Join 3,433 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


He's got a powerful weapon...
September 19, 2005 1:26 PM   Subscribe

No more Q? What would have become of James Bond without all of his wacky gadgets? (via Engadget)
posted by missmerrymack (45 comments total)

 
A Bond movie without at least one cool Q-inspired gadget testing scene is not a Bond movie I have any interest in seeing. Unless they get Macauley Culkin to be the new Bond and they let him get stoned before every scene.
posted by fenriq at 1:35 PM on September 19, 2005


I dunno. I always felt the best parts of any of the Bond movies were scenes in which Bond was more of a hard-core spy/agent. The prologue scenes in most of the films, for example.
This could be good.
posted by Thorzdad at 1:38 PM on September 19, 2005


A wide array of actors, including Daniel Craig, Clive Owen and Dougray Scott, have been mooted as possible contenders.

This discussion has been going how long? Don't remember.

But every single one of them is exactly everything what a James Bond character is not.
posted by uncle harold at 1:39 PM on September 19, 2005


Lets just hope it's like the Timothy Dalton franchise bond (without TD): hard man, no BS, no preening, no madonna, no ridiculous bluescreen work (a la XXX-like die another day 2nd half saunter into hollywood-powerrangers-specialeefects-masterbatory-jizzfest suitable only for braindead halfwits), just martinis, dry, shaken, not stirred.

And for gods sake, use Clive Owen. The man was born for it.
posted by lalochezia at 1:41 PM on September 19, 2005


I'm with febriq. Casino Royale, as the first Bond book, is obviously going to be very different from subsequent stories. This tends to go for any long-running series (the only one I can think of off the top of my head is Discworld. Compare the first two books with the rest of the series). Like it or not, the James Bond mythos has taken on certain formulaic characteristics. Without them, it's just not Bond.

- He's a little older than would be expected. Young enough to believably be doing all sorts of crazy physical things, but old enough to be suave, dashing, elegant, and gentlemanly

- There is always a chase

- There is always a hot girl

- The bantering between Bond and Moneypenny

- The opening sequence, then credits, then the story
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 1:41 PM on September 19, 2005


Especially a 27-year-old Bond
posted by NinjaPirate at 1:41 PM on September 19, 2005


(in response to)
posted by NinjaPirate at 1:43 PM on September 19, 2005


I have to say I think Clive Owen would be quite good as Bond, but we still need our gadgets!

Those prologue scenes are great, but he almost always used something from Q Branch in some fashion. The seagull snorkel suit is an example.
posted by missmerrymack at 1:44 PM on September 19, 2005


I like the idea of a Bond more from "From Russian With Love", the smooth man of wealth and taste. I use a Bond martini as a base for when I order:

"A dry martini," he said. "One. In a deep champagne goblet."

"Oui, monsieur."

"Just a moment. Three measures of Gordon's, one of vodka, half a measure of Kina Lillet. Shake it very well until it's ice-cold, then add a large thin slice of lemon-peel. Got it?"

While I prefer the deep champagne goblet (it's so much easier than those stupid shallow glasses), I get really weird looks. A lot of places also don't have Gordon's (I use Belvedere), none have had Kina Lillet (this doesn't bother me, a half measure), but the lemon-peel is so much cripser than an olive. I know shaking bruises the martini, so sue me.
posted by geoff. at 1:45 PM on September 19, 2005


I often wonder how the Bond movies would've turned out if they'd had Patrick McGoohan as Bond instead. Based on some of his acting in The Prisoner, I suspect he would've played 007 as the cold, somewhat of an asshole fellow that Flemming intended.
posted by unreason at 1:46 PM on September 19, 2005


Endgadget is obviously beginning to live up to its name.
posted by i_cola at 1:51 PM on September 19, 2005


Death to gadgets sounds like a good thing. The invisible car crossed a line for me. Yeah, Rolexes with lasers that can cut through iron bars are pretty bad but if you just wince a little and mentally substitute "cutting tool" they don't render the story impossible. The invisible car made it a fantasy film completely ungrounded in this universe.
posted by George_Spiggott at 1:51 PM on September 19, 2005


geoff., please tell me you tip very, very well after ordering that.

Worst potential new young Bond:
A tie between Colin Farrell and Ben Affleck, both would be just about unwatchable.
posted by fenriq at 1:53 PM on September 19, 2005


I prefer the Dr No version of Bond that includes more ass-kicking and less gadgets. That version is significantly less cartoonish and much more interesting.
posted by aburd at 1:53 PM on September 19, 2005


Bond without gadgets is MI-5, and that freaking rules.

(Known as Spooks in the UK.)
posted by Mikey-San at 2:02 PM on September 19, 2005


I like the cheesy Bond. There are plenty of action/intrigue movies played straight (to whatever degree of success); I don't see a need for the Bond franchise to turn out more of those.

That said, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it, and Clive Owen could play a great Bond.

