The Decline of the Bond Franchise

So I finally got around to watching SPECTRE last night and can honestly say that it was a generic potboiler, in my opinion of course.

The thing that bothered me so much was the attempt by the film to keep some of its predecessors key notes but modernise it in a Bourne world.

For example, when Bond and Swann get to the Moroccan facility, instead of killing them both outright, he decides to reveal his plan to him and torture him to death. So far, so Bond/ Austin Powers/ Flint (for the older ones on here). The only problem is, all of the humour and OTTness of the situation has been removed to keep the story in the "real" world.

The biggest problem for Bond in this era (and as mentioned in the film) is that he is a bit of a dinosaur. The pretenders to the throne have become the real thing where Bond as become a weak imitation of both the earlier films and its competitors.

In the last year we have had Kingsman and Mission Impossible which both do Bond better than Bond ever did. And if 007 believes himself to be more serious, he falls short again against Jason Bourne.

By removing the campness of the franchise, Bond has proved that maybe he should be retired.

The last great Bond film was Goldeneye - over the top villains, humour and great set pieces.

Given a choice between seeing a new Bond movie or the next Kingsman movie, I know which would one I want to see.

Nonsense Adam. All that has happened is the last few films have not met YOUR perceptions of what a Bond film should be. The thing is with 50 years worth of films, 2o odd films and half a dozen different actors playing the role everyone will have developed their own idea as to what Bond is and should be. The issue is no one Bond or film could tick all these boxes.

Personally after the horrific Die Another Day I was of the view the franchise needed stripping back and the grittier mood of the Craig films fit the bill perfectly. That said I think it is time for a change, Skyfall as a good film, but the moody introspection and back story has gone far enough. A new Bond and new director will reinvigorate the series. Hiddlestone would be a good choice, he does not have the physicality of Craig so they would need to take the series in a new direction which is just what will happen and has always happened.

I agree with Rowls..

I remember the Moore era..

Just a generic action movie now, a poor one at that.

Casino royale aside all the Craig ones have been terrible.

Skyfall was particularly bad.

Rowley wrote:Nonsense Adam. All that has happened is the last few films have not met YOUR perceptions of what a Bond film should be. The thing is with 50 years worth of films, 2o odd films and half a dozen different actors playing the role everyone will have developed their own idea as to what Bond is and should be. The issue is no one Bond or film could tick all these boxes.

Personally after the horrific Die Another Day I was of the view the franchise needed stripping back and the grittier mood of the Craig films fit the bill perfectly. That said I think it is time for a change, Skyfall as a good film, but the moody introspection and back story has gone far enough. A new Bond and new director will reinvigorate the series. Hiddlestone would be a good choice, he does not have the physicality of Craig so they would need to take the series in a new direction which is just what will happen and has always happened.

To some extent, you are correct - they do not feel like Bond films anymore.

Although I appreciate that the books are different to the films, I feel that the film legacy is something that should be respected as opposed to completely disregarded.

What we have had in the last few films are moody, soulless action films with no identity at all. The series does need a reboot but not to modernise it but to recapture the essence of a Bond movie not the source material.

Not sure about Hiddlestone. If Colin Firth hadnt done his version of a gentleman spy in Kingsman, I think he would have been a good fit.

Have to agree with Jeff on this one. I've read a lot of criticism of Skyfall and Spectre recently and most of it centres on the fact that they don't fit the bill of what those critics perceive to be a Bond film rather than a criticism of the film itself.

I personally liked both Skyfall and Spectre and thought the latter in particular had everything I would look for in a Bond film (with the added bonus of seeing Moneypenny in her pants).

I've read most of the books and the Daniel Craig films certainly capture the mood of those better than any of the rest of the films. In the novel From Russia With Love (the best one), Bond doesn't make an appearance at all in the first third of the book. If that happened in one of the films there would be a massive outcry.

superflyweight wrote:  In the novel From Russia With Love (the best one), Bond doesn't make an appearance at all in the first third of the book  

That is also my favourite of the Fleming Bond books.

