Other Articles in this Category
Most Viewed Stories
Most Commented Stories
Save & Share this Article
Oh, how we miss James Bond
I haven't seen a good James Bond film in the cinema in years. Other enthusiasts seem to share my opinion.
Stephen Oxenrider, a fellow James Bond enthusiast, sent out a YouTube link to a great song that had been rejected as the theme song to last year’s Bond film, “Quantum of Solace.” Visit www.youtube.com/watch?v=zg2dXY9TOKA and be dazzled—or chagrined that the fantastically Shirley Bassey-esque number by Eva Almer was passed up in favor of the racket bellowed by Alicia Keyes.
Stephen’s e-mail sparked quite a discussion among recipients, which soon turned to the recent bankruptcy filing of M-G-M, which owns half the rights to the Bond franchise. The other half is owned by Eon Productions, which makes the 007 films.
Finally I weighed into the fray:
“That Jason Bourne movie they called ‘Quantum of Solace’ sucked so bad it’s a wonder we weren’t all drawn violently out of the cinema. What a pity to waste one of the greatest of Ian Fleming’s Bond titles on a movie that bore no resemblance to a Bond film,” I wrote.
“One can only hope that when MGM/UA/Eon/Whoever get their acts together, they will budget enough money for the next 007 film to be able to afford tripods for the cameras and color film stock. Maybe there will be enough cash left over to purchase a good plot, too. (Maybe there’s one still on the shelf from the last production, seeing as none was used.)”
Now that wasn’t too editorialized, was it?
A nice, polite fellow named Tom Zielinski promptly responded.
“I too had issues with QOS…but to imply that it is not a Bond film is ridiculous. No disrespect here, but I’m curious. I’m guessing you’ve seen QOS but once and would prefer Roger Moore’s take on Bond?”
For one Bond enthusiast to imply another might “prefer Roger Moore’s take on Bond” is about as severe an insult as one PETA member accusing another of secretly owning a mink stole.
I hastened to reply:
“Yes Tom, I only saw QOS once. It was such an unpleasant experience that I haven’t been able to bring myself to even watch the DVD that I obligingly bought to complete the collection. The shaky, unsteady camerawork and the fast MTV edits actually made me queasy at some points,” I opined.
“Apart from calling one of the characters ‘James Bond’ and another one ‘M,’ I really didn’t see anything in that film that looked like a James Bond movie. It was absolutely no different than the last Jason Bourne movie: just a lot of bam! bam! bam!, cut! cut! cut!, loud explosion! loud explosion!, all at the expense of developing a coherent plot.
“The color was washed out and I can only surmise the camera must’ve been hand-held by someone with Parkinson’s who was off his meds the way it wobbled all the time, not that any one scene lasted long enough to actually allow any artistic camera use anyway.
“James Bond films have elegance, style and class. QOS had none of those attributes. It didn’t even have a decent theme song or a memorable score.”
Then, to address the insult:
“I still prefer George Lazenby as 007, and only wish he hadn’t been so head-strong that he didn’t let [Bond producers] Cubby Broccoli and Harry Saltzman mold him to the role over several films. What a loss!
“Roger Moore was amusing, but I still prefer him as Lord Brett Sinclair in ‘The Persuaders’ over 007. But even Roger’s worst Bond film, ‘Moonraker,’ was eons (ha ha!) ahead of that sad tripe we were subjected to last fall.
“I recognize the series has to progress to remain relevant and attract new market share, and we can’t linger in the widescreen, Technicolor beauty and sophistication of the Sean Connery years — augmented, of course, by a lush John Barry score — but to completely abandon the elements that make a James Bond film a James Bond film is ludicrous, and in a way, insulting to movie audiences who paid for a Bond film.
“Lose those elements and you’ve no longer got a James Bond film. With QOS, Eon did — and we don’t.”
Today, according to one of the books, is James Bond’s 87th birthday. A new 007 film won’t come out until next fall at the earliest. Based on the recent past, I’m not to optimistic about what we’ll be presented in 2010. Meanwhile, thanks to the wonders of home video, we can still wallow in those halcyon days of the good Bond film. Those days when Bond was Bond, James Bond—and a Bond song was really a Bond song.
