James Absolon explains how this Pope-themed film, despite its risky premise, works
Alex Pollard reviews Hollywood's biopic of the controversial Margaret Thatcher
James Bond fans breathed a sigh of relief last week when the announcement that had been anticipated for over two years finally came. Bond 23 has a November 2012 release date. Hurray! There’s just one problem. It has to correct all of the mistakes that the crushingly disappointing Quantum of Solace made in 2008, while avoiding the many errors that the series has made in the past (however, that list is significantly reduced if Moonraker is just classed as one big mistake). Here is my list of dos and dont’s that should help the series get back on track.
001. Let Bond have some fun
Despite much speculation to suggest otherwise, Daniel Craig has confirmed that he is returning to the role of Bond. This is excellent news, especially considering his brilliant performance in Casino Royale. However, Quantum required the character to be in a moping state throughout, so Craig couldn’t show the diversity that he had in the previous film. In order to right this, allow Bond to enjoy himself; give him some killer lines like he had in Casino, and for goodness sake at least let him get the girl at the end.
002. No more direct sequels
Quantum provided a worthy experiment in being the series’ first direct sequel, but the result proved that it just didn’t work. While many have complained about the formulaic nature of the films, at least some of the formula needs to be retained, otherwise it isn’t a Bond film. There is a reason, after all, that when the 23rd film is released it will mark the 50th anniversary of the series.
003. Sort out the music
People always talk about the importance of every Bond film’s title song, but each film’s soundtrack is arguably more important. Who could forget the beautiful oriental music from You Only Live Twice? Or the instantly recognisable theme from On Her Majesty’s Secret Service? Quantum’s soundtrack was extremely generic, with all of the style and pizzazz that made the earlier soundtracks so distinguishable sorely absent. The aforementioned style needs to be reintroduced for Bond 23 in order for the music to get back in the groove.
004. Make the villain a villain
The most memorable Bond films are nearly always the ones with the best villains. Who did Quantum have? Can’t remember? No-one can. While the villain wouldn’t need to be as pantomimic as Donald Pleasance’s much-mocked Blofeld, at least give the audience enough to work with to know he/she is truly evil/mad.
005. Stay away from the gadgets
Many feel that the loss of gadgets in Craig’s films is disappointing, but with every new ridiculous Roger Moore outing, much of the criticism was focused on the gadgets. Craig’s Bond is a real character, who doesn’t smirk at every killing and use corny punchlines. Yes, Quantum didn’t work, but resorting back to gadgets is not the way. Look what happened when they brought in an invisible car…
006. Get a decent story
Ian Fleming’s books have all been adapted, therefore the scriptwriter(s) need to be doubly good and come up with a story worth watching. Quantum’s plot was almost incoherent due to its desire to be overly serious. However, that isn’t to say we should go back to the camp days of Moonraker and Octopussy. There is a balance that needs to be found, so employ someone good enough to find it.
007. Let us enjoy the action
There are some fantastic action sequences in Bond movies. From the thrilling motorbike chase in Tomorrow Never Dies to the volcano showdown in You Only Live Twice. However, the action in Quantum was far too frantic and unevenly distributed. Again, the balance needs to be found, and action shouldn’t be put in just for the sake of it. We want to be left shaken, not just stirred.
I totally agree with this list, especially number 4. In Quantum, the villain's (can't even remember his name) 'evil' scheme was to sell bottled water to Bolivians at really, really high prices - a plan so crap it would shame even Dr Evil from Austin Powers.
I'm still a firm believer that the biggest issue with new Bond is that Craig is totally wrong for the role. I think it's lost a lot of spark because he strikes me as more sleazy and gross than a sexy and charming man of mystery. But unlike you, I kind of long for the days of campy Cold War storylines...
I love that there's basically universal agreement now that Quantum didn't work. One of the few films that had me counting down how much longer I had to sit there and endure it.
I don't know, maybe I'm a dinosaur here, but I hate Craig as Bond. I feel the same way that I do about Arnie films: if I tune in, I know what I'm expecting. If I want a gritty thriller, I watch a gritty thriller. I don't watch a Bond film. I dislike this homogenisation.
The Bond films have generally swung between lighthearted and serious - Connery's started off serious but gradually got sillier, then Lazenby went back to serious, then there was Roger Moore's slapstick, then Timothy Dalton's swing back to grittier action, which Brosnan carried on but gradually they got dafter... and now back to serious with Craig. So in a while I'm sure we'll go back to a more lighthearted approach, but I doubt it'll happen during Craig's tenure.
You must log in to submit a comment.