Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

Are we overdue for an Octopussy?


60 replies to this topic

#1 Trevelyan 006

Trevelyan 006

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 820 posts
  • Location:Antenna Cradle

Posted 28 July 2014 - 04:32 AM

As unpopular as this topic (and my own opinion) may become, I feel as though the Bond series could use a detour. Craig has been nothing short of an absolutely fantastic fit to Bond. I've thoroughly enjoyed his run and will continue to for as long as he stays in the role. However, the Craig plots and Bond characterization have been pretty dark (a rather generalized statement, I suppose) for the past handful of years. With a new actor no doubt on the horizon, the series will surely again reinvent itself. I am personally ready for a return to the lighter side of Bond. The sheer, borderline cheesy fun Octopussy provided the series with was a different dimension and aside from the general seriousness. I must admit though, I'm not totally convinced that type of Bond fun would translate to today's age and theater audience. But, as a long-time fan of the series, I just feel as though there is no way I can be alone on this. The Bond movies (especially of yesteryear) were fun, globe-trotting adventures packed with beautiful women, exotic locales and sensationalized (yet deadly) super villains. I'd just like to return to some of the former comedic magic the Bond formula offered. Another Octopussy may be a little far fetched but, perhaps, maybe not too far off?

 

The Bond series has always been hard-edged, action-packed, and thrilling. We get it and always have. Now that these elements have been utterly reinforced with the Craig era, I feel as though I'm ready for to see some more of the fun Bond used to have at his enemy's and sometimes allies expense. Even if it is just for a film, or two. 

 

What do you think?


Edited by Trevelyan 006, 31 July 2014 - 12:12 AM.


#2 Hansen

Hansen

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 431 posts
  • Location:Paris

Posted 28 July 2014 - 06:16 AM

To me, Octopussy is very well-balanced film in terms of action / suspens / comedy.

As mentionned, film has many comedic elements but also a great story (and this is one of the few with a cold war background), great suspens : killing of 009 (and the twins henchmen are probably the best ones of Moore era) and Moore's best piece of acting when disguised as clown he tries t convince the general.

So to answer your question : yes, I would love to have this formula back at least for one film.



#3 thecasinoroyale

thecasinoroyale

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14358 posts
  • Location:Basingstoke, UK

Posted 28 July 2014 - 12:11 PM

'Octopussy' is certainly one of the best Roger Moore Bond films - a perfect blend of humour, espionage and action.

 

The settings are well used and solid as well is the action sequences and stunt work.The action on, in and under the train ranks as my favourite in the Moore films as is the tense bomb defuse in the circus.

 

With a really perfect use of exotic locations that add to the film like nothing other, if they can transfer this pace and style for Craig in a future Bond film I think it would be a winner.



#4 tdalton

tdalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 11680 posts

Posted 28 July 2014 - 12:42 PM

While I really like Octopussy, I'm not ready for them to head back in that direction.  I like the serious take on Bond and want to see it continue for the foreseeable future. 



#5 Iceskater101

Iceskater101

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2398 posts
  • Location:Midwest, MN

Posted 28 July 2014 - 12:59 PM

I would like to see a lighter Bond movie! I mean all of Craig's are very dark. I also can't wait for them to go back to the older characteristics of the Bond franchise including having that door to M's office.



#6 Grard Bond

Grard Bond

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 518 posts
  • Location:The Netherlands

Posted 28 July 2014 - 06:53 PM

I'm not sure if I agree with the opinion that Octopussy is in perfect balans, I always think, when I watch this movie, that they didn't make a realy good decision to make a serious or more comical Bondmovie.

It has serious stuff, but also very silly stuff like the Tarzan yell. It's a very schizophrenic movie and I think it's very out of balance.

Before this movie was made and released director Glen was saying that it would become a "From Russia with love" kind of movie and although there are some elements that prove this, the finished product is more like LaLD or Golden Gun, only better made.

