101 replies to this topic

[lois lane]

Oh. Ian Fleming seemed to think Sean Connery did a pretty good job of it.

Of course you are right, I read IF liked Sean's performance immensely. In my personal view, I think DC comes closest, but that doesn't mean to say that everyone should think that way. I think it is fair to say that Sean Connery is no.1 in most peoples books, as for me, he is number 2.

Not saying I agree with it, or that I disagree for that matter. Hard to argue with the man who wrote it though, but there's always one who will try...

or two....or three......!!!!!!

Yes but he hasn't seen DC has he?

Also, he probably liked all if not most of the performances, I havent read enough on it know if he disliked any of them. I read (on this website!) he always wanted Richard Burton for the role.

[Santa]

Oh. Ian Fleming seemed to think Sean Connery did a pretty good job of it.

Of course you are right, I read IF liked Sean's performance immensely. In my personal view, I think DC comes closest, but that doesn't mean to say that everyone should think that way. I think it is fair to say that Sean Connery is no.1 in most peoples books, as for me, he is number 2.

Not saying I agree with it, or that I disagree for that matter. Hard to argue with the man who wrote it though, but there's always one who will try...

Yes but he hasn't seen DC has he?

I made the same point elsewhere, in fact I'd be very, very interested to hear what he would have thought of all of them. Shame that can't happen. However, for the point under discussion, I still say Fleming's is the only reliable opinion on whether Sean Connery captured the character of the books or not.

[LadySylvia]

Oh. Ian Fleming seemed to think Sean Connery did a pretty good job of it.

How nice for Fleming.

Well, yes it is really. He wrote the character, in case you hadn't noticed, so I think he'd have a fairly good idea whether or not Sean Connery made a good job of portraying that character.

Yeah, and I read his books and watched the movies. What is your point? We all have our opinions.

I don't think that an actor has to closely resemble the literary Bond to be a good James Bond. I think that he should simply portray Bond in a manner that suits him.

Edited by LadySylvia, 20 June 2007 - 06:16 PM.

[00Twelve]

I don't think that an actor has to closely resemble the literary Bond to be a good James Bond. I think that he should simply portray Bond in a manner that suits him.

But the template on which all the films were based can't be ignored, either.

No adaptation of a character can pull entirely away from that which it is adapting. You don't have to like Fleming's Bond, but that incarnation of the character (the original) was at least someone in whom I could invest. I could be worried that he might not make it. Ever read the end of FRWL? If they ever did that in a Bond film, I'd shave my head. He seemed like a real person, and not someone who always had a smart answer to every question and a sexual innuendo up his sleeve. Just above his wrist dart-gun.

And Craig and Dalton captured more than just FlemingBond's grit and angst. There was also the ability to laugh at themselves, a human characteristic none of the other Bonds deigned to do, and they could get badly hurt (contrast Dalton just after the rig crashes down the bank and Moore in bandages on OP's boat). And hey, imagine Bond being gritty and occasionally angsty! It's crazy. You think they did wonderful jobs, too! You've said so. They did so because they did the same thing that Fleming did when writing the character: made him believably human.

[LadySylvia]

I don't think that an actor has to closely resemble the literary Bond to be a good James Bond. I think that he should simply portray Bond in a manner that suits him.

But the template on which all the films were based can't be ignored, either.

No adaptation of a character can pull entirely away from that which it is adapting. You don't have to like Fleming's Bond, but that incarnation of the character (the original) was at least someone in whom I could invest. I could be worried that he might not make it. Ever read the end of FRWL? If they ever did that in a Bond film, I'd shave my head. He seemed like a real person, and not someone who always had a smart answer to every question and a sexual innuendo up his sleeve. Just above his wrist dart-gun.

And Craig and Dalton captured more than just FlemingBond's grit and angst. There was also the ability to laugh at themselves, a human characteristic none of the other Bonds deigned to do, and they could get badly hurt (contrast Dalton just after the rig crashes down the bank and Moore in bandages on OP's boat). And hey, imagine Bond being gritty and occasionally angsty! It's crazy. You think they did wonderful jobs, too! You've said so. They did so because they did the same thing that Fleming did when writing the character: made him believably human.

Sorry. I don't agree.

[00Twelve]

Okay.

[Sbott]

TD has plenty of screen chemistry and charisma. Which is why he has his legion of fans.

Trust me when I say that not one Bond actor has truly captured Fleming's Bond. And believe me that is a good thing. Both Craig and Dalton managed to capture literary Bond's grittiness and angst. But that's it.

I may have missed this but what were DC and TD lacking?

