Faulks: Skyfall 'distasteful'

Quote :

Sebastian Faulks ridicules 'distasteful' Bond film 'Skyfall'
Skyfall, the latest 007 blockbuster which was hailed by the critics as possibly the best James Bond film ever, has been ridiculed by the author of a recent Bond novel.



The film, which was released in October, has taken more than a billion dollars at the box office and received rave reviews, including from The Daily Telegraph and the celebrated critic Philip French, who said it might be the best Bond film yet and marked the moment that its star Daniel Craig emerged from the shadow of Sean Connery.

Their claims were derided on Friday, however, by the award-winning writer Sebastian Faulks, author of the 2008 Bond novel Devil May Care, which was commissioned by the estate of 007's creator Ian Fleming in 2008 to mark the centenary of his birth.

His Bond became an instant best-seller and was praised by critics as one of the best of 33 sequels written since Fleming's death.

On Friday he criticised Skyfall's reviewers' and said he found the film distasteful in parts and marred by bad acting.

"I found the last film pretty distasteful. One [of the Bond girls] couldn't act and the other had been previously exploited as a sex worker. And Bond walks into the shower and makes love to her. Casino Royale was much better," he told an audience at India's Jaipur Literature Festival.

He disliked the aggressive promotion and merchandising for the film and said critics had shown a "fantastic degree of collusion" with the film's publicists to avoid spoiling its main shock - the death of M, played by Dame Judi Dench.

"The critics said it was one of the greatest Bond films, which is clearly not true. Albert Finney can't do a Scottish accent," he said.

While he was disappointed to see Dame Judi leave the role, and praised Ralph Fiennes' performance as her successor, he said both Skyfall and Quantum of Solace had made a error by attempting to portray the spy as a more human character with a richer inner life.

"The films' attempts to show a deeper and sensitive side to James Bond have not been successful because that's not how he works. He doesn't have much of an inner life and when you try to give him one the whole thing stalls," he said.

He had also tried to introduce a sense of introspection in 007 to break up the unrelenting action sequences, but he quickly abandoned it. "I thought I would invest him with some serious thoughts. It didn't work. It was unconvincing. It made him look not thoughtful but slightly gay," he added.

The author said a greater interest in books would have indicated a deeper character, but in the whole Bond canon he is only seen reading once - and his literary choice is a guide to modern golf.

Bond's charm is in the balance between his essentially cold character and the fact that he pits it against dark forces to protect Britain, he said.

Only Casino Royale successfully hinted at an agent with a hinterland when it shows Bond fall down in the shower, "shocked and appalled by what he had done. It suggested he had a softer, human side," Faulks said.

Fleming's Bond conveyed a character "so alone and in constant jeopardy", under-equipped in soft shoes and nothing but a "ladies' gun" to defend himself.

Mr Faulks' fellow panelist, Ian Fleming's biographer Andrew Lycett, disagreed with his criticism of Skyfall. "It gathered together all the ingredients of a Bond novel and I wasn't bored, I quite enjoyed it," he said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/jamesbond/9826812/Sebastian-Faulks-ridicules-distasteful-Bond-film-Skyfall.html

Sebastian needs to go fuck himself.

Quote :

He had also tried to introduce a sense of introspection in 007 to break up the unrelenting action sequences, but he quickly abandoned it. "I thought I would invest him with some serious thoughts. It didn't work. It was unconvincing. It made him look not thoughtful but slightly gay," he added.

Sebastian Faulks wrote:

"I thought I would invest him with some serious thoughts. It didn't work. It was unconvincing. It made him look not thoughtful but slightly gay"

:roll:

Has this critically acclaimed tw@t ever read a single Fleming chapter?

Judging from DEVIL MY CARE I'm guessing he just scanned the Wikipedia synopses.

I thought the acting in the film was a cut above the rest, so I found that criticism interesting.

I'm still surprised to see that so many people who liked Craig's character in CR find him so distasteful now that he's had sex with a slave. He's still the same cold-hearted bastard he was in CR.

What an idiot.

I love the moral judgement that because she was a sex slave its wrong to have sex with her. Do rape victims become abstinenve practicers? What twaddle.

Largo's Shark wrote:

Sebastian Faulks wrote:

"I thought I would invest him with some serious thoughts. It didn't work. It was unconvincing. It made him look not thoughtful but slightly gay"

:roll:

Has this critically acclaimed tw@t ever read a single Fleming chapter?

Judging from DEVIL MY CARE I'm guessing he just scanned the Wikipedia synopses.

Agreed. Anybody who says Fleming's Bond has no serious thoughts is either ignorant or an idiot or both. Mindboggling that this buffoon was chosen to write a Bond novel. Who the hell is minding the shop at the Fleming estate these days?

What Faulks is actually mad about is the absence of monkey hands.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

What an idiot.

I love the moral judgement that because she was a sex slave its wrong to have sex with her. Do rape victims become abstinenve practicers? What twaddle.

When Severine fucked Bond, it wasn't slave sex, it was 'thank you' sex. And she probably enjoyed it too.

I can't agree with any of his points here. I though Naomie Harris acted her part well - pleasing to the eyes and ears. And neither Skyfall nor any other Craig Bond film take Bond as "deep" as Fleming did anyway. Even Thunderball (the novel) is about 20% Bond's musings on things. If anything, I wish more of Bond's thoughts would make it onscreen. Can't think of the best examples at the top of my head, but so many of Bond's (aka Fleming's) observations on society, villains, women, food, etc. are spot-on.

