• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

The Inconstant Bond, Part 2.

Charles EP M. said:
Lazenby's agent convinced him spy films were on the way out?! Whoopsie!
Click to expand...
In fairness I can see that argument at the time, a lot of the Avengers/Man From U.N.C.L.E./etc.-a-like sixtiespunk stuff felt like it was in decline from its mad heights when even Wonder Woman was being square peg, round hole retooled into that genre. It's just Bond has shown a resilience to sticking around and adapting (much like Doctor Who) rather than being tied to a particular era and sinking with the majority of the works associated with it.
 
Alex Richards said:
It occurs to me that Connery being persuaded to stay for OHMSS probably leads to either the franchise ending there or the 'Bond as codename' idea being canonised.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure, recasting wasn't a wholly bold concept by the 1960s/70s it's just that Bond was probably the most high profile, likely the most successful, and definitely the longest lasting.

That they were still committed to recasting even after having problems with Lazenby and then bringing Connery back for one more go-around speaks that they were intent on running the franchise as long as possible. There wasn't even a suggestion of retiring the series until after The Man With Golden Gun, and so long as Cubby owned the rights I can't see any franchise ending being anything more than a hibernation.

Maybe instead the trend in Bond becomes five or so films followed by hibernation for some years before coming back with new tales in the modern world and a new Bond. Actually more along the lines of what Toho did with Godzilla where each revival becomes the start of a new series.
Thande said:
Just a note, while obviously two writers can give different spins on the same topic, @RyanF already used the "Many Faces of James Bond" title for his article series so we may want to avoid ambiguity.
Click to expand...
It's a matter of debate whether @Tom Colton and I are intended to be the same writer under a different alias, or wholly different people altogether.
Thande said:
In fairness I can see that argument at the time, a lot of the Avengers/Man From U.N.C.L.E./etc.-a-like sixtiespunk stuff felt like it was in decline from its mad heights when even Wonder Woman was being square peg, round hole retooled into that genre. It's just Bond has shown a resilience to sticking around and adapting (much like Doctor Who) rather than being tied to a particular era and sinking with the majority of the works associated with it.
Click to expand...
Unlike most of the other spy-fi stuff, the Bond franchise desperately wanted to stick around and went to great lengths to hit upon the next big thing. That included increasing the appeal to the US with Diamonds Are Forever, going so far as to consider casting an American in the role. That was again considered for Live and Let Die, which also cashed in on the blaxploitation craze in US cinema. The Man With the Golden Gun similarly tried to cash in on the kung fu craze.

Even after they returned to their lofty heights with The Spy Who Loved Me they couldn't help but try to leech off some other pop culture phenomena. Both that film and its successor feature a character named for Jaws, and Moonraker sends Bond into space because Star Wars had supplanted Jaws as the most successful film of all time.
 


I have only read one Bond book, Casino Royale when I was like 13, though can't really remember much. I can't remember Bond expressing much if any politics but I can imagine him being a generic 50s centrist, lots of current Mi6 agents in 2023 would I imagine have similar views as they are quite mainstream
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top