[LadySylvia]

TD has plenty of screen chemistry and charisma. Which is why he has his legion of fans.

Trust me when I say that not one Bond actor has truly captured Fleming's Bond. And believe me that is a good thing. Both Craig and Dalton managed to capture literary Bond's grittiness and angst. But that's it.

I may have missed this but what were DC and TD lacking?

They weren't lacking anything. Are they supposed to be lacking something, because they don't completely act like the literary Bond?

[Sbott]

TD has plenty of screen chemistry and charisma. Which is why he has his legion of fans.

Trust me when I say that not one Bond actor has truly captured Fleming's Bond. And believe me that is a good thing. Both Craig and Dalton managed to capture literary Bond's grittiness and angst. But that's it.

I may have missed this but what were DC and TD lacking?

They weren't lacking anything. Are they supposed to be lacking something, because they don't completely act like the literary Bond?

Absolutely not. So turning the question on its head what does the literary Bond have that the actors have not managed to capture?

[LadySylvia]

Let's see . . . Bond's tendency toward substance abuse - alcohol, along with his sexist and racist attitudes. I've read the novels. I've noticed.

[Santa]

Bond's tendency toward substance abuse - alcohol, along with his sexist and racist attitudes.

That's a fair point but realistically I think a lot of people wouldn't consider that acceptable behaviour these days, but also all the books have had to be adapted for the screen. Most books simply can't be filmed as is, as I know you know. For me, as long as they capture the tone and spirit of the original material, I'm happy with it because I've realised a direct adaptation ususally doesn't work.

[Judo chop]

Trust me when I say that not one Bond actor has truly captured Fleming's Bond. And believe me that is a good thing. Both Craig and Dalton managed to capture literary Bond's grittiness and angst. But that's it.

Yesss

[Santa]

[quote name='Judo chop' post='749203' date='21 June 2007 - 18:53'][quote name='LadySylvia' post='748777' date='20 June 2007 - 11:51']Trust me when I say that not one Bond actor has truly captured Fleming's Bond. And believe me that is a good thing. Both Craig and Dalton managed to capture literary Bond's grittiness and angst. But that's it.[/quote]

Yesss

[MHazard]

Sadly, Rog had not respect for the raw, real emotion of Fleming Bond. He could not have done OHMSS as written.

If one takes a real, close look at the actors who have played Bond, not one of them has ever really portrayed the character written by Fleming. And perhaps that is a good thing.

No, it's not. Fleming wrote a captivating, human and reasonably complex (particularly in the last few novels) character at least in relation to typical thriller heroes. Obviously things have to be done to flesh out a literary character for the screen, but I believe that Connery, Craig, Lazenby and Dalton all incorporated some elements from Fleming into their character. In many ways Laz and Craig came pretty damn close and the ways in which Connery deviated, such as campiness, bad puns, and acting like Bond is Superman, detracted rather than added to his portrayal. I try not to let (as some others have) your contrarian views upset me as everyone is entitled to their opinions. But, I am puzzled. If you don't like Fleming, but also don't like many of the elements created by the movies (I'm basing this on your comments on the "pure bond" thread) what is it about James Bond as opposed to some other character that keeps you coming back. Because most of your comments seem to be quarelling with what other people like. Now again, everyone is entitled to their opinion. If someone doesn't like Fleming's books they're entitled and if they don't like Sean or Laz or Craig or any Bond (personally I don't care for Moore or Brosnan) they're also entitled. But what the heck about Bond do you like? I've read many of your postings and I havent' a clue. And, to return to topic, Fleming did write the "we have all the time in the world" ending which Laz played and which most consider his finest moment (myself I prefer the skating rink scene, but still...).

[LadySylvia]

[quote]Yesss

Edited by LadySylvia, 21 June 2007 - 08:54 PM.

[00Twelve]

Well, the films would have been rated R, anyway, if they followed the books on their heels, so to speak. Based on that, yeah, we'd have no franchise. I still find Craig's Bond (which is unequivocally closer to Fleming's Bond) more interesting than even Connery's, at this point. And it's the Flemingesque traits that draw my favor. Just me. Hopefully Bonds 22 & 23 won't give me any reason to change my mind.

On topic, I thought Laz handled the moment very well, whether it took a while to get there (# of takes) or not. The finished product sold very well, and in that moment, I saw the book leap to life. If he'd been a little less, um, "chipper," he'd have been spot on for the whole thing.

[Sbott]

Let's see . . . Bond's tendency toward substance abuse - alcohol, along with his sexist and racist attitudes. I've read the novels. I've noticed.