GOLDFINGER is definitely one of Fleming's weaker efforts, but it's a goldmine of Bond's introspection.

Hilly wrote:

He disliked the aggressive promotion and merchandising for the film and said critics had shown a "fantastic degree of collusion" with the film's publicists to avoid spoiling its main shock - the death of M, played by Dame Judi Dench.

I'm confused - is Faulks saying that he approves of this "collusion" between the publicists and the critics aimed at avoiding the revelation of M's death, or is he saying that he disapproves of it? I'm not sure whether he's using the word "fantastic" in the sense of "wonderful", "praiseworthy", etc., or in the sense of "extreme", "incredible", etc.

Is he saying that this collusion is the one aspect of the film that gets a thumbs up from him, or that it's another of its shortcomings? If the latter, why on earth should he object to critics not spoiling the death of M? Is he trying to suggest that this "collusion" was tantamount to muzzling the press in some way and that he wishes that reviewers had had more freedom of expression, even at the price of blowing the main plot twist and infuriating readers who wanted to get an overview of SKYFALL and learn whether or not it was worth paying to see without having every last surprise in it wrecked for them?

And.... "the aggressive promotion and merchandising for the film"? What on earth was he expecting? That the film would just be quietly released one day with the minimum of fuss, with its makers hoping that it would gradually build some positive word of mouth? Have all the previous Bond films completely passed him by? This is how they do things when it comes to releasing a Bond film. It's how they've always done it. And did he object to the aggressive promotion and merchandising for DEVIL MAY CARE, a novel that received just about the biggest promotional fanfare in recent British publishing history?

Yeah... *ahem.*

Quote :

Sebastian Faulks ridicules 'distasteful' Bond film 'Skyfall'

Just replace "film" with "novel" and "Skyfall" with "Devil May Care", and it is alarming just how accurately Faulks' criticisms of the film can be turned upon his own work.

Quote :

He had also tried to introduce a sense of introspection in 007 to break up the unrelenting action sequences, but he quickly abandoned it. "I thought I would invest him with some serious thoughts. It didn't work. It was unconvincing. It made him look not thoughtful but slightly gay," he added.

Considering that writers put a lot of themselves into every character and every story, that's one hell of an admission. The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks.

I haven't read Devil May Care yet. If he doesn't think Bond is capable of serious thought, then I don't think I'll bother. He clearly doesn't have a clue and has never read a Bond book in his life.

And he doesn't approve of critics being able to keep a lid on a major spoiler? What a pillock. I don't usually mind spoilers to a degree, but I'd have been utterly furious if someone had told me beforehand that M would die.

Lycett's right, Faulks is clearly very wrong - it did gather elements from other Bond novels, as any Fleming fan would have noticed!

Elements sorely lacking from Devil May Care.

Incidentally, Bond is shown reading more than Tommy Armour's How to Play Your Best Golf. He also reads Eric Ambler's The Mask of Dimitrios (FRWL), thrillers in general "007 in New York," and I'm pretty sure he reads Kennedy's Profiles in Courage, although that's an instance of Fleming's JFK ingratiation more than anything else.

Bond is also at work writing his own book--Stay Alive!--in FRWL.

Hilarious article. Typical, coming from someone who made one of the worst Bond continuation novels ever.

Really does make you wonder if he's thoroughly read any of Fleming's work.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Incidentally, Bond is shown reading more than Tommy Armour's How to Play Your Best Golf. He also reads Eric Ambler's The Mask of Dimitrios (FRWL), thrillers in general "007 in New York," and I'm pretty sure he reads Kennedy's Profiles in Courage, although that's an instance of Fleming's JFK ingratiation more than anything else.

Bond is also at work writing his own book--Stay Alive!--in FRWL.

Bond at a book signing [of his own book] would be something to see methinks. Cigarette on the go, etc.

I've never been to a book signing, but would certainly make an exception in this case.

:)

Faulks is a right fucking little tosser, who has no business criticizing anything about Bond after the sh**e that he tried to pass off as a novel. A book which is the DAD equivelent.

The mere fact that he claims introspection for Bond is wrong shows he never understood the strengths of Fleming's work, and why his book was so crap.

If a sniper/hit man took this prick out permanently, I actually think it would put a smile on my face, as nasty as that sounds.

jet set willy wrote:

Faulks is a right fucking little tosser, who has no business criticizing anything about Bond after the sh**e that he tried to pass off as a novel. A book which is the DAD equivelent.

The mere fact that he claims introspection for Bond is wrong shows he never understood the strengths of Fleming's work, and why his book was so crap.

If a sniper/hit man took this prick out permanently, I actually think it would put a smile on my face, as nasty as that sounds.

Well, I wouldn't make a habit of it.

jet set willy wrote:

Faulks is a right fucking little tosser, who has no business criticizing anything about Bond after the sh**e that he tried to pass off as a novel. A book which is the DAD equivelent.

The mere fact that he claims introspection for Bond is wrong shows he never understood the strengths of Fleming's work, and why his book was so crap.

If a sniper/hit man took this prick out permanently, I actually think it would put a smile on my face, as nasty as that sounds.

I bet this article's a hit over at DCINB.

Largo's Shark wrote:

Yeah... *ahem.*

The two blokes in the back look like they saw action against the Spanish Armada.