Bond vs Jones

[Indy007]

When I said I was a Fleming purist, I mean that the movies should stick to the novels and the enture Roger Moore era marked a time when the producers and Moore essentially threw Fleming out the window in favor of gadgets and the Bond movie formula...

Ian Fleming had to be thrown out the window during the 1970's because the way he viewed the world and what he believed in is not acceptable for late twentieth century and twenty first century western culture. His Bond had certain views, especially towards minorites and women, that would outrage western society atleast from 1970-present period. Flemings political and social views are what his novels are all about, and the nature of popular entertainment in film or the blockbuster is to entertain, not to push some sort of political agenda which Fleming did in his writings. The gadgets during the Moore era are ridiculous, but they are supposed to be as the cinema 007, as Roger Ebert once said, is only supposed to be a joke. Those gadgets, like the hoverboard gondola, are suitable for mainstream movie audiences and the culture of the popular film. As Bond progresses through different eras, the film makers are going to develop many ideas, some ridiculous of course, that Fleming or anyone during the 1950's would have never thought of or imagined. The silly gadgets during the Moore era were part of the humor and preposterousness that was needed to calm the tensions and create laughs from those distressed from Vietnam and Watergate.

"License to Kill" captured the essence of the best Fleming writing on screen. [/QUOTE]

I love Licence To Kill, but western film audiences didn't buy it and as a result, the film failed at the box office. It failed because Flemings Bond does not work on the big screen for most people, and most movies are made to appeal to a general audience, not to a few Fleming fans who think differently from the average person. After that bad financial experience, Michael Wilson and Barbara Broccoli have come to realize that Flemings world is not the same place as what is necessary and desired for motion pictures.

The bottom line is that with each decade passing, James Bond has to evolve and change and like GoldenEye tried to prove, he can't be stuck in a cold war era when Flemings beliefs, values, and ideas were acceptable. Vesper Lynd had damaged Bond and the mission simply because she was a woman, but that is not a lady today's culture wants. If the films stuck to Fleming, their messages would have to be anti-feminist and anti-minority because Flemings Bond had those sentiments. Licence to Kill actually does not capture the essence of Fleming even though Bond does not want Pam Bouvier to participate in the mission at first. She is essentially a feminist character and Fleming would have been outraged by her. Also, Bond is horrified with the murder of Della and it was the centerpeice of the picture; where in Flemings Goldfinger, Tilly Masterton's death was nothing and quite unimportant. Fleming's Bond would have interpreted Dellas death as caused by her failure as a woman. I like the darkness of Licence to Kill and Bond out for revenge, but unlike Flemings novels, many people will be exposed to the pictures and the movies are expected to conform to the tastes of the average person who is ignorant of Ian Fleming. The only way we could make Bond pictures more like Fleming, is if his novels hit most households and everyone was Fleming enlightened. But this is impossible, so the movies have to reflect a culture most people are part of.





[/QUOTE]

 

[Blofeld]

It wasn't Fleming's politics(he was apolitical, read the good and eveil chapter in "Casino Royale"), that caused him to be ignored in the Moore era. And do you really think Bond women like Mary Goodnight, Andrea Anders and Stacey Sutton are strong female roles?

Even Octo***** becomes just another babe that Bond has to save!

The Moore era is comprised of bad films, bad villains- the neo-Nazi robots- Drax, Stromberg and Zorin. Even the Fleming characters like Scaramanga and Mr. Big(played by great actors) were made to look silly on film due to bad writing.

Moore himself is just not a good James Bond, he even admitted that he hasn't read much of the Fleming novels and did next to no research on the role....

If only George Lazenby had stuck around....

 

[Aaron H]

If only George Lazenby had stuck around....

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You are right, Bolfeld. I think that Steven had gotten fed up with the Moore films and wanted to see some of the original ideas behind the Bond films return, instead he got sucked into a little project call Indiana Smith.

 

[Blofeld]

George Lazenby was a great James Bond, very Fleming-esque, and did a great job on his first acting experience. The problem was he let the good reviews he was getting from the Fleming crowd go to his head and mis-managed his own career

 

[Blofeld]

Gotta take exception to what you said about License to Kill.

The Truck chase, the opening s quence, the underwater scenes, the Aztec temple were all top-notch, not made for TV quality.

Plus it had Robert Davi doing a great villain,a real life Columbian drug lord

 

[Attila the Professor]

Re: Fans of Fleeming were robbed.

It?s like writing a script about hot young teen age love in the summer of 1928, give only SOME of the names from all F.Scott Fitsgerald novels to the characters and call it ?The Great Gatsby?.

I know nothing of Bond...but that's a rather nice description...mind if I borrow it sometime?

 

[theinfiniteweird]

Well, as long as people are discussing Bond, my favorite is Octo*****.

What I'd like to see is "Indiana Jones meets James Bond". Not vs, they just meet. Interesting, I'd think.

 

[intergamer]

If only George Lazenby had stuck around....

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You are right, Bolfeld. I think that Steven had gotten fed up with the Moore films and wanted to see some of the original ideas behind the Bond films return, instead he got sucked into a little project call Indiana Smith.

yeah, i've often wondered how AWESOME a bond movie would have been if they'd let Spielberg direct one.

I think he should still do one if he gets tired of Indiana Jones

 

[Blofeld]

How about a Bond film involving the golden idol Indy lost in the opening in Raiders?

It's nice to imagine.....

But given how Indy is owned by Lucasfilm/Paramount and Bond is MGM/UA..it will never, ever happen!!!

 

[Sundance]

While I think the Indiana Jones movies are much better than any Bond film the music is worse...Indys' theme(the raiders march)is now corny...I would never get tired of the bond theme...

cheers

Padawan

 

[00Kevin]

wow, that was very interesting

 

[Sundance]

Padawan

 

[Raiders90]

Hey

This may have been done before here, but I figured I'd do it. Battle Royale, Indy vs. Bond.
In my version of it, it'd be Indy as played by Harrison (1981-1989;1993;2008) and Bond as played by Connery (1962-1967;1971;1983)

A few things they have in common (besides Sean Connery): Both characters are/were spies, both tragically lost wives shortly after their marriages and also had other lovers die due to them, and both have a fondness for tuxes.

 

[herr gruber]

Seconds Out. Round 1.

Bond points a pen at Indy, firing a lethal dart. Indy ducks and the dart kills Daniel Craig. Indy reaches out and pulls off Connery's toupe. A shocked Bond doesn't see the fist that hits him full on on the nose. Bond falls backwards and impales himself on his own spiked shoe.

Indy all the way. although Connery's Bond is a tough cookie.

 

[eroc]

Indy would kill that SOB

 

[Adamwankenobi]

"Spy? You mean like James Bond?"

 

[|ZiR|]

You know, a part of me want to say Bond, but that's probably because I'm watching The Man with the Golden Gun as I type this. Wrong Bond, at any rate.

I'd like to think that Indiana Jones would win, so I vote Indy. I'll be surprised to see if anyone chooses Bond. This is an IJ forum after all.

 

[Fish1941]

Hey

This may have been done before here, but I figured I'd do it. Battle Royale, Indy vs. Bond.
In my version of it, it'd be Indy as played by Harrison (1981-1989;1993;2008) and Bond as played by Connery (1962-1967;1971;1983)

A few things they have in common (besides Sean Connery): Both characters are/were spies, both tragically lost wives shortly after their marriages and also had other lovers die due to them, and both have a fondness for tuxes.

Sean Connery has never portrayed a James Bond who had tragically lost his wife.

And as far as I'm concerned, he IS NOT the only Bond worth remembering. All six actors were great in my opinion.

 

[Snakes]

I actually think Bond would beat Indy in a fight. Bond is a trained killing machine, Indy's a archaeologist who knows how to avoid being killed. I think Indy is a cooler CHARACTER, but I think Bond would beat Indy in a fight. (Not Roger Moore though, Indy would beat him hands down.)

 

[Fish1941]

I actually think Bond would beat Indy in a fight. Bond is a trained killing machine, Indy's a archaeologist who knows how to avoid being killed. I think Indy is a cooler CHARACTER, but I think Bond would beat Indy in a fight. (Not Roger Moore though, Indy would beat him hands down.)

I'm sure that Moore's Bond could have beaten Bond. Moore was no wimp. And he was the only Bond actor who really knew how to handle a gun . . . in compare to the others. Unfortunately, people have a bad habit of judging others in a superficial manner.