They clearly haven’t put much thought into this. We expect at least five ways from Cracked, maybe even six.
Surely (double-0) seven?
He’s very nicely fixing a problem that seems to exist mainly in his head.
Here’s something sinister:
“In 1946, Phyllis Bottome writes a James Bond book,” West says. "He’s not called James Bond, he’s called Mark Chalmers, but he has every characteristic of James Bond."
Chalmers, the hero of Bottome’s novel, is a 36-year-old, dark-haired master at Eton who is signed up to work for British intelligence by a friend, Reggie, who works at the Foreign Office.
After a meeting with “B”, the head of British Intelligence, he is despatched to the continent with a mission to communicate with a British sleeper agent and a suicide pill in case it all goes wrong.
Chalmers is a keen aficionado of mountain sports, enthusiastic about fine food and wine and has an eye for a pretty girl. He also speaks fluent French and German.
Seven years later, the world would be introduced to a character named James Bond.
He’s in his late thirties. He is sent to the continent after a meeting with “M”, the head of British intelligence.
He is a keen aficionado of mountain sports, enthusiastic about fine food and wine and has an eye for a pretty girl. He also speaks fluent French and German.
There’s nothing necessarily sinister about two books appearing some years apart with similar characters and themes.
But Fleming knew Phyllis Bottome. Indeed, the summer after The Life Line was published, Bottome and her husband Ernan Forbes Dennis holidayed in Goldeneye, Fleming’s Jamaican villa.
We’re not saying it’s sinister … but it’s definitely sinister.
To be fair Bond is a bit of a rip off of The Saint as well, so this doesn’t surprise me one bit.
I will check that documentary out on Iplayer. It sounds like it could be interesting.
Finally watched Spectre. Over two nights earlier this week. Fell asleep both times. Can’t remember much. Can’t be arsed to bother re-watching it either.
There’s a very good book about ‘Operation Mincemeat’ and the author actually mentions that almost everyone in British Intelligence was also an author; usually of mysteries and/or spy stories.
It’s quite likely that ideas bounced around that group, it was partly their job to come up with plots or understand the enemy’s plots and their writing may also have been something they could talk about without breaking the official secrets act.
But the main thing to remember (IMO) is that James Bond was Ian Fleming. Not as he was, but as he would’ve wished to be.
Hirsch is reluctant to suggest Phyllis “invented James Bond”. But she does say “she sort of invented Ian Fleming the writer”.
I think that’s a good thesis.
With the rise of Donald Trump, you’d think that Neal Purvis and Robert Wade, the writers of the last six James Bond movies, would have no shortage of real life inspiration to plumb for future films. Not so, it turns out, because even for the screwy internal logic of a Bond movie, the twists and turns of reality have made for some overly outrageous suspensions of disbelief. Explaining the dilemma of Bond in the age of Trump, Purvis told The Telegraph that the franchise’s history of mustache-twirling evildoers can’t top true life anymore because: “With people like Trump, the Bond villain has become a reality. So when they do another one, it will be interesting to see how they deal with the fact that the world has become a fantasy.” And, given Brexit and other nationalist movements abroad, it’s more than just Trump that’s challenging the basic Bond worldview: “Each time, you’ve got to say something about Bond’s place in the world, which is Britain’s place in the world … But things are moving so quickly now, that becomes tricky.” The changes have left it so that, “I’m just not sure how you would go about writing a James Bond film now,” Purvis said. Uh, Q, thoughts?
It reminds me a bit of the deleted scene at the end of THE BOURNE IDENTITY. He’s captured by the remaining Treadstone handler, Brian Cox, who tells him that post-911, they need a guy like him now more than ever.
James Bond, a national icon for Britain, seems like he’d be more relevant than ever. Just make the villain a Russian nuclear scientist who’s implanted actual nuclear bombs inside a group of refugee children.
These guys wrote Die Another Day, they’re no strangers to absurdity.
And you just kinda spoiled the Plot from mi Spy epic “BLUE”.
You should read William Goldman’s sequel (novel, not a film) to MARATHON MAN called BROTHERS.
Also, the satirical film WRONG IS RIGHT feels like its already a Bond style adventure set in the world of a Trump presidency.
As far as casting Bond after Craig, it is interesting to remember that Craig probably wasn’t on anyone’s mind as a replacement for Pierce Brosnan.
I could see them going with someone no one would expect.
I ussed to think that myself, but I belive that was the Mathew Vaughn Picture “Layer Cake”, the one that put him on the run for the coveted role.
In all honesty; It also could have been Tom Hardy.
Yeah, Layer Cake was great and really cast him as a modern Steve McQueen. I felt that maybe they noticed him with MUNICH, though. He was the most typical movie spy in the film.
Really, I think Hardy would be better as a character more like Harry Palmer these days. Bale would be a good choice for Palmer too.
Back then, I thought Clive Owen was the obvious choice, and in a way that’s the way they went - Owen would’ve had a very similar energy to Craig. Though what they got with Craig which I think was genius was less obvious charisma; he played Bond as a bit of an empty void, an abyss for people to fall into.
Yeah, I really like Craigs Bond. He reminds me of Batman. An unusually resourceful psychotic man on a mission. Like Charlie Sheen, he only has one setting: GO!
Also like Sheen he survives on tigers blood.
I was going to make an HIV joke but decided against it.
Strange: Roger Moore’s reign felt like 25 years. Octopussy alone felt like 15 years.
Yeah, Roger Moore was “my” James Bond. I loved those films when they came out. Especially MOONRAKER!