A James Bond theme song is what initially got me hooked on this franchise, and the openers rely on the theme song. Together, they are a package deal that kicks off each Bond flick.

BEST BOND THEME SONGS

I have to give a little disclaimer in each of these breakdowns. First, a song only makes the list if it’s a title song. So, Octopussy’s ‘All Time High’ can’t make the cut. Second, the song has to stand as a Bond Song. See, Duran Duran’s ‘View To A Kill’ was a huge success–the only Bond theme to make No. 1. However, I hear that song and I think 1980s and 1990s music. I don’t think Bond. Third, the song lyrics better relate to the film. Finally, I don’t know anything about music, so I cannot speak intelligently on the matter, but good Bond songs are distinct. They mix a slow and fast pace, properly use instrumental moments, and have strong, clear, and often distinct solo vocals.

1. Diamonds Are Forever (Shirley Bassey)
2. Live And Let Die (Paul McCartney and Wings)
3. Goldfinger (Shirley Bassey)
4. The World is Not Enough (Garbage)
5. GoldenEye (Tina Turner)

WORST BOND THEME SONGS

1. Another Way to Die (Alicia Keys and Jack White)
2. Licence to Kill (Gladys Knight)
3. Man with the Golden Gun (Lulu)
4. The Living Daylights (a-ha)
5. Moonraker, All Time High (Shirley Bassey, Rita Coolridge)

Another Way to Die from Quantum of Solace is a duet. And it sucks. Just like the movie. Licence to Kill was wholly unforgettable. Even though I literally just watched the opener two hours ago, I still can’t remember it. Man with the Golden Gun rhymed like a bad poem I wrote in second grade. The Living Daylights was just boring. Moonraker and Octopussy’s All Time High are just kind of off–a little slow and a little too much about loving 007.

Shout out: Although it’s not a title theme, Casino Royale’s ‘You Know My Name’ by Chris Cornell is a great, great song for the introduction of James Bond. Had the opener scene included the merest hint of nudity it certainly would be the best combo.

BEST BOND OPENERS

Again, a disclaimer, or rather more of a foreword to the listings of Bond openers. A Bond opener is not what the film starts with–that is more of a foreword or overture. The Bond opener is the part that comes just after, and includes the theme song and opening credits. Good Bond openers are easy to spot and always include these elements: naked female bodies or at least a graphic form of the naked female body, bright colors and abstract graphics and designs, inversion of foreground and background, movie-theme appropriate elements, guns, and still screen shots. If the opener has parts of the film depicted, they do no take precedence but are merely background. Dr. No pioneered the graphic side of the Bond openers, while From Russia With Love debuted the use of the female form.

1. Die another Day
2. Diamonds Are forever
3. Live and Let Die
4. The World Is Not Enough
5. Goldfinger

Die Another Day is genius. I like the song, although it’s too techno for Bond. The opener is key to the movie because it shows the torture Bond goes through, which is important to his suspension from MI6. It portrays the female form as fire, ice, and electricity, while showing scenes of Bond’s torture, which take a backseat to the graphics. Diamonds Are Forever is made complete by the fabulously (read: sexually) placed diamonds and a cat throughout the opener. Live and Let Die Faces turn to skulls. Things burn. Shit gets real. The World Is Not Enough does a great job of using movie-relevant details, like phallic oil pumps and liquid female forms made of oil. Goldfinger Wonderful gold bodies with images from film projected.

WORST BOND OPENERS

1. For Your Eyes Only
2. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service
3. A View To A Kill
4. Tomorrow Never Dies
5. Moonraker

For Your Eyes Only Feels like a music video that wants to be a Bond opener. Features Sheena Easton. No other Bond film features the singer in the opener. Not to mention she looks like the evil god-person in Ghostbusters. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service Instrumental theme song with images from all the other Bond films. Uh, weird?  A View To A Kill Bad laser graphics, neon, more neon, women skiing in fire with more neon. Tomorrow Never Dies Microchips, guns, shattering glass, smoke women, and I feel like I’m in an I-SPY book. Awful. Moonraker uses appropriate theme items, but it just doesn’t work.

This week, the 007 film world lost Martin Grace, 67, a veteran stuntman who was Roger Moore’s primary stunt double from The Spy Who Loved Me through A View To a Kill. The MI6 Web site reported he died Jan. 27, two months after an accident where he fractured his pelvis. He had suffered a similar injury doubling for Sir Roger in an action sequence set on a train in Octopussy.

It seems fitting that Grace deserves a salute from this site. And a good place to start is For Your Eyes Only, whose pre-titles featured Grace doubling for Sir Roger holding on for dear life in a helicopter controlled by an old acquaintance:

In A View To a Kill, Grace was promoted to the spot of lead stunt arranger while still doubling for 007 in a sequence filmed at the Eiffel Tower.

The veteran stunt man had lots of work outside of the world of James Bond, as this clip shows from a film that’s instantly recognizable:

Frank Rich is considered one of the most important journalists in America. He writes a weekly column for The New York Times and has been a contender for the Pulitzer Prize, the most prestigious U.S. journalism award.

A long time ago, the 1970s to be precise, he was the movie critic for Time magazine. And one movie he liked a lot was 1979’s Moonraker. An excerpt:

Producer Albert R. Broccoli, the major-domo of the James Bond movies, is the proverbial Jewish mother of cinema: he is not about to let anyone go away hungry. In Moonraker, the eleventh 007 opus, Broccoli serves the audience a space-shuttle hijacking, a jumbo-jet explosion and a protracted wrestling match between two men who are falling from the sky without parachutes. All this happens before the opening credits. From there, it’s on to gondola chases in Venice, funicular crashes in Rio and laser-gun shootouts and lovemaking in deep space. Meanwhile, beautiful women come and go, talking (ever so discreetly) about fellatio. When Broccoli lays out a feast, he makes sure that there is at least one course for every conceivable taste.

