The James Bond Film Discussion Thread (With Bonus Lazenby!)

[cooleddie74]

The launch of the rocket from Blofeld's volcano base in You Only Live Twice presents a similar problem. Yes, Blofeld and his senior staff and all his henchpersons are hidden behind protective layers when the rocket launches but there should have been so much exhaust flame and smoke from the takeoff that the equipment in the surrounding area should have been destroyed or at least heavily damaged. But there's no smoke or fire damage to the inside of the crater base.

 

[cardinal biggles]

"But won't they get incinerated?"
"Just repeat to yourself, 'It's just a show, I should really just relax.'"

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Don't forget the 200dB sound waves that smash your internal organs.

 

[Starkers]

The launch of the rocket from Blofeld's volcano base in You Only Live Twice presents a similar problem. Yes, Blofeld and his senior staff and all his henchpersons are hidden behind protective layers when the rocket launches but there should have been so much exhaust flame and smoke from the takeoff that the equipment in the surrounding area should have been destroyed or at least heavily damaged. But there's no smoke or fire damage to the inside of the crater base.

The thing that gets me about YOLT is the plan? China (presumably) want the USSR and the West to annihilate each other in WWIII, but I always wonder what the aftermath looks like for both them and SPECTRE? I mean even in the late 60s Mutually Assured Destruction was a thing. Did China just imagine America and Russia would destroy each other and there'd be no fallout (in either sense of the word) and what do SPECTRE get out of it? Money, but then where are they going to spend it? Power? Again in what sense when large parts of the globe are now a wasteland and where China are the only superpower (and can perhaps crush SPECTRE like a bug)?

 

[cooleddie74]

Blofeld and SPECTRE were dangerous and had vast criminal resources but nobody ever accused them of being the smartest people in the world. I mean, in DAF Blofeld locks Bond inside an easily escapable storage closet on the oil rig and it takes him just a few minutes to escape and help defeat Blofeld's plans. Blofeld is sinister and cunning but apparently doesn't think much beyond the monetary reward or the title of nobility. Even at his best he's lacking in having true long-term vision.

 

[cooleddie74]

Two Bond films of note celebrate release anniversaries this weekend.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[scotpens]

Blofeld and SPECTRE were dangerous and had vast criminal resources but nobody ever accused them of being the smartest people in the world.

That's for sure. I mean, what kind of international criminal/terrorist/espionage organization has a clever and memorable Madison Avenue acronym (actually a "backronym") for a name?

 

[cooleddie74]

And a symbol(the octopus)that can be recognized by anyone with the knowledge of their organization. A hidden tattoo or password I can see making sense but SPECTRE flaunts so much of itself on the surface and any British or other foreign agent worth their salt can recognize a SPECTRE operative with relative ease just based on what they say and their choice of clothing.

 

[Ssosmcin]

Kinda like Gerry Anderson's UFO. S.H.A.D.O. is a super top secret organization but every single one of their very publicly seen vehicles has S.H.A.D.O. emblazoned on each side.

Secrecy was never the Bond film's long suit.

"Oh my God! You just killed James Bond!"

"Your reputation has preceded you, Mr. Bond."

"My name is Bond, James Bond."
"And I'm Dick Tracy and you're still under arrest."

 

[cooleddie74]

Even Blofeld's bathysub escape vehicle at the end of Diamonds Are Forever had the octopus on it. They branded a lot for an underground criminal organization.

 

[cardinal biggles]

That's for sure. I mean, what kind of international criminal/terrorist/espionage organization has a clever and memorable Madison Avenue acronym (actually a "backronym") for a name?

And a symbol(the octopus)that can be recognized by anyone with the knowledge of their organization. A hidden tattoo or password I can see making sense but SPECTRE flaunts so much of itself on the surface and any British or other foreign agent worth their salt can recognize a SPECTRE operative with relative ease just based on what they say and their choice of clothing.

A Facebook page I follow did a post about Live and Let Die, which was released 49 years ago this week. In the post, they included this quote from Roger Moore about his approach to playing Bond:

"To me, the Bond situations are so ridiculous, so outrageous. I mean, this man is supposed to be a spy and yet, everybody knows he's a spy. Every bartender in the world offers him martinis that are shaken, not stirred. What kind of serious spy is recognized everywhere he goes? It's outrageous. So you have to treat the humor outrageously as well. My personality is entirely different than previous Bonds. I'm not that cold-blooded killer type. Which is why I play it mostly for laughs."
​

So it only makes sense to send the world's most conspicuous secret agent to battle an international criminal organization with such impeccable branding.

 

[scotpens]

And a symbol (the octopus) that can be recognized by anyone with the knowledge of their organization.

Interestingly, a Thunderball preproduction sketch for the octopus logo was more naturalistic, with a recognizable human skull for a head. Although I can see why they went with a more stylized look for the movies -- it's a lot simpler to work into a ring!