Bonus link: Charles Stross' Bond plot skeleton
posted by Zed_Lopez at 2:18 PM on September 19, 2005


I'd prefer Bond sans gadgets. But he's more of an operative than a 'spy'

Otherwise he'd spend the whole movie rubbing elbows with diplomats, scanning media and occasionally blackmailing someones wife.

I prefer someone like George "I'm going to kill that MF'er" Lazenby.
posted by Smedleyman at 2:30 PM on September 19, 2005


Anything that takes the franchise closer to the Bond of the books is alright by me. The closest portrayal so far has been Timothy Dalton's; but he was unlucky enough to land the role at the height of political correctness and a generally poor time for film making in general.
posted by nthdegx at 2:36 PM on September 19, 2005


The invisible car crossed a line for me.... The invisible car made it a fantasy film completely ungrounded in this universe.

The invisible car bugged me too, but it's actually not that farfetched.
posted by Mr Pointy at 2:38 PM on September 19, 2005


It appears to have come full circle....

I certainly respect that they are attempting to stay true to the original novel, good for them. And, personally, I could use a change from the flashy Bonds we've had of late....

I'm looking forward to this!
posted by HuronBob at 2:48 PM on September 19, 2005


I thought John Cleese was introduced as Q's replacement in the last movie.

Clive Owen's my top choice for Bond (The Croupier or The Bourne Identity), but I've seen some people recommending Daniel Craig and after seeing Layer Cake I think he'd be an interesting Bond.

Charles Stross' Bond plot skeleton

Neat, but too complicated. I prefer this one:
Insane genius wants to destroy or take over the world and only James Bond can stop him.
posted by kirkaracha at 2:50 PM on September 19, 2005


I think the reason they had to go over the top with the gadgets is because Roger Moore is such a pansy. I mean come on, can you really imagine him hitting someone? Slapping them silly while crying, maybe, but not gutfighting. Brosnan is at least capable of projecting a harder look, but let's face it, he could use his wrists to check his spark plug gaps. Put someone hard-looking in that role and you could get back to the core of things.

Personally I thought the best Bondlike actor was Gareth Hunt as Gambit from the New Avengers. The show was fairly weak in its first season and horrible in the second, but Gambit was great. Lighthearted and amiable until he was needed, then his eyes turned to slits and he became this silent, implacable ass-kicking machine. And what nthdex said about Dalton; he could have been perfect but the screenplays wouldn't let him.
posted by George_Spiggott at 2:59 PM on September 19, 2005


The invisible car made it a fantasy film completely ungrounded in this universe.

Yeah. It was only the invisible car that did that. Uh-huh.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 3:02 PM on September 19, 2005


"I think the reason they had to go over the top with the gadgets is because Roger Moore is such a pansy. I mean come on, can you really imagine him hitting someone? Slapping them silly while crying, maybe, but not gutfighting. "

There is an entertaining story about Lee Van Cleef (might be something else) on set and slagging off Roger Moore. So Roger Moore walks up and lays Cleef out with a punch. After that they became friends.

There's an entertaining thing they say about picking a Bond movie. It's easier to pick a thug and get him to play being posh than getting a posh guy to act like a thug.

I'm glad they are going gadget-lite as long as he gets to keep his attache case with knife, cash and gun installed. But it's not entirely unexpected as they often have a gadget-lite film follow one where it is a gadget-frenzy.

As for picking Bond. They need to realise that Bond is the star, you just need the right man in his shoes.
posted by Navek Rednam at 3:27 PM on September 19, 2005


Clive Owen for the win, definitely. His character in the BMW short films is almost perfect Bond - very little diaglogue, no emotion, hard as nails. And yes, the invisible car pissed me off no end.

fenriq: Worst potential new young Bond: A tie between Colin Farrell and Ben Affleck, both would be just about unwatchable.

I see your worst Bond and I raise you... Vin Diesel.
posted by blag at 3:29 PM on September 19, 2005


I always kinda wanted to see George Clooney as Bond.

Or Jason Statham, if he weren't so thin on top
posted by stenseng at 3:40 PM on September 19, 2005


Bond without a proper British accent is a travesty.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 3:48 PM on September 19, 2005


blag, but Vin's already done the spy thing (and it was sooooo good) in XXX and that ridiculous steaming pile where some duck bites his ear and he's a spy/nanny. But yeah, he'd be atrocious trying to be charming with that mook voice and mug.

Statham's not a bad suggestion though.

Here's an idea out of left field but I bet he could do it and carry it off, Gary Oldman, though he may not be pretty enough for it.
posted by fenriq at 4:00 PM on September 19, 2005


Somehow I can't shake the feeling that they're going to screw up the Bond franchise again. That last one with Halle Berry was atrocious, so I suppose they're well on their way.

Gadgetwise, I hate to lose Q, but would like to see them dial back their absurdity. Or how's this for an idea: have one of the gadgets not work when Bond needs it.