 

The movie before this one, Eyes only, is more like FRWL and a much better movie and although there's a lot of fun with the action etc, it also has a more serious undertone.


Edited by Grard Bond, 28 July 2014 - 06:55 PM.


#7 jamie00007

jamie00007

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 555 posts
  • Location:Sydney

Posted 29 July 2014 - 02:41 AM

I think most Bond fans are ready for a fun Bond adventure. I count the Craig era as my second favourite behind the first six movies but Im definitely ready for a change in tone. Though Octopussy, my third least favorite film, is certainly not the type of film I'd want them to emulate. Something like Thunderball, with its perfect balance of seriousness and humour and its more laid back pace and mostly single location is the type of film I'd like to see Craig in.



#8 Trevelyan 006

Trevelyan 006

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 820 posts
  • Location:Antenna Cradle

Posted 29 July 2014 - 05:54 AM

To be fair, I've loved the Craig era myself. It was a perfect change of pace (and perhaps a needed one) after the Brosnan films. I just feel as though a lighter spirited Bond adventure or two, would do the series a bit of good is all. Keep things fresh and unpredictable. There is no sense in staying the current course after Craig, as nobody will play serious, physical, emotionally scarred Bond as well as he (directly following anyway).

 

'Octopussy' is certainly one of the best Roger Moore Bond films - a perfect blend of humour, espionage and action.

 

The settings are well used and solid as well is the action sequences and stunt work.The action on, in and under the train ranks as my favourite in the Moore films as is the tense bomb defuse in the circus.

 

With a really perfect use of exotic locations that add to the film like nothing other, if they can transfer this pace and style for Craig in a future Bond film I think it would be a winner.

The circus/bomb defuse scene also, to this day, remains as one of my most favorite in the entire series. It is unique and quite memorable.



#9 Agent Spriggan Ominae

Agent Spriggan Ominae

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1068 posts
  • Location:Aiea,Hawaii

Posted 29 July 2014 - 06:37 AM

I'm glad to see that OP has it's supporters. My honest opinion, at least as far as how I perceive the the mainstream perceptions of the Bond films post-Craig is that OP is one of the more underrated films, along with the rest of the John Glen era which played a role I feel in the current tone of the Craig era. Glen was the second unit director and editor on OHMSS and I feel his influence on that film deserves more credit. FYEO was somewhat a semi-reboot to Fleming at the time coming off MR, and OP would be the very next film in the "new-era" and I feel because things like the Tarzan yell and the Clown bit that it's gets the mis-perception of being too silly when it's actually anything but. Infact the clown bit is actually a rather tense darkly ironic scene that makes one recall the saying from Soren Kierkegaard about the clown who comes on stage to tell the audience that the theater's on fire but they all just laugh and then burn to death. The idea of Bond disguised as a clown is actually straight from Fleming's notes. I would say that OP is one of my favorites of the Moore films. Compared to stuff like TSWLM and MR it is far more scaled back, more in line with some of the earlier Connery films GF, TB in terms of the kind of plot. Of course Moore's take on Bond was by default a little bit lighter than the others, but the story and stakes are deadly serious and on the same level of GF/TB. I would actually say both OP and AVTAK(which for me personally is my favorite Moore film, I was born in San Fran) are reworkings of the plot/story of MR(the Novel) and GF. 

 

