Numanoid

OK, so I'm working my way through the Bond series. Just watched Live And Let Die last night. I've also seen most of the Bonds from For Your Eyes Only on, so I've seen the bulk of the series.

Now here's the thing. I've noticed that Bond is not really all that great of a secret agent (especially since he goes by his real name most of the time - how secret is that ). He tends to get caught not once, not twice, but three or more times per movie. He tends to be unaware of dangerous situations even though you and I in the audience have figured out it's a trap by using nothing more than common sense. He is pretty easily fooled by the dumbest of criminals. He also tends to completely get suckered into trap after trap on the off chance that he might get laid.

Now maybe I'm looking at this all wrong. Is Bond supposed to be a suave, sophisticated, intelligent super agent, or is he supposed to be a fairly dim-witted boob who lucks into foiling the caper time after time (ala Johnny English or Inspector Clouseau)?

Let's face it, Bond makes a lot of mistakes and should have been killed about 97 times by now.

Discuss.

RyoHazuki

The movies only show his really big and exciting adventures (ala Batman). He probably does normal spy shit all day with ease.

Trigger

I agree - this is part of the reason why I detest pretty much all of the Bond films. It's also probably part of the reason why others love the series. I've always thought he was going to catch aids before he caught one of his foes. I mean, if not for the fact that all of his enemies are complete retards, he wouldn't make it past the first act.

FinkPish

I think you are overthinking it a bit. James Bond is set up as a super spy, but actual spying in itself isn't really all that exciting unless Bond gets tangled up in the dastardly plot. Also, it is more exciting to see him get captured, only to escape in a more dramatic way. If it were just Bond snooping around the bad guy's lair, finding the evidence, then calling in the cavalry when the time was right to foil the evil plan, the movies would be more boring than soup.

Numanoid

I don't agree with that at all. I think it's just an excuse for lazier writing. It would be much more thrilling to have him ALMOST get caught, but use his supposed super skills to avoid it. Immediately I think of the movie Sneakers, which is mostly about investigating and "snooping around the bad guy's lair and finding the evidence", with only a single catch/escape sequence.

FinkPish

I agree that some of it could be due to lazy writing, but the whole essence of James Bond is exactly what I said: he snoops, gets caught, escapes dramatically, foils evil plan, kills the bad guy. They have been like that since the very first movie. If you are disappointed that they weren't done another way, then that is one thing, but you are rebelling against the fundamental reality of Bond. They aren't supposed to be realistic movies, they are fantasies. Do you really think in real life, the bad guys explain their entire plan to the good guy before slowly putting him to death?

Mano

This was the point I was going to make. Bond allows himself to be caught so that the villain can get his monologue in and inform Bond of his actual plans. If you notice most of the time Bond has no idea what their plans are until this point in the movie.

Numanoid

How do you know they don't?

The Ferret

I havent seen any Moore bond movies since i was little, but lately i saw From Russia with Love, Goldfinger, Thunderball, and caught the end of You Only Live Twice. FRWL is by far my favourite, and Bond never really gets caught by the bad guys from what i remember. Goldfinger's good but a bit over the top, Thunderball was a bit slow at parts and the underwater ending was a bit weak but overall the movies good. You Only Live Twice, even though it's really over-the-top was superenjoyable, and again Bond only gets caught once that i saw. Maybe i should have saved my mini-reviews for another thread, but my point is some of the earlier Bond movies are great and somewhat believable within the context of the film.

jaeufraser

I don't know, Bond films are fun but most of them aren't what I'd call masterpieces. And even though he's really not that great a spy, the villians aren't really good at what they do. You'd think being talkative wouldn't be the downfall of our biggest world threats, but apparently it is.

But, save for a few of the films, in general they're just silly, but fun action movies. I mean, Sean Connery as an asian man? HA! You have to suspend your disbelief a little to believe a lot of the things in these films. I think Bond also probably has a clause in his contract that says he has to constantly be blowing shit up. A proper spy film doesn't really set the stage for some of the over the top theatrics that people seem to love about Bond.

FinkPish

I do know, but if I told you, I'd have to kill you.

Rivero

Starting as early as Thunderball, and even in parts of Goldfinger, the series began a downhill decline into parody, bombast, lazy writing, increasing cliches and dumb gadgets. By Thunderball they'd pretty much given up on the idea of Bond being an effective spy and revelled in the laughs to be had in his reckless behaviour(note the scene where he shows up late to the council meeting with all of the agents, as if they're all thinking, "That 007, it's always something") and cheesy one-liners. The be all end all yardstick by which all Bond movies should be measured against is still


90% of the films are dumb fun. This one remains an actual terrific film.