I too have read the books and I too have noticed, I was just interested in your opinion.

[MHazard]

[quote name='LadySylvia' post='749281' date='21 June 2007 - 16:51'][quote]Yesss

[Judo chop]

Let's see . . . Bond's tendency toward substance abuse - alcohol, along with his sexist and racist attitudes. I've read the novels. I've noticed.

I think Craig definitely dipped his toes into the waters of substance abuse. I would never expect to see lengths of screen time devoted to Bond pounding drink after drink just to sell the message

[LadySylvia]

[quote name='Judo chop' post='749501' date='22 June 2007 - 07:35'][quote name='LadySylvia' post='749165' date='22 June 2007 - 01:51']Let's see . . . Bond's tendency toward substance abuse - alcohol, along with his sexist and racist attitudes. I've read the novels. I've noticed.[/quote]

I think Craig definitely dipped his toes into the waters of substance abuse. I would never expect to see lengths of screen time devoted to Bond pounding drink after drink just to sell the message

[Judo chop]

Now, you can call me stupid if you like. But now you have lumped every sixteen year old and younger into that same category with me and that, my malevolent mistress of the moors, is crossing the line!

N'Synch were artistic geniuses decades before their time!!

[dodge]

[quote name='LadySylvia' post='749605' date='22 June 2007 - 19:26'][quote name='Judo chop' post='749501' date='22 June 2007 - 07:35'][quote name='LadySylvia' post='749165' date='22 June 2007 - 01:51']Let's see . . . Bond's tendency toward substance abuse - alcohol, along with his sexist and racist attitudes. I've read the novels. I've noticed.[/quote]

I think Craig definitely dipped his toes into the waters of substance abuse. I would never expect to see lengths of screen time devoted to Bond pounding drink after drink just to sell the message

[Judo chop]

I hope this thread gets back on track. I'd love to get into the topic if we can stay en route. The train was scheduled to go from New York to Chicago. We're stopping off everywhere but there. What's wrong with Chicago?[/color]

Quite right, Dodge.

As I stated in my previous post before all the shenanigans started en route to my hometown, I thought that Laz

[dodge]

Laz was spot on in the scene, I believe, but a lone performance ending on that note probably has cost him points in many viewers' eyes. If Laz had done a by-the-book followup showing Bond back in action, hell-bent on revenge, we could have had two great films always thought of as a pair. Me, I still cherish the ending as is, but I can see how many might object to a 'weepy' Bond. Imagine CR without its finale: just Bond on a boat, mourning Vesper. Then imagine if Craig--even Craig--had then quit.

So Laz/Bond pouring his heart out seems less the problem to me than the failure to show the man back on the rip.

[Judo chop]

Laz was spot on in the scene, I believe, but a lone performance ending on that note probably has cost him points in many viewers' eyes. If Laz had done a by-the-book followup showing Bond back in action, hell-bent on revenge, we could have had two great films always thought of as a pair. Me, I still cherish the ending as is, but I can see how many might object to a 'weepy' Bond. Imagine CR without its finale: just Bond on a boat, mourning Vesper. Then imagine if Craig--even Craig--had then quit.

So Laz/Bond pouring his heart out seems less the problem to me than the failure to show the man back on the rip.

I don

[autquisest]

a) What do I think of L

[Stephen Spotswood]

I was just rewatching OHMSS last night, 7/4/07. I think Lazenby played the death scene perfect. His Bond was so flippant throughout the movie that what stands out beyond the gorgeous scenery, was his few "serious" scenes, his courting of Tracy, and her death.

What disappointed me was Sean Connery's reaction in the follow-up DAF. In the begining of the movie, he apparently kills Blofield, the killer of his wife, and you don't get any sense of satisfaction or vengeance. It's almost, "Tracy, Tracy who?"

[MHazard]

I am firmly convinced that this was because the producers wanted us to forget that OHMSS took place or put another way that there is no continuity between Sean's Bond and Laz. You have to think of DAF as taking place after YOLT with OHMSS never occurring.

[Thunderfinger]

[quote name='autquisest' post='752249' date='3 July 2007 - 16:43']a) What do I think of L

[Stephen Spotswood]

My problem with the scene, is that one actually likes Tracy as a person, not someone always crying out, "Oh James, James," like Tanya Roberts. She was also shown as quite a fighter in her own right. Her death scene is presented tenderly, with the same song that played over their courtship scene, All The Time in the World, sung by Louie Armstrong. Then you're jarred by the James Bond theme just because it's part of the formula. They would've been better off with Louie Armstrong singing over the credits.

All The Time In the World sounds like a title to a James Bond movie.