I think what the films/stories have in common are certain key elements that make up what one would consider the quint-essential Bond adventure formula. There's a certain kind of villain, in OP we have Louis Jordan as Kamal Khan who is much like the film one of the more underrated villains. He brings that air of exotic charm and menace that it's almost hard to describe. The way he plays the role it naturally evokes that evil, sophisticated, ruthless businessman type villain while not overplaying the role. He may not have scars or any manic outbursts but it's the subtle villainy that's brilliant. The other main component is the secondary physical threat/henchman type role i.e OddJob, Gobinda. Both are very memorable although somewhat cliche but in the case of Bond, especially the older films that's part of the fun. It's moments like the bit with Oddjob smashing the golf ball and Gobinda and the dice that leave an impression. In my namesake's anime movie, Spriggan there's a scene where one of the villain's henchmen crushes a bronze ashtray with his cybernetic hand that reminded me of that classic Bond-style moment which shows just how powerful this villain is, that makes it all the more fun when they get their eventual come uppence. The third main component is the villain's plot or threat, and that's the old case of Nuclear Blackmail or a plot to outright cause a Nuclear disaster which most would argue has been done to death in not just Bond but other Franchises as well, the most recent examples I can think of are The Dark Knight Rises and The Avengers, and it's interesting that both while comic movies are also heavily inspired by the Bond formula. In the Novels Fleming first introduced the concept in MR, and it would again be used in TB and to a lesser extent the GF novel but it was made a key component of the plot in the film adaptation. Since then the threat of Nuclear annihilation was used in YOLT/TSWLM and the last real Nuclear based plot was TWINE, which kinda reworked the standard threat of a villain with a nuke. Above nukes there's the whole Regan-era "Star-wars" type space based weapons which we've seen stuff like YOLT, DAF, MR, GE, DAD and then there's bio-chemical weapons that so far only OHMSS really featured. We've had a taste of a cyber-based/hacker villain's plot in SF but there's still the concept of a cyber weapon i.e something like STUXNET which could be an idea for future Bond movie. If you want to get really interesting borderline sci-fi(but allegedly real) there's stuff like directed energy microwave weapons/ scalar technology, HAARP type systems, the idea of geoengineering(weather control), even microwave/vlf frequency mind-control(voice of god weapons).

 

I guess in answer to the question, yes I think at the very least before his run ends, Craig should have an OP style/scale plot and villains to tackle. Craig's era so far has had most of the traditional elements girls, gadgets[in my perspective all three Craig Bonds have gadgets that are featured and used in them] action, memorable main villains and exotic locations, just very scaled back. Post SF we have almost all of the traditional elements in place, with M, Q, Moneypenny, Tanner, Felix and there's still a few loose threads of Mr. White/Quantum. Now it feels like it's about time for them to do a more traditional type Bond story, just translated to the tone and style of the Craig era. Imagine taking the bare-bones of a story like OP or AVTAK and then translating it to the same style of story, action, and tone in the Craig films. We could have another classic on our hands. Like I said before Moore brought his own lighter touch to the role and I wouldn't say Craig's films have been totally without humor. In my opinion that's another misconception, Craig's films have plenty of lighter/funnier moments, it's just done in his style or brand of humor which is different from Moore just like how Moore was different from Connery. For an OP style story/plot to work they shouldn't compromise the tone of the films in Craig's run so-far. I think it could be done and if we're thinking about this I wouldn't surprised if the filmmakers were considering something like this too. While it's not Bond, I really enjoyed Captain America:The Winter Soldier and certain parts it's almost a throwback to the old school Bond films like TSWLM and MR. Actually I would even say that TWS film is a variation of the MR novel's story, which would again confirm that Fleming is indeed one of the granddaddy's of action/adventure storytelling. He did it first and arguably best. Like the song says, "Nobody does it better".        



#10 Guy Haines

Guy Haines

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3075 posts
  • Location:"Special envoy" no more. As of 7/5/15 elected to office somewhere in Nottinghamshire, England.

Posted 29 July 2014 - 09:41 AM

Octopussy locations certainly, and we nearly got one for the SF pre titles. But as the basis for a less heavy Bond 24 or 25, no. It worked for Roger Moore - it's one of my favourite Moore films, and would have been the perfect swansong for him. I can't see that approach working with Daniel Craig, though

 

However, I would like to see something similar to the balance of serious action and sardonic wit of the Connery films, plus a race against time plot for Craig's Bond, and a Thunderball style plot - underwater or not - would be right for this.