THE JAMES BOND FILMS
If you, like staunch 007 enthusiasts, miss Bond Classic, he’s available on home video, including inexpensive DVDs now under $10 each, as well as fabulously loaded “Ultimate Edition” sets. Here’s the roster, including who personified Bond:
Dr. No (1962) Sean Connery
From Russia With Love (1963) Sean Connery
Goldfinger (1964) Sean Connery
Thunderball (1965) Sean Connery
*Casino Royale (1967) David Niven
You Only Live Twice (1967) Sean Connery
On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969) George Lazenby
Diamonds Are Forever (1971) Sean Connery
Live and Let Die (1972) Roger Moore
The Man With the Golden Gun (1974) Roger Moore
The Spy Who Loved Me (1977) Roger Moore
Moonraker (1979) Roger Moore
For Your Eyes Only (1981) Roger Moore
Octopussy (1983) Roger Moore
*Never Say Never Again (1983) Sean Connery
A View to a Kill (1985) Roger Moore
The Living Daylights (1987) Timothy Dalton
License to Kill (1989) Timothy Dalton
GoldenEye (1995) Pierce Brosnan
Tomorrow Never Dies (1997) Pierce Brosnan
The World is Not Enough (1999) Pierce Brosnan
Die Another Day (2002) Pierce Brosnan
Casino Royale (2006) Daniel Craig
Quantum of Solace (2008) Daniel Craig
*Not one of the “official” Eon Productions 007 films
See archived 'Arts and Entertainment' stories »
| Excellent commentary.
This new 007 series, with that short ugly guy, is just too far away from anything that Bond should be. He is not a brutal, cold-blooded anti-hero, but a romantic hero. That is, and always will be, his appeal and that is the way Ian Fleming wrote about him and the Film Producers presented him.
Style, adventure and fun, yes, FUN!, were the hallmarks the keep the films going for nearly 50 years.
As always, I cannot wait for the next James Bond film, but I guess that will not happen until Daniel Craig departs the series. |
|
| Gary J. Firuta - Nov 28, 2009 08:01:13 PM | Remove Comment |
| | |
| I need to weigh in for the womenfolk here. Bond films appeal to us too. I appreciate that the Bond Girls are almost always independent and resourceful and not the pretty playthings they are accused of being. of course I except the bimbo in A View to a Kill. |
|
| Lillian - Nov 16, 2009 04:33:52 PM | Remove Comment |
| | |
| Cool idea Matt! Keep the Russkies, SMERSH and of course SPECTRE as the bad guys and keep all those cool 60's gadgets and bring back Q! |
|
| Cviewlad - Nov 16, 2009 09:36:10 AM | Remove Comment |
| | |
| They should put James Bond back into the 60's and keep him there. Keep that 60's color, look and atmosphere. The Indiana Jones films are great period pieces that don't need "updating" to keep their relevance. Bond could be the same. |
|
| Matt - Nov 13, 2009 09:39:29 AM | Remove Comment |
| | |
| I cringed at Roger Moore's 007, but I would rather more Moore over the Jason Bourne 007 were are suffering through now.
I wanted to like Dan Craig as 007 and QOS has me disappointed, even though I was not too happy with Casino Royale. I see why some people like it but it really was the first warning the 007 team were going off reservation for their inspiration.
The problem with making 007 movies is Sean Connery is 007 and anything else is not what 007 is supposed to be. Can anyone imagine Carry Grant making QOS? I doubt it unless they are on some good drugs. For those who don't know, Grant is who Ian Fleming ,007s creator, had in mind when writing the books. This is the kind of class and style 007 is supposed to have.
I can only hope the trouble at MGM gives the 007 team time to reconsider their current path and get things right for next Bond adventure. |
|
| Jason - Nov 12, 2009 03:20:59 PM | Remove Comment |
| | |
| Right on target. The comment about George Lazenby being heads-strong reminds me of a recent article I read on Alternative007 where the author argued the reason that George was so good as Bond was because the actor himself was a classic alpha male. This in turn made him a believable Bond. The current guy has none of those qualities. |
|
| Mike R - Nov 12, 2009 12:35:40 PM | Remove Comment |
| | |
| I certainly agree. What has happened to the classic supporting players like Boothroyd and Moneypenny? And OHMSS is one of my favorites as well. |
|
| CDP - Nov 12, 2009 11:28:57 AM | Remove Comment |
| | |
| I agree! I miss those good old days when a Bond movie had a story. And I agree about the color issue. What's next? Will Bond 23 be in sepia? |
|
| Matt - Nov 12, 2009 11:07:55 AM | Remove Comment |