 

[Starkers]

Even though we don't see the body, I prefer to believe Blofeld died in DIAMONDS before Wint and Kidd. After Tracy's death, it seems quite fair. Bond's too happy at simply capturing him as opposed to being vengeful.

And having unnamed Blofeld get wasted in the fricking pre-credit scene----and totally unrelated to the body of the film----was simply misguided. FOR YOUR EYES ONLY picked a strange time to briefly bring him back. And then came non-canon Sydow.....

Frankly given Moore showed more pain over the death of Tracy than Connery ever did, then if Lazenby's Bond couldn't be the one to get revenge, I'm glad Rog could.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Starkers]

That's really interesting.

I own the Roger Moore/Spy Who Loved Me one, some friends got it me as a birthday or Christmas gift quite a few years ago now! Not sure I've ever taken him out of the box!

 

[cooleddie74]

For all the crap some fans give Moore for his films being so campy in many respects the camp factor started before Roger got there. DAF is essentially a Roger Moore movie starring Sean Connery.

 

[cooleddie74]

That was a Guy Hamilton beat, though. In all four of his Bond films either the main villain or the henchman survives for one end-of-film confrontation with Bond. Goldfinger. Wint and Kidd. Tee-Hee. Nick Nack. It's just something he did to varying degrees of effect.

In my opinion Goldfinger and Tee-Hee worked. Wint and Kidd and Nick Nack less so.

 

[Starkers]

Since this is more of a general Bond thread now it's worth sharing this

According to Broccoli and Wilson it's going to be two years (at least) before filming even starts on the next film so I guess we're looking at 2025 at the earliest

Nobody’s in the running. We’re working out where to go with him, we’re talking that through. There isn’t a script and we can’t come up with one until we decide how we’re going to approach the next film because, really, it’s a reinvention of Bond. We’re reinventing who he is and that takes time. I’d say that filming is at least two years away.

If only they'd had time on their hands when they could have been thinking about these things. I dunno, if only they'd been locked in their houses for 18 months with nothing to do

I get that they didn't want to even think about the next guy until Daniel had his send off, but it's over nine months since NTTD hit the cinemas, and do they really need two years to reinvent the character etc? Bond isn't that complex a character at the end of the day.

I get that preproduction, script and casting take time (or maybe not, look how quickly Russell T Davies has turned Doctor Who around since he took charge again) but it really does feel like either they can't be arsed anymore, or maybe it's just too strenuous these days, I mean Wilson is 80 but at 62 it's not like Broccoli is really that old.

Obviously the days when you could turn a Bond film around in a year are long gone, and maybe even the days where you could drop one every two years are too, but it'd be nice to have a consistent Bond flick dropping every three years. Is that really too much to ask?

And yes they're not beholden to me or any other fan, but if they're not that fussed anymore they could fully hand the whole thing over to Amazon, and I'm not saying that would necessarily be a good idea, I don't actually want a Bond Extended Universe or anything, but if they're just clinging on out of misplaced honour or duty that's not fair on anyone.

I mean just look at this.

60s- 6 films
70s- 5 films
80s- 5 films
90s- 3 films (but remember they didn't start until midway through the decade)
2000s- 3 films
2010s - 2 films (in fairness if Boyle had worked out we probably would have got NTTD in 2019 so it would have been 3 again)
2020s- 1 film (so far)

Maybe three films a decade is the norm now.

What do people think, valid criticism or am I just bring a grumpy old man :P

One last point but I guess the big question is whether they'll decide what kind of Bond they want and cast to fit the role, or whether they'll cast Bond and then mould the character to fit the actor. Hopefully the former and they'll go for something a smidgen more light hearted.

 

[cooleddie74]

I'd love to see a return to a new Bond film every two or three years but in this day and age that's not terribly likely(though doable as the Star Wars Sequel Trilogy and standalone movies proved all too well and even if you had issues with the storytelling and plots they showed that you can produce and release an ambitious mega-budget movie in one franchise and every single year if you actually want to). Three a decade would be progress at this point and as long as the films were decent it'd be fine.

If two or all three are like Spectre then not so much.

 

[Starkers]

That was a Guy Hamilton beat, though. In all four of his Bond films either the main villain or the henchman survives for one end-of-film confrontation with Bond. Goldfinger. Wint and Kidd. Tee-Hee. Nick Nack. It's just something he did to varying degrees of effect.

In my opinion Goldfinger and Tee-Hee worked. Wint and Kidd and Nick Nack less so.

Nick Nack at least had a reason to try and kill Bond, he'd just blown up his inheritance after all, but Wint and Kidd could have just skipped off into the sunset together, they struck me as hired killers not loyal SPECTRE agents.