 

Can I just make a comment about what appears to be a backlash against SF recently? I don't think it's down to plot-holes, or Sam Mendes' direction, or enhanced roles for certain cast members we think should be barely cameos, such as M.

 

No, I think it's because in the Craig era Bond has, to an extent, been taken out of our comfort zone. Not Bond's - ours. This doesn't bother me - as a fan of the books most of all I welcomed the reboot, but I can see how fans used to the mix of tuxedoed agent, flash locations, Bond girls,  one liners and sight gags (which to be blunt I mostly loathed) miss the "good old days". Certainly, I miss the 1960s Connery era most of all. But I can't see it coming back. 24 or 25 may well be different or lighter in tone, and change of emphasis is no bad thing - another fear members express is that 24 will be Skyfall revisited, but I can't see that happening either, the story was very much a one off. But Daniel Craig disguised in a crocodile submarine? Training tigers the "Woodhouse way"? Thanks, but no thanks!



#11 tdalton

tdalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 11680 posts

Posted 29 July 2014 - 12:38 PM


Can I just make a comment about what appears to be a backlash against SF recently? I don't think it's down to plot-holes, or Sam Mendes' direction, or enhanced roles for certain cast members we think should be barely cameos, such as M.

 

No, I think it's because in the Craig era Bond has, to an extent, been taken out of our comfort zone. Not Bond's - ours. This doesn't bother me - as a fan of the books most of all I welcomed the reboot, but I can see how fans used to the mix of tuxedoed agent, flash locations, Bond girls,  one liners and sight gags (which to be blunt I mostly loathed) miss the "good old days". Certainly, I miss the 1960s Connery era most of all. But I can't see it coming back. 24 or 25 may well be different or lighter in tone, and change of emphasis is no bad thing - another fear members express is that 24 will be Skyfall revisited, but I can't see that happening either, the story was very much a one off. But Daniel Craig disguised in a crocodile submarine? Training tigers the "Woodhouse way"? Thanks, but no thanks!

 

First and foremost, I have to admit that I find the current backlash against Skyfall to be rather humorous.  I can recall a time around here where those that didn't like Skyfall were, to a degree, looked somewhat down upon by a certain segment of the membership. 

 

I don't agree, however, that the reason that there's a backlash is due to EON pulling us out of our comfort zone when it comes to Bond.  I think that any backlash against Skyfall at this point comes down to the film losing, as several of us commented back in late 2012, the film finally losing its "new Bond film glow".  It's now being seen for exactly what it is, problems and all, and the problems that it has working against it are rather significant. 



#12 Trevelyan 006

Trevelyan 006

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 820 posts
  • Location:Antenna Cradle

Posted 29 July 2014 - 08:40 PM

Skyfall, along with many of the other Bond films, will only garner more criticism as time goes on.



#13 JohnnyWalker

JohnnyWalker

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 272 posts

Posted 29 July 2014 - 10:56 PM

Skyfall, along with many of the other Bond films, will only garner more criticism as time goes on.

Films nowadays only really get 'internet praise' when they're quite bad and people want to defend them.



#14 Jim

Jim

    Commander RNVR

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14266 posts
  • Location:Oxfordshire

Posted 30 July 2014 - 01:36 PM

One Octopussy in any given lifetime is already one Octopussy too many.



#15 dtuba

dtuba

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 573 posts
  • Location:Tacoma, WA, USA

Posted 30 July 2014 - 01:52 PM

I have not been kind to OP over the years. It was my 3rd Bond film in the cinema. MR was my first, and although I was very young, I knew it was silly. FYEO I liked even more (saw it like 6 times) and compared to MR it seemed like a deadly serious Bond film (although of course it wasn't). When OP came out, I disliked it, thinking it a step backwards;  of course I was 16, and I thought I was way too cool for those boring old Roger Moore Bond films. Now as a middle aged "old fogey" myself, I can see how well most of the movie works; it really is like a "greatest hits" of Moore's Bond. (I still find the India sequences silly and a bit racist, having traveled there and becoming more familiar with the culture.) And yes, the clown sequence is far from the worst part of the film.

