Jump to content


Photo

What became of the 'original' Bond after DAD?


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#31 Major Tallon

Major Tallon

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1736 posts
  • Location:Mid-USA

Posted 09 April 2012 - 11:17 AM

Truth be told, I've always felt that while the Connery films (bar YOLT and DAF) were the closest to the source material, Connery's portrayal of Bond himself didn't exactly mirror the Fleming version of the character. Fleming's Bond was very much an ordinary man-sure, he was trained to be a part of the world of espionage and was prepared to kill when necessary, but he was a normal person and not a super-human killing machine; in fact, the physical and psychological stresses of his life did take its toll on him and he did do a fair bit of soul searching throughout the series. Connery however played Bond as being nigh-invincible; a cold and calculated machine. Connery's Bond certainly didn't look like he spent much time ruminating over the nature of his life and work; he just relentlessly went about his business without batting an eye. Not that I'm knocking Connery's portrayal at all-the kind of psychological depth Bond had in print was kind off difficult to translate to the screen, especially when the films were primarily intended to be thrillers. Moore arguably built upon Connery's portrayal of the invincible 'super-agent', albeit with a humorous touch which served him well in a lot of his other roles.

I think Dalton WAS the first one to give Bond some psychological depth. Bond was no longer the action hero who wandered around the world killing villains and bedding beautiful women-he was a hardened professional spy, but deep down inside, a man with conflicted views about his life and his actions. Brosnan too, despite the somewhat outlandish premises of some of his films, struck a kind of balance between the Connery/Moore ideal of the invincible hero and the Dalton rendition of a man torn between duty and his finer feelings.

Actually, in a sense, I feel Craig is a mix between Fleming's Bond and Connery's; except that he's Fleming's Bond updated for the 21st century. He does have the persona of the steely killing machine, like Connery did, but he's also a 'real man', conflicted about himself and his actions, much like Fleming's Bond or Dalton's Bond.

Nicely said, CasinoKiller.

#32 AStupidPoliceman

AStupidPoliceman

    Cadet

  • Crew
  • 8 posts

Posted 10 April 2012 - 05:38 PM


Truth be told, I've always felt that while the Connery films (bar YOLT and DAF) were the closest to the source material, Connery's portrayal of Bond himself didn't exactly mirror the Fleming version of the character. Fleming's Bond was very much an ordinary man-sure, he was trained to be a part of the world of espionage and was prepared to kill when necessary, but he was a normal person and not a super-human killing machine; in fact, the physical and psychological stresses of his life did take its toll on him and he did do a fair bit of soul searching throughout the series. Connery however played Bond as being nigh-invincible; a cold and calculated machine. Connery's Bond certainly didn't look like he spent much time ruminating over the nature of his life and work; he just relentlessly went about his business without batting an eye. Not that I'm knocking Connery's portrayal at all-the kind of psychological depth Bond had in print was kind off difficult to translate to the screen, especially when the films were primarily intended to be thrillers. Moore arguably built upon Connery's portrayal of the invincible 'super-agent', albeit with a humorous touch which served him well in a lot of his other roles.

I think Dalton WAS the first one to give Bond some psychological depth. Bond was no longer the action hero who wandered around the world killing villains and bedding beautiful women-he was a hardened professional spy, but deep down inside, a man with conflicted views about his life and his actions. Brosnan too, despite the somewhat outlandish premises of some of his films, struck a kind of balance between the Connery/Moore ideal of the invincible hero and the Dalton rendition of a man torn between duty and his finer feelings.

Actually, in a sense, I feel Craig is a mix between Fleming's Bond and Connery's; except that he's Fleming's Bond updated for the 21st century. He does have the persona of the steely killing machine, like Connery did, but he's also a 'real man', conflicted about himself and his actions, much like Fleming's Bond or Dalton's Bond.

Nicely said, CasinoKiller.


My sentiments exactly. Thanks for saving me the work!

#33 glidrose

glidrose

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1393 posts

Posted 10 April 2012 - 07:27 PM

What became of the 'original' Bond after DAD?

He became a member on CBn. Sadly, at some point one of the mods banned him.

#34 Jim

Jim

    Commander RNVR

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 13670 posts
  • Location:Oxfordshire

Posted 10 April 2012 - 07:34 PM

?

#35 00 Brosnan

00 Brosnan

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 503 posts
  • Location:East Coast, U.S

Posted 11 April 2012 - 06:23 AM

I don't give it much thought because I think the Bond of Craig and Brosnan are as much of the same character as the Bonds of Connery and Brosnan are.


I agree with this Jaguar dead on. They're all Bond, one guy...just different portrayls.

I personally tend to think of them in eras. 1960s-Connery, 1970s-Moore, 1980s-Dalton, 1990s-Brosnan, Modern-Craig.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users