Did Daniel Craig really say this about Bond? (Face palm alert)

Dragonpol wrote:

Yes, but look at the Terminator Bond on display in the PTS of TND and DAD. This was mainly what I was referring to - mass murder on a grand, nay industrial scale. The likes of this had never been seen in a James Bond film before or indeed since the Brosnan era. The only thing that comes close for me is the infamous Zorin Miner's Massacre scene from AVTAK some ten years before, and he was a Bond villain, not James Bond himself.

Brozzer-Bond was more machine now than man.

It is a welcome relief that Cregg-Bond has moved the character slightly away from the MG-toting mold. You wouldn't see Skyfall's PTS in the Brozzer era because the body count is too low.

CJB wrote:

Dragonpol wrote:

Yes, but look at the Terminator Bond on display in the PTS of TND and DAD. This was mainly what I was referring to - mass murder on a grand, nay industrial scale. The likes of this had never been seen in a James Bond film before or indeed since the Brosnan era. The only thing that comes close for me is the infamous Zorin Miner's Massacre scene from AVTAK some ten years before, and he was a Bond villain, not James Bond himself.

Brozzer-Bond was more machine now than man.

It is a welcome relief that Cregg-Bond has moved the character slightly away from the MG-toting mold. You wouldn't see Skyfall's PTS in the Brozzer era because the body count is too low.

And the lack of explosions.

Ironically, Craig has been promoted holding an assault weapon yet in QOS all he does is fire a burst shot and you never see it again.

Yes, the Craig Era is a welcome change of pace in terms of action and gun play compared to the Brosnan Era that came before.

Python wrote:

Ironically, Craig has been promoted holding an assault weapon yet in QOS all he does is fire a burst shot and you never see it again.

He also picked up an HK416 from one of Silver's henchman, but IIRC he only killed one man with it.

Largo's Shark wrote:

Python wrote:

Ironically, Craig has been promoted holding an assault weapon yet in QOS all he does is fire a burst shot and you never see it again.

He also picked up an HK416 from one of Silver's henchman, but IIRC he only killed one man with it.

The back-to-basics Amis-sty;e approach to James Bond is always welcome. All we need now is a film version of Colonel Sun.

The fact that Bond isn't a saint, but works on the side of "good", makes him an interesting character.

The only thing that separated him and Silva was a glass barrier in the prison. And a better sense of style.

The answer to this question is in the way Fleming wrote the character. He does all of his dirty work under the name of Queen and Country, and not only is he damn good at it, but it becomes a part of himself whether his conscience always likes it or not.

Fleming writes Bond in a manner similar to how his literary hero Raymond Chandler wrote Phillip Marlowe. Both operate in between worlds and as errant knights on a lonely quest that is ill-defined and never ending. The only difference is that Bond is a spy and enjoys certain other's company.

And no one really ever goes into Bond's dark side. In the films he is not the assassin of the books, and it is only on rare few occasions that we are allowed to see Bond's pure enjoyment of killing. At times he understandably relishes this. Dent, Grant, Lique, Killifer for example. Most notable and the best built up is Necros, hence my username.

The moment in the films that comes closest to Fleming is after the last tanker explodes in LTK and Bond barely manages to escape the blast. When Dalton collapses down onto that rock and gazes back at his handiwork bruised, battered, bleeding and somehow still alive, you can see the pain of living etched completely into his face and that is the literary Bond brought to life.