 

Do I think Daniel should do a film in the tone of OP? Not strictly, because that simply isn't his interpretation of the character. But injecting a bit of daft humor into a mostly serious affair- most definitely. I think DC can pull off  a bit of silliness. And, certainly the franchise could stand to lighten up a bit after the grim and serious QOS and SF.


Edited by dtuba, 30 July 2014 - 01:55 PM.


#16 plankattack

plankattack

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1385 posts

Posted 30 July 2014 - 02:31 PM

Are we overdue for an OP? I guess it depends what part of OP you're looking for - epic adventure in an exotic locale with a ticking-clock in the background and just a tinge of the fantastic? Sure, I could go for that, though I'd rather it feel like TB than OP.

Of course if you're looking for Tarzan yells, Barbara Wodehouse references, and "that should keep you in curry" one-liners, no, not my thing. We've been there and done that with Sir Rog, and to be honest, nobody does that sort of Bond better than him.

If that's the OP that you want, then you've got it, in the same way that I doubt we'll ever see another QoS, so I'm going to have to make do with re-watching the one we've got.

#17 Trevelyan 006

Trevelyan 006

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 820 posts
  • Location:Antenna Cradle

Posted 31 July 2014 - 12:11 AM

Do I think Daniel should do a film in the tone of OP? Not strictly, because that simply isn't his interpretation of the character. But injecting a bit of daft humor into a mostly serious affair- most definitely. I think DC can pull off  a bit of silliness. And, certainly the franchise could stand to lighten up a bit after the grim and serious QOS and SF.

 

I couldn't agree more. Building on what you have said, it is almost necessary at this point to move in a slightly different direction following the events of all of Craig's films. They have been so heavy emotionally for Bond, that he deserves a film to unwind a bit character-wise. Not saying it should be overdone, of course. He's lost the love of his life, seen the death of a mother figure and much irreversible destruction in his personal and professional life. Give Craig's Bond a film to release a little, stylized in an Octopussy manner, and as instant and different Bond classic could be born.  

 

Of course if you're looking for Tarzan yells, Barbara Wodehouse references, and "that should keep you in curry" one-liners, no, not my thing. We've been there and done that with Sir Rog, and to be honest, nobody does that sort of Bond better than him.

 

Again, I couldn't agree more. Don't get me wrong, just because I feel as though another Octopussy is due, doesn't mean EVERYTHING that comes with that. More of the tone, pace and humor. Less of the cheese. Nobody could get away with the cheese like Moore anyway, just as you said. 


Edited by Trevelyan 006, 31 July 2014 - 12:15 AM.


#18 Guy Haines

Guy Haines

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3075 posts
  • Location:"Special envoy" no more. As of 7/5/15 elected to office somewhere in Nottinghamshire, England.

Posted 31 July 2014 - 06:41 AM

I think we're overplaying the line that the Craig films have been dark and serious, so the next one needs lightening up. Casino Royale and Skyfall didn't lack humour, in spite of the sad endings - both of which were mitigated by the very last scenes. (Quantum Of Solace is, however, a different kettle of fish, in my experience. I watched it more than once at the local multiplex and on each occasion I didn't hear a single guffaw from the audience. "Titter ye not", as the late Frankie Howard might have said.)

 

The same could be said about an earlier entry, OHMSS. We remember it as "serious" because Bond falls in love, is married and becomes a widower minutes later. Yet for the most part it is a typical 1960s Bond film, with the kind of dark wit and at times risqué humour that either Connery or Moore could have handled easily.

 

I think one case that can be made about the reboot era is that the films have been, at times, more "about James Bond" rather than being "James Bond films". But even that may be overstated - you couldn't mistake any of the Craig films for a "kitchen sink" drama or a deep psychological piece. In the end they have action and varied locations, and the other elements that make up the Bond film.