I think my favourite of the books is arguably the worst of the (original) films - On Her Majesty's Secret Service

The John Gardner Bond books are pretty good. I've read about nine of them and they more than hold their own.

in any good versus bad films you need to like the good, think craigs bonds have been a let down in this. he just comes across as a smug pr!ck. and i found i really couldn't care less what happens to the main character. perhaps its not all craigs fault as there hasn't really been a "good" bad guy for bond to bounce off. one that could get you routing for bond. its all abit meh

i liked the old bonds, but i was a kid. dont hold much for me now im a adult. doubt id miss them if they were to be stop being made. casino royale and goldeneye are the only ones ive enjoyed in 20 years

The recent Bond films suffer from the lack of a real iconic bad guy.

Mads Mikkelsen, who I think is brilliant, was poorly utilized in Casino Royale and as for Bardem and Waltz, what a waste of an actor. Still, having Jonathan Pryce as a media megalomaniac years ago was hardly the stuff to send shivers down the spine either.

Get a good "baddie" and the rest takes care of itself.

And Vijay Armitraj. All of the most exceptional Bond films have featured Vijay Armitraj.

Tom Hiddleston ruled out of becoming the next Bond

I think he wanted to keep low key...

I think Greg Davies from "Man Down" should be given a go

I've really gone off the Bond films since Craig took over. I don't blame Craig himself, just think that since he became Bond they've taken Bond in a direction which is not what the earlier films were about.

Bond films were always something that I wanted to see first time at the cinema, but not anymore. The next time one comes out I'll wait until it's available on DVD.

Gonna have to disagree with Adam and agree with Rowley here.

With a franchise that has the history Bond has, it needs to go indifferent directions in order not to end up a parody of itself. Some may say this has already happened but I disagree.

I like both the older films with the charismatic baddies and ludicrous gadgets / doomsday weapons AND the recent ones, with their darker, grittier feel.

I remember reading somewhere that Bond films tend to be products of the time they are made in, hence the different styles. We live in pretty dark times and I think the Craig films reflect that quite well.

For the record I also like the Bourne films (except Legacy) but wouldn't compare them to Bond as they are about an ex-agent fighting against his former employers.

The MI films are okay - they certainly hark back to the earlier Bond films stylistically, but for some reason I've never really cared much for Tom Cruise's Ethan Hunt.

Oh and on the subject of Bond villains, why would anyone NOT like Javier Bardem in Skyfall? I thought he was brilliant - a definite nod to Sean Bean's character in Goldeneye and probably several other classic baddies, but with a modern twist.

As I think about it, probably the biggest issue I have with the Pierce Brosnan / Daniel Craig films is Judi Dench's M. I didn't like how she was always berating him for being a "dinosaur" and seemed to actually hate him...yet in the end being forced to admit she needed him. Well acted though and she went out like a boss.

I actually liked Bond's back story and watching him trying to overcome his weaknesses in the best "superhero" tradition.

That said, I do miss the gadget-laden cars / boats / aircraft and outlandish secret bases etc. Would be nice if they could be brought back in a (vaguely) sensible modern way.

Not seen SPECTRE but am willing to keep an open mind about it and remember this is "new era Bond".

Think its also worth remembering that from Quantum of Solace onward, they've been working without the benefit of a Fleming book to guide the scripting...so the most recent films haven't had any of his "DNA".

Quantum of Solace - 5/10 some good bits, many flaws, there is a decent movie in there somewhere, but I struggled to find it.

rick_dagless wrote:Suicide Squad - 5/10 some good bits, many flaws, there is a decent movie in there somewhere, but I struggled to find it.

Nice work, Rick.

Hmm, cheers Flipper, maybe I should switch this to the film thread...

It has been a long day,

Fixed it now.