The Dark Side of the Bond Films

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

: it was b]when Bond dumps Mathis' body in the garbage bin like a sack of trash[/b]. It was disgusting, it was crude, it was reprehensible....it was not supposed to be Bond, but for some reason Paul Haggis and Daniel Craig thought that audiences wanted to see that kind of 007 in a Bond film. Clearly they were mistaken.

Indeed not dark, but dumb and unworthy.

tbh much like the treatment of Greene, the whole 'dark' aspect to that is actually done at the expense of any reason, logic or sense of professionalism....it was about the sort of vile gratification for the emotionally immature early teens that are now the clear target demographic.

Now? You mean were, surely?

Not Bond, but you can still find that sensibility in other films today aiming at that demographic.

Makeshift Python wrote:

Problem is that didn't really come through because they eventually caught up with Bond anyway (due to his negligence) and since the police are corrupt, it was kind of a pointless move on Bond. It would have made a nice call back to Mathis' remark in CR, I just wish it came off better and made some actual sense.

It was one of those moments that shouted "characterisation!" but lacked anything to connect it to the rest of the film. It's symptomatic of the problems with the film - that Forster and Haggis felt that any exposition is bad and so developed a real phobia of actually telling the audience anything. And by some bizarre little twist, they became most averse to telling us anything when we needed to know it the most.

There is a very interesting concept buried in QOS - the idea that Bond is willing to travel to the ends of the earth and fight a shapeless, formless enemy in a battle that no-one will notice for the sake of getting an answer about Vesper. I see some parallels with the YOLT novel in that version of the film. But Forster and Haggis positioned the audience in the wrong spot.

Largo's Shark wrote:

Now? You mean were, surely?

One film does not a corner turn and tbh Skyfall succeeds despite this mentality in many ways imo.

lachesis wrote:

Largo's Shark wrote:

Now? You mean were, surely?

One film does not a corner turn and tbh Skyfall succeeds despite this mentality in many ways imo.

What examples of 'vile gratification for emotionally immature early teens' were they're in SF?

I'm curious about that, too.

Largo's Shark wrote:

lachesis wrote:

Largo's Shark wrote:

Now? You mean were, surely?

One film does not a corner turn and tbh Skyfall succeeds despite this mentality in many ways imo.

What examples of 'vile gratification for emotionally immature early teens' were they're in SF?

I find the 'enjoying death/sulking because the job has consequences' rather unworthy, but by and large SF I agree has a more mature set of sensibilities.

Tibbett's death in AVTAK is quite eerie.

Harmsway wrote:

Tibbett's death in AVTAK is quite eerie.

Indeed. For being another sloppy and ridiculous Bond film (like MOONRAKER), it has a couple of dark moments.

The murder in the city hall, Jenny's lifeless body floating around in the water and Mayday's death also come to mind.

Not to forget.

Moore even thought that the filmmakers went too far for that particular scene. It's the kind of brutality that Glen would jump on again with LTK.

I think the problem they had was that AVTAK was a GF retread, but the character of Goldfinger was fairly benign - until his gold lust set in and he would go to any lengths to satisfy it. Zorin, on the other hand, had been fairly passive until then. He had mostly acted through May Day until then and what action he did take, like throwing the agent into the turbine fan or killing the conscientious objector in the blimp, didn't really set him apart from other Bond villains who were willing to get their hands dirty. And this was a problem because the film had tried to set him up as the failed result of Nazi experimentation into genetic perfection that had made him an utter psychopath. The script obviously needed to show that in action, but despite the callous and terrifying nature of the murders he had committed, someone evidently thought that it didn't go far enough.

Yes, it is a disturbing scene. I suppose it's the "Goldfinger equivalent" of Goldfinger gassing people (even if the context is slightly different). That's pretty extreme too, when you think about it, although it's not as protracted as this.

Largo's Shark wrote:

Not to forget.

It's hard to believe that thirty minutes after this Roger Moore was fucking a girl half his age in the shower while Q watched through a robot.

CJB wrote:

thirty minutes after this Roger Moore was fucking a girl half his age in the shower while Q watched through a robot.

That sounds like a film I'd like to see whereas AVTAK is unwatchable.

Someone ought to do a Walken cut of the film.




Or just a repeating clip of Walken yelling "MORE, MOH POWAH! DO IT FULL THRODDLE!!!"

Silva's death scene is pretty dark… Or at least the stuff between him and M before Bond arrives.

Bond putting M in a headlock in QUANTUM.

gritty

M needed to know if she could trust Bond to put her in a headlock.

"dark griddy deep" --Mi6 Magazine, 2008

I believe that was the tagline for CASINOROYALE's film Scalpfall.

CJB wrote:

I believe that was the tagline for CASINOROYALE's film Scalpfall.

A film about a villain seizing control of the world's supply of anti-dandruff shampoo?

It's certainly stupid enough to sounds like CASINOROYALE, but it implies coherence, which was not a trait that I remember him having.