 

I agree with the post above that a film like Octopussy, with the "cheesy" elements, could only have been carried off by Sir Roger Moore (Pierce Brosnan perhaps, but I got the impression throughout that he wanted his Bond to nod in the direction of the 1960s era.) I don't think the present Bond could do it.  One of the soundest bits of advice given to a Bond actor, imho, was from Guy Hamilton to Moore at the start of filming LALD - "Sean was Sean and you are you." That's how it should be for any actor given the Bond role. A new actor may have a new, lighter, or at least different approach but it should be his own. Which is why I don't think we'll get a new "Octopussy", but we may get a future movie that is a bit more of a romp.

 

(And speaking of "Octopussy" - presenters on Radio 4 are currently arguing about the plural of the word "octopus", for some reason. The things they talk about on the wireless!)



#19 AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän

AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 493 posts
  • Location:Oulu, Finland

Posted 31 July 2014 - 08:05 AM

One Octopussy in any given lifetime is already one Octopussy too many.

Ouch! That is rather harshly put, but I kinda agree since I've always found OP to be the blandest, least memorable of 80's Bonds. Weak main villain (Kamal Khan), uninspired direction, dumb humour...As hated as AVTAK is, it is head and shoulders above OP - even when Moore is way too old and main Bond girl is a shrieking bimbo,


Edited by AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän, 31 July 2014 - 08:06 AM.


#20 FlemingBond

FlemingBond

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 610 posts
  • Location:Phoenix, Az U.S.

Posted 31 July 2014 - 04:26 PM

I don't really think of Octopussy as cheesy or funny. There's the Tarzan scene of course.....but it's my second favorite Roger Moore film.

Craig can do flirty and sexy and humor. Look at Casino Royale. There's drama and the downbeat climax, but there's a lot of classic Bond elements there. They can put some fun into the next one without getting cheesy.



#21 glidrose

glidrose

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2469 posts

Posted 31 July 2014 - 11:28 PM

Octopussy is a fun film. Takes me back to the good old days when I had a jolly good time. But only ol' Rog could have done it and I'm not sure Daniel Craig can do a fun film.

#22 Guy Haines

Guy Haines

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3075 posts
  • Location:"Special envoy" no more. As of 7/5/15 elected to office somewhere in Nottinghamshire, England.

Posted 01 August 2014 - 06:57 AM

I agree with FlemingBond above. Craig could do a less heavy Bond film, but not in the mould of the 70's to mid 80s. I think the closest his film might resemble would be early to mid 60s, which would suit me, but even then it wouldn't be a "carbon copy" of the Connery era film, and it shouldn't be.

 

Couple of unrelated points. We may think of their Bonds as like "chalk and cheese" - I'll leave you to decide which is which! - but few have been more supportive of Daniel Craig than Sir Roger Moore. He was particularly complimentary about Craig in his previous film, praising SF warmly. I doubt he'd have been so supportive if he thought Craig was getting it wrong. (I think he'd have kept quiet - he said in his biography, about a certain cast member in one of his Bond films "I've always said if you've nothing nice to say about someone, then you should say nothing. So I'll say nothing.")

 

Secondly, in listening to the Bond books on audio CD recently, I've noticed a certain sense of humour creeping in, as early as Goldfinger, which pre-dated the first film by three years. Bond uses dry, barbed comments to wind up Goldfinger - "Take Fort Knox? Bit of a tall order for two men and a girl, isn't it?", to which the villain responds by asking 007 to put away his sense of humour. And Bond's thoughts after ordeal by circular saw, when he realises that he is not in heaven, but aboard Goldfinger's aircraft are quite amusing. It's not cheesy, "nudge nudge" stuff, but as the book Bond got older, it seems he discovered droll wit.



