I don't understand people who say they didn't like Timothy's films because he was making Bond 'too human'. I really enjoyed those films, and Pierce's. I guess I like the 'vulnerable' Bond. And why shouldn't Bond be human? He is an interesting and kind of sad character so it would be a waste not to show it (especially in books). As long as the man doesn't become a wimp and break down in cry every five minutes, I think making Bond human is good. It makes him more 'accessable' to the public.
So what do you think?
What is wrong with Bond being human?
Started by
Joyce Carrington
, Feb 15 2003 10:45 AM
4 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 15 February 2003 - 10:45 AM
#2
Posted 15 February 2003 - 05:34 PM
Remember the scene in Dr. No where Bond gets ill after his encounter with the tarantula (centipede in the book). The thought that just tension alone would be enough to make a man this hard react in such away reminded us all that he was human. The fear coming out of the scene was palpable. When was the last time someone felt honestly worried that Bond would not get out of a scrape alive? I know it's hard to suspend disbelief after 20 film outings, and an army of books, but I believe adding a little fear into the character, as the early Connery did, as Dalton did, and most importantly, as Ian Fleming did, would go a long way. The first half of DAD was gritty, but they still had Brosnan quipping back after having been tortured for months, not to mention that great diet plan he was on whereby he fattened up in a North Korean prison.
#3
Posted 16 February 2003 - 07:46 AM
Well I'm not sure how many people made that comment against Bond being human. But I believe, Joyce, you might have seen me around CBn saying something to that effect.
For me, it's just that I grew up in the Roger Moore era. 007 was more of a caricature, a character, not a person.
A superhero, if you will. And while it is true that in my childhood, I never did relate much in a human way to Roger Moore's Bond, it did not stop me (or those of the same opinion) from wishing and striving to be in some ways like him....Cool, funny, well-groomed, and being able to get the job done despite a seeming fatiousness.
Personally, I have no problems with Bond as a fearing person (although Dr. No was a bit of a revelation for me). It's just that a part of me didn't want to see the super-Bond go away.
For me, it's just that I grew up in the Roger Moore era. 007 was more of a caricature, a character, not a person.
A superhero, if you will. And while it is true that in my childhood, I never did relate much in a human way to Roger Moore's Bond, it did not stop me (or those of the same opinion) from wishing and striving to be in some ways like him....Cool, funny, well-groomed, and being able to get the job done despite a seeming fatiousness.
Personally, I have no problems with Bond as a fearing person (although Dr. No was a bit of a revelation for me). It's just that a part of me didn't want to see the super-Bond go away.
#4
Posted 16 February 2003 - 10:10 AM
Just a question Joyce, why's this discussion in the fan-fic forums?
#5
Posted 16 February 2003 - 03:14 PM
i would like bond to be human, but i would like him to retain that "super hero" part of him as well, kinda middle ground and i know its a fine line he walks