blast guard on the machine pistol. Body armor aside, after two rounds, I would have aimed low. Tried a few at the knees. Just my thinking.

I've always wondered that as well. Kinda like how in Godzilla films the army keeps wasting machine gun rounds on the big guy even thouigh he's brushing them off like they're nothing. As for the shooting styles, I also love Moore's stance in FYEO in the sequence with Locque. A signature moment I've always loved. Apparently MGFM liked it as well as an early poster for Octopussy featured a still from the scene.

[Mister Asterix]

Dalton and Lazenby looked good, although I ever got why Dalton wasted his shots at Whitaker after it was clear he was wearing body armor and had a blast guard on the machine pistol. Body armor aside, after two rounds, I would have aimed low. Tried a few at the knees. Just my thinking.

I've always wondered that as well. Kinda like how in Godzilla films the army keeps wasting machine gun rounds on the big guy even thouigh he's brushing them off like they're nothing...

[mra]Hang on. That

[Almadjian]

"Shall we make it a schilling a hole?"

Have to see how you fare with "that old Beretta" after you punish me with your Browning.

[SnakeEyes]

I love Fairbairn/Sykes/CQC/Commando stuff.

http://www.gutterfig...g.org/Main.html

Is a very good place to read about, not just shooting, but all aspects of the great WW2 era British fighting systems (Mostly by W.E.Fairbairn or his direct pupils).

As far as posing goes, I think the intensity in Dalton's eyes makes him look seriously dangerous whatever the pose. He looks like you could give him a gun and ask him to kill people for a mission.

You're right, Bryce (as ever) Bond should have gone for the knees when it was obviously seen there was a face shield around the carbine.
Still; meeting his waterloo is a funny way to go.

[Johnboy007]

Not really bothered much by how Bond holds his gun, except for Piere's new school "gangster" style in the Tower in The World Is Not Enough. Elbow above the gun, with the gun turned sideways.

Looks more punk than professional.

[Almadjian]

Snakeeyes:

Thanks for the site. I was not familiar with that site before, good stuff. I lent my copy of Fairbairn's book to a friend years ago and never saw it again!

Nice to know it's online now. Definitely a must read!

[SnakeEyes]

Yeah. This is certainly the stuff 'real' Bond would have been taught.

It mentions that Fleming spent time learning all these things too, so no doubt that it rubbed off onto written Bond and perhaps the early films.

Gotta love that Fairbairn quote about defence for the common people. More true today than it ever was. True legend.

[Stuart]

Not really bothered much by how Bond holds his gun, except for Piere's new school "gangster" style in the Tower in The World Is Not Enough.  Elbow above the gun, with the gun turned sideways.

Looks more punk than professional.

Yes, I call that the Steven Segal technique.

Although, to be far to Segal, he is reportedly quite competent with firearms. I just find his stance a little odd. But if it works for him....

[Almadjian]

Right about Segal. He is a .45 afficionado and fires 1,000s of rounds per month in practice.

[SnakeEyes]

Most of Segal's good press comes straight from his BS spewing mouth.

I can't deny he's good at martial arts and owns his own dojo etc etc, but he aint no ex special forces and all that other crap he goes on about to make his inflated ego look good on tv. I think his stance is pretty terrible most of the time, but blanks and squibs make even the worst shot in the world look great in the movies...

[J.C.D'Arc]

The proper way is to hold it down low below the waist with both hands and arms straight. This is because it is quicker and easier to bring it up and find a target than it is to bring it down.

It's important to remember that these are movies we're talking about. Not only does James Bond have the writer on his side (so he can hit whatever he shoots at, no matter what his stance or hold, if it's dramatically effective), the actor who plays him is under the instructions of the director, who is trying to frame an exciting-looking shot. It may be tactically silly to wander around in a hot situation while holding your gun up next to your face, but given a choice between a correct posture and a dramatic one, the director will almost always go for the drama. I like how Brosnan seems to act fairly correctly while going around corners, through doors, up or down stairs, etc. There are errors, but it seems like he at least tried to look like he knew what he was doing. It's one of the things I like about his characterization of Bond.

I don't recall having seen Steven Segal doing the gangbanger gun-on-its-side thing. The films of his that I've seen have usually been fairly good in that respect--his pistol-handling seemed pretty well-integrated with his Aikido.

Anyone who's interested in this sort of stuff might want to check out Massad Ayoob's Stressfire system.

[spynovelfan]

Yeah. This is certainly the stuff 'real' Bond would have been taught.

It mentions that Fleming spent time learning all these things too, so no doubt that it rubbed off onto written Bond and perhaps the early films.

No doubt. But it's also perhaps useful to remember that Fleming was writing thrillers. J.C.'s points above are equally valid for the books. There are, of course, many things in Fleming's books that are realistic representations of espionage, but by Fleming's own admission a lot of it is romanticised or exaggerated. Most women don't have names like Pussy Galore, most megalomaniacs don't have the heart on the wrong side or hideous deformities or underground lairs and so on. That's partly why the books were so successful. A more realistic portrayal of what secret agents did might not have been nearly as exciting. It's all heightened, often implausible and sometimes inaccurate. Fleming carries you along despite that. He himself admitted he wasn't too interested in guns, and while in intelligence he was primarily a planner sitting behind a desk - he was never a field agent like Bond. I recently read the memoirs of someone who was in the SAS and then MI6, and he says that on reading the scene in CASINO ROYALE in which Bond faints after being tortured, he immediately thought 'Well, this writer's had no combat experience!' Just an impression from one man, but still. Fleming infamously got his weapons stuff wrong, and continued to make mistakes even with Boothroyd's help. I think it's a mistake to judge the actors or the films by how realistically they portray this sort of thing - it was never *that* realistic in the novels. That's not really the point of James Bond.