#23 glidrose

glidrose

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2469 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 08:26 PM

Couple of unrelated points. We may think of their Bonds as like "chalk and cheese" - I'll leave you to decide which is which! - but few have been more supportive of Daniel Craig than Sir Roger Moore. He was particularly complimentary about Craig in his previous film, praising SF warmly. I doubt he'd have been so supportive if he thought Craig was getting it wrong. (I think he'd have kept quiet - he said in his biography, about a certain cast member in one of his Bond films "I've always said if you've nothing nice to say about someone, then you should say nothing. So I'll say nothing.")


So that's why RM still claims he's never seen Timothy Dalton's two Bond films. He's not alone! :D

 

Secondly, in listening to the Bond books on audio CD recently, I've noticed a certain sense of humour creeping in, as early as Goldfinger, which pre-dated the first film by three years. Bond uses dry, barbed comments to wind up Goldfinger - "Take Fort Knox? Bit of a tall order for two men and a girl, isn't it?", to which the villain responds by asking 007 to put away his sense of humour. And Bond's thoughts after ordeal by circular saw, when he realises that he is not in heaven, but aboard Goldfinger's aircraft are quite amusing. It's not cheesy, "nudge nudge" stuff, but as the book Bond got older, it seems he discovered droll wit.


Oh absolutely. Bond is very sardonic in GF the novel. And once he's gotten over Tracy's death in YOLT and begun functioning like a normal human being he's clearly resembles Sean Connery.

#24 FlemingBond

FlemingBond

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 610 posts
  • Location:Phoenix, Az U.S.

Posted 04 August 2014 - 03:46 PM

for the record he was talking about Grace Jones.



#25 sharpshooter

sharpshooter

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8996 posts

Posted 05 August 2014 - 04:09 AM

I'm not sure if we'll get back to the style of Octopussy any time soon, to be honest. I enjoy that film, but they seem to be more aware of that 'regression'. I think the Skyfall template will be as fantastical as things get.



#26 Iceskater101

Iceskater101

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2398 posts
  • Location:Midwest, MN

Posted 05 August 2014 - 04:18 PM

I actually don't enjoy Octopussy but honestly, Roger Moore is not my favorite Bond actor so that's probably why.

 

I think it would be cool if we had a Bond movie that wasn't so dark and more fun.



#27 hcmv007

hcmv007

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2310 posts
  • Location:United States, Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 05 August 2014 - 10:42 PM

If the current Bond formula works why change it?



#28 AMC Hornet

AMC Hornet

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5857 posts

Posted 05 August 2014 - 11:26 PM

"If it ain't broke don't fix it."

Albert R. Broccoli

 

"'If it ain't broke don't fix it' is a recipe for complacency."

Michael G. Wilson



#29 Guy Haines

Guy Haines

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3075 posts
  • Location:"Special envoy" no more. As of 7/5/15 elected to office somewhere in Nottinghamshire, England.

Posted 06 August 2014 - 06:18 AM

I agree with the Michael G Wilson quote, but trying to fit Daniel Craig's Bond into an OP style romp would be as convincing as casting a younger Roger Moore in QoS or SF. They approach the role in different ways - highly successful but different.

 

There was an interesting comment by Craig about Bond 24 on a website called Screenrant. In it he says he wants to "reclaim" some of the old irony, but without going into pastiche, and that he can't do "shtick". Given his apparent involvement in the production of his Bond movies, that doesn't sound like 24, or 25 becoming an "Octopussy" to me - more likely a film or films that give more than a nod to the classic era of the 1960s, but updated for this day and age.

 

The dark irony and wit of the classic era may well round off Daniel Craig's time as Bond. But if fans want a "fun romp" they may well have to wait for a new actor as 007.



#30 Fisico

Fisico

    Cadet

  • Crew
  • 10 posts
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 06 August 2014 - 02:38 PM

I generally prefer dark and serious Bond movies, but Octopussy was great!

So I wouldn't mind if they'd make a new Octopussy, but adapted to the style of Daniel Craig.


Edited by Fisico, 06 August 2014 - 02:38 PM.