FinkPish

I think Thunderball is one of the top three Bond films.

To me, there was always a bit of playfulness to Bond, that only became greater once everyone had gotten comfortable with the character. There have been witty one-liners and comebacks since Dr. No, so if that is a problem, it has been there since the beginning. And I don't think the parodies, if you can even call them that, began until Moore's stints as Bond. Almost all of his movies seemed to be very self-aware, to a fault sometimes.

DonnachaOne

I'm not going to be an apologist like so many others. In the film, Bond's exploits do not seem to make him a great spy.

I do like a lot of the films, though.

Would I like to see some more SPYING? You bet. Espionage makes for good suspense. However, I don't think it always makes for good ACTION.

Of course... Bond isn't just a spy... he's an agent. He's not always an undercover guy gathering info - sometimes he's the one-man SWAT team. Take, for instance, the beginning of Tomorrow Never Dies.
Bond is simply gathering information about illegal arms trading - who's doing the trading, what's being traded etc. He sees nukes. Whereas the average spy would be all "oh, bloody hell, best report this back to base, and I can read the sunday paper then too", Bond becomes a action man. He takes out most of the dealers, destroys most of the weapons and rescues the nukes from the black market. M has enough faith in him to do so that she convinces the "Plan B" forces to hang back until he's out. Bond is valued for not only gathering information about the problem, but he can be trusted to take care of the problem too.

I'm sure plenty will disagree with me - I see Rivero has allowed his "Star Wars thread" persona to represent him here - but I still like most of the Bond movies, about a great spy and a great action man.

Doughboy

This is why I prefer the serious Bond pictures like From Russia With Love, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, For Your Eyes Only, and Licence to Kill. These movies play it straight and in OHMSS and LTK, Bond does go undercover as a spy.

I don't mind the occasional over-the-top Bond adventure like Thunderball, Moonraker, or GoldenEye, but the series is at its best when Bond is a spy and not Indiana Jones.

Rivero

Hey I like most of them too. I liked Roger Moore's take on the role, as well as Timothy Dalton. The Spy Who Loved Me kicks ass, so does On Her Majesty's Secret Service and I always thought the two Dalton ones were very underrated. I was just saying I'd wish the filmmakers would take a look at the first couple of Connery films, or the original Fleming novels and drop the cheese for once. Watching Pierce Brosnan parasurfing in Die Another Day didn't even remotely approach what I'm sure they thought would be "dumb fun". Denise Richards as scientist Dr. Christmas Jones. Enough. It isn't funny, guys. This series needs a serious jumpstart, similar to Star Trek, an almighty franchise that currently finds itself deader than it has ever been in it's 40 year history. There needs to be change for things to survive. It's time the Bond series changed, because right now the Bourne series is mopping the floor with this long-running franchise.

Michael Corvin

I can't believe you got me monologuing!

garmonbozia

IMO, they already are, lol

Groucho

As already stated, From Russia With Love is the only Bond movie that's a true spy thriller. Although I would give For Your Eyes Only and The Living Daylights "honorable mention."

The Ferret

From Russia With Love is an amazing film that stands on it's own. I saw the first half hour to Dr.No recently and it seemed reminiscent of FRWL's style just with a bit slower pacing. Any word on it? It's been a long time since I saw the full thing.

wmansir

OK, he's normally inept, but they almost always throw in that one moment where he shows of his super spying ability. Like where he jumps off the bed a moment before a leathal dart comes flying out of an aboriginal mask on his night stand, and then explains that the mask was from the Hootakanna tribe, but the rest of the decor was a Buatta tribe motif.

Numanoid

Of course, the question remains as to why he got himself into that situation in the first place (usually to get laid), and then again, there are plenty of times when the dart hits him and he wakes up to find himself hanging upside down over a pit of radioactive tarantulas.

wendersfan

I agree with Rivero, and by extension, Groucho. Plus, Dianiela Bianchi was unbelievably hot:

DRG

I definitely agree with the part about him announcing his name to damn near everyone in the world. Even if it wasn't a total incognito assignment, that doesn't make much sense. And the times he actually does come up with an alias it's silly because he makes no attempt to disguise himself. Which is made worse by the fact he attracts so much attention to himself.

As for the women, he gets himself into so much trouble because she usually either 1) turns out to be a bad guy and he's put himself in a compromising situation, or 2) she gets captured or is put in a perilous situation, so she becomes a liability to the mission when he has to save her.

Still, I love the movies despite the reality of the whole thing. Well, most of the movies.

FiveO

I think the better question is in which film and in which specific scenario was Bond the closest to death.

I always loved the laser in Goldfinger to have him being the absolute closest to dying.