The thought of Colin Farrell was wretched, but I've heard he's been ruled out. Some folks at a TV site I frequent have been campaigning for Hugh Laurie, but he's no younger than Brosnan, so he'd be out if they stick to their stated intention to go younger.
posted by pmurray63 at 4:06 PM on September 19, 2005


fenriq - my reason for naming him as all-time worst Bond was entirely down to that dreadful XXX thing.

The problem with casting Bond is an actor's baggage - you've either got to use an unknown actor or one whose previous roles don't damage the believability of them playing Bond.

Brosnan was perfect in this respect - other memorable roles: private detective, millionaire art thief, spy - as would Owen be. Statham's too stereotyped as the East-end gangster, Oldman as the archetypal unhinged English baddie.

On preview: Hugh Laurie! Now there's a thought.
posted by blag at 4:16 PM on September 19, 2005


And yes, dirtynumbangelboy, he has to be British. Sorry, septics, but none of you can do the accent properly.
posted by blag at 4:18 PM on September 19, 2005


The only thing I'd miss is the Q - Bond interaction.

"Pay attention 007"

And in Goldfinger with Connery mentioning that the tracking system would allow him to pop off for a quick one at the bar.
"I don't think the designers had that in mind"

You could get away with Q being a debriefer. Or an actual spy who has a contact network in place. Bond seems to run roughshod over those. But then, he's got all those girls, so who cares?
posted by Smedleyman at 4:49 PM on September 19, 2005


You know who would be great as Bond? That Remington Steele guy... he rawked.
posted by wfrgms at 5:02 PM on September 19, 2005


I just remembered that Eddie Izzard sketch:
"Q, he must have been some sort of psychic because he always gave Bond exactly what he needed. He always used every single item, he never came back, going:
<SeanConnery> "Q, I’ve got a load of stuff I didn’t use on that adventure. Went all the way out to fucking-God-knows-where, and this watch that turned into a hamster, what was the point of that? These trousers, press a button, turn into jam. Why? The hat turned into a bicycle, that was very funny…" </SeanConnery>

posted by blag at 5:24 PM on September 19, 2005


Here's a weird idea...



Ron Livingston


think about it...



Think about the strut from Office Space, or his drunken badassedness in Band of Bros.

Ron Livingston... I guess, *if* he could do the accent?
He can pull off the "comma" hairline

If not, he'd be a great felix leiter
posted by stenseng at 5:29 PM on September 19, 2005


I would like to see Ron Livingston as the bad guy. Evil, but with a sense of comic timing. He's a good actor and the series is in need of a good bad guy, some who drapes evil over them like a good coat.

"Do you expect me to talk?"
"No Mr. Bond, I expect you to die."

He could do it.
posted by fluffycreature at 5:58 PM on September 19, 2005


I can't find the article, but I read recently that they've been having trouble finding an actor to play Bond because all the good ones have said "no". Stop talking about Clive Owen--yes, he'd be great, but he said something to the effect that Bond was outdated. Daniel Craig, also no. Eric Bana--no.

This is a production without a big-name actor. They might have to get an unknown.
posted by zardoz at 7:12 PM on September 19, 2005


You want a dark, kick-ass Bond? I say go with Sean Bean or Clive Owen. Remember Bean as 006 in Golden Eye? Half the reviews of the movie mentioned that Bean would have made a far more interesting Bond.

I remember when I first started reading the books and was shocked to find that Bond was so...cold (around the time that Roger Moore was Bond). Just a real bastard compared to the movies. And then I realized how much cooler the movies would be if Bond wasn't such a cartoon.
posted by Ber at 7:28 PM on September 19, 2005


geoff., you can just order that by name—it's a Vesper.

And you need the Lillet!
posted by kenko at 9:13 PM on September 19, 2005


Just to make a casual attempt at nerdiness: the title of this post actually refers to Scaramanga, not Bond (the next line is "He charges a million a shot").
posted by John Shaft at 10:01 PM on September 19, 2005


wfrgms: It wasn't a guy, it was a girl: Stephanie Zimbalist.
posted by clyde at 10:57 PM on September 19, 2005


I like the idea of a contest to pick the worst Bond replacement. Who would be worse? Owen Wilson or
David Duchovny? Orlando Bloom or Colin Firth?
posted by turner13 at 9:10 AM on September 20, 2005


As much as I loved him as Legolas I have to go with Bloom for worst possible Bond. But Hugh Grant might come in a close second.
posted by Ber at 10:00 AM on September 20, 2005


James Purefoy looks as if he'd make a good Bond.
posted by Navek Rednam at 10:03 AM on September 20, 2005


John Shaft (shut yer mouth), you are right. I love the theme from The Man With the Golden Gun and I'm a dork who didn't think about it describing Scaramanga.
posted by missmerrymack at 3:51 PM on September 27, 2005


« Older Throughout his childhood, David Myers was told tha...  |  Neomuet... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments