Over the last few Bond films they’ve made a point to further his personal storyline along. And that adds depth to the character. As a writer, I’m normally all for that.
But…
Am I the only one who doesn’t want to see things change and him change? One of the reasons my favorite Bond movies remain the Sean Connerys is that James Bond is just who he is. He’s suave, he’s witty, he knows thirty languages, he can pilot planes, he’s an expert skiier/skindiver/driver. And he takes on a super villain with secret lairs, a private army all in matching jumpsuits (how did he recruit them and how did no one see these secret lairs being built?), a Herculean henchman, and a plot to take over the world. One guy against all that, and he still destroys the villain and his empire and has time to get laid at least twice a movie. That's enough. And it didn't take 2 hours and 43 minutes.
Yeah, it’s a formula but I like the formula. As Hitchcock says, “the best movies have the best villains.” Just give 007 a worthy fun opponent and blast the James Bond theme. Why delve into his personal life when a new Bond arrives every generation or so?
Here’s what the producers need to understand: Anyone can create an action hero and start a franchise. They can use the same CGI effects and generate eye popping (but fake) action sequences. They can film around the world. They can introduce their own super villain with his own world domination plot.
But it’s not James Bond. The one thing the Bond franchise has to do is protect James Bond. Change him too much and it’s no longer James Bond. It’s just an action hero. And there’s nothing special about a new action hero. You’ve squandered sixty years of nurturing a franchise.
You might claim, “Well, the Sean Connery James Bond was from a different era. We need to modernize him.”
Why?
Is it anachronistic for someone to be suave, look good in a tux, be attractive to women (James Bond is hardly Pepe LePew — I doubt he’d be in trouble with #MeToo), be British, and have enough stored knowledge to beat Ken Jennings at JEOPARDY?
Anyway, that’s my fear for the future of James Bond based on what I saw in NO TIME TO DIE. So I walked out of it depressed. That’s never happened before. A few times I’ve walked out mad at how stupid certain installments were (I’m looking at you MOONRAKER) but never depressed. Usually I’m exhilarated. It was a fun ride and at the end I was reassured that "James Bond would be back"for another. NO TIME TO DIE was many things — many good things — but it sure wasn’t a fun ride. And did I mention it’s too friggin’ long?
What did y'all think? (Note: I won't post any comments that spoil plot points.)
from By Ken Levine
Comments
Post a Comment