What's actually a basic concept is that, when you bring Dalton's Bond, Moore's Bond, and all the movie Bonds into the conversation, you're no longer just talking about books....
Well, yeah... And I never have been talking just about the books.
What's actually a basic concept is that, when you bring Dalton's Bond, Moore's Bond, and all the movie Bonds into the conversation, you're no longer just talking about books....
Not so much. If anything, Fleming's Bond was more prone to be smitten with his women. The closest he was ever as a womanizer was in On Her Majesty's Secret Service where he had to sleep with women at the clinic in Piz Gloria in order to obtain information about Blofeld's plot. Afterwards when Bond is reunited with Tracy, he actually tells her what happened at the clinic as a way of coming clean.
I think what @HugeLobes is getting at with Dalton was that with those films we essentially saw Fleming's Bond written into a Bond movie.
The closest Dalton ever came to Cinematic Bond was in THE ROCKETEER where he plays a Errol Flynn type movie star playing up the suaveness. It shows to me that if Dalton wanted he probably could have played up Cinematic Bond very well, but that just never interested him. He wanted to differentiate his Bond the way Moore successfully did from Connery. The difference this time was that his Bond, by design, didn't have any of the swagger people associated with Cinematic Bond.
And THAT is why Craig is more successful. Even though he veered closer to Fleming, he retained that swagger that people associate with Cinematic Bond. You can see it all on display when he's in the Bahamas, walking around like he owns the hotel, charming desk clerks, beating Borat at poker before seducing his wife. Dalton just didn't go for that.
I've always said since 2006 that Craig's Bond is essentially a fusion of Fleming's cynicism and Connery's machismo.
Was Fleming's Bond a rampant womanizer like in the early movies?
I think what @HugeLobes is getting at with Dalton was that with those films we essentially saw Fleming's Bond written into a Bond movie.
Lots of interesting stuff in this discussion, but I just had to comment on this. I've not been a fan of the Craig years, and to me, it's largely because they forgot that "movie Bond is a fantasy character that you should want to be." Craig seems always to be having a miserable time of it, sullen and eternally burdened. The other cinematic Bonds consumed life like gluttons, while Craig just seems to glower at his plate unhappily.It’s that we get a very odd combination of Fleming novel and Bond movie, which I agree got combined *much* better in CR. They remembered that movie Bond is a fantasy character that you should want to be.
Which to be fair is a major part of Fleming Bond. The opening chapter of Goldfinger for example is Bond having just finished his mission as seen in the film. But instead of sex and quips “positively shocking”, it’s Bond morosely staring into his double bourbon reflecting on his profession as an assassin and how he feels his soul is corroding from it.Lots of interesting stuff in this discussion, but I just had to comment on this. I've not been a fan of the Craig years, and to me, it's largely because they forgot that "movie Bond is a fantasy character that you should want to be." Craig seems always to be having a miserable time of it, sullen and eternally burdened. The other cinematic Bonds consumed life like gluttons, while Craig just seems to glower at his plate unhappily.
For me, it's emblematic of the Craig era that Blofeld describes himself as "the author of all your pain." If a villain had tried that line on Connery, he would have looked over his shoulder to see who the guy was talking to. The idea of movie Bond being defined by his personal pain is antithetical to the wish-fulfillment fantasy figure you describe.
Lots of interesting stuff in this discussion, but I just had to comment on this. I've not been a fan of the Craig years, and to me, it's largely because they forgot that "movie Bond is a fantasy character that you should want to be." Craig seems always to be having a miserable time of it, sullen and eternally burdened. The other cinematic Bonds consumed life like gluttons, while Craig just seems to glower at his plate unhappily.
The idea of movie Bond being defined by his personal pain is antithetical to the wish-fulfillment fantasy figure you describe.
Ah, the no true Scotsman fallacy. No, sorry, Dalton by definition played Cinematic Bond.The closest Dalton ever came to Cinematic Bond was in THE ROCKETEER where he plays a Errol Flynn type movie star playing up the suaveness. It shows to me that if Dalton wanted he probably could have played up Cinematic Bond very well, but that just never interested him. He wanted to differentiate his Bond the way Moore successfully did from Connery. The difference this time was that his Bond, by design, didn't have any of the swagger people associated with Cinematic Bond.
As regards the enjoying being Bond thing, in TLD Dalton has these lines:
“Stuff my orders! I only kill professionals. That girl didn't know one end of her rifle from the other. Go ahead. Tell M what you want. If he fires me, I'll thank him for it. Whoever she was, it must have scared the living daylights out of her.”
He really delivers the line about thanking M for being fired as if he means it. I remember when I first saw the film thinking that I could never have imagined Connery or Moore saying that line, much less with the delivery Dalton gives it.
For me both Dalton and Craig Bonds hate their job, the difference is reaction. Dalton decides to embrace the hedonism of it, to at least enjoy some aspects of it. Craig, well he can't even bring himself to enjoy the trappings of being an international man of mystery. (and obviously sandwiched between them you have the Bond who loves his job to bits!)
Moore's Bond showed a hint of disdain, or at least weariness, on occasion. The "It usually is" line from FYEO for example. George's Bond obviously was quite happy to tender his resignation. Don't think Connery's Bond ever gave the impression he was dissatisfied with his job.
One aspect of Craig's performance I really like, which doesn't get enough notice, is how throwaway everything is to him. Once an object, or a person, has fulfilled it's purpose it's gone. Car keys, mobile phones, Mathis, even his father's hunting rifle. Not needed anymore, away you go.
With Dalton it was the cold broiling rage behind his eyes, like an icy volcano. He really was the perfect 007 to go off piste in search of revenge for Della and Felix. Not sure how well that story would have worked with any other Bond to be honest.
And then in the very next film:As regards the enjoying being Bond thing, in TLD Dalton has these lines:
“Stuff my orders! I only kill professionals. That girl didn't know one end of her rifle from the other. Go ahead. Tell M what you want. If he fires me, I'll thank him for it. Whoever she was, it must have scared the living daylights out of her.”
He really delivers the line about thanking M for being fired as if he means it. I remember when I first saw the film thinking that I could never have imagined Connery or Moore saying that line, much less with the delivery Dalton gives it.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.