Want more? Here it is:

The result is a film that is irresistibly entertaining as only truly mindless spectacle can be. Those who have held out on Bond movies over 17 years may not be convinced by Moonraker, but everyone else will be. With their rigid formulas and well-worn gags, these films have transcended fashion. Styles in Pop culture, sexual politics and international espionage have changed drastically since Ian Fleming invented his superhero, but the immaculately tailored, fun-loving British agent remains a jolly spokesman for the simple virtues of Western civilization. Not even Margaret Thatcher would dare consider slowing him down.

These days, Rich tackles larger, more imporant topics. To read his latest NYT column, just CLICK HERE. Meanwhile, if you’d like to read his Moonraker review in full, just CLICK RIGHT HERE.

Jaws on they ass

“Goldfinger” sowie “Diamonds are forever” und “Moonraker” (also quasi die Mondblitz-Titelmelodie ) sind drei der schönsten und markantesten Titelsongs aus der bislang 22-teiligen James-Bond-Serie – und sie stammen alle drei von der Waliserin Shiley Bassey (* 8. Januar 1937 in Cardiff). Am 6. November veröffentlichte das mittlerweile 72-jährige Stimmwunder nun ihr 65 (!) Album. Unter dem Titel “The Performance” präsentiert die charismatische Diva seit 27 Jahren erstmals wieder eine Scheibe mit neuen Liedern.

In den 1980/90ern machte Shirley Bassey vor allem mit dem Schweizer Pop-Duo Yello und dem Titel “The Rhythm Divine” sowie mit dem Nummer-1-Hit “History Repeating” zusammen mit den Propellerheads jeweils kurz aber eingängig auf sich aufmerksam.

Kritiker und Amazon-Bewerter feiern das neue Album “The Performance” bislang einhellig als absolutes Meisterwerk. Sogar der ein oder andere Song mit James-Bond-Groove soll mit drauf sein. Probehören lohnt sich also bestimmt. Mehr zum Thema James Bond gibt es neben den Nachrichten auf Mondblitz.de noch auf Wortgeflecht.de sowie James-Bond-007.eu.

Today, The Scotsman has released a review of Dame Shirley Bassey’s latest album, titled “The Performance”.

By Fiona Shepherd

DAME SHIRLEY BASSEY: THE PERFORMANCE
****
GEFFEN, £12.72

IT’S Dame Shirley Bassey these days, if you don’t mind – as if anyone needed reminding that we are in the presence of musical royalty. Elegant, commanding, playful, sophisticated, vulnerable – or, in the words of Manic Street Preachers’ frontman James Dean Bradfield, “this beautiful, glamorous singing beast” – Bassey is everything you could want from a diva and now she’s back to show yer Leonas how it should be done.

As was evident from her lauded appearance two years ago at the Glastonbury festival, she effortlessly musters the level of respect and regard afforded her fellow Welsh warbler Tom Jones, an old pro who just about manages to pull off the balancing act of moving with the times while remaining true to himself. Bassey, for her part, is about to show exactly how that is done on her first full studio album in more than 20 years. The Performance is dignified, heartfelt and timeless.

A good deal of the credit must go to Bond composer David Arnold in the role of producer. Given Bassey’s indelible association with the James Bond series – she is the only artist to have sung three Bond film themes – it must have taken all of five seconds to matchmake those two, and another ten to persuade John Barry and lyricist Don Black to compose a new song for their muse, the first they have written for her since Diamonds Are Forever. Our Time Is Now is a good, grown-up meditation on romance but it is far from the best this album has to offer.

More intriguing than the rekindling of old creative partnerships is the host of bright young things who have also queued up to write songs for Bassey. Some of the album’s contributors are no-brainers – the Pet Shop Boys, David McAlmont and Rufus Wainwright would probably have had diva strops of their own if they had not been invited to the party. Others, such as KT Tunstall and Kaiser Chiefs’ Nick Hodgson, are more unexpected choices, and some – we’re looking at Richard Hawley here – are downright inspired.

Most are understandably in thrall to the Bassey persona, writing songs to fit their conception of the veteran diva. And so Bassey comes out contemplative rather than shaking her stuff on opening number Almost There, written by Tom Baxter. You can see right away where he is going with the line “I’m not quite so young, I’m not quite so foolish in my defence”, but Bassey makes subtle work of its rather mournful tone before soaring on the big orchestral finish.

Her countrymen, the Manic Street Preachers, take the sentimental, pseudo-autobiograpical route with The Girl From Tiger Bay. It’s a lovely song from a band who are more than capable of whipping up some heart-tugging romance when they have a mind to and, unlike other tracks, it is strong enough to retain something of the Manics’ stamp even as it is submitted to the traditional Bassey takeover.

Apparently, we have Rufus Wainwright to thank for the impetus of the album, and won’t he love that. His contribution, Apartment, was the first track to fall into place and he dares to take Bassey somewhere different. Despite the Latino arrangement, there is more than a hint of the European cabaret tradition about its protagonist’s irreverent rejection of the fairytale lifestyle (“I’m running away from Cinderella, don’t want to go to Rapunzel’s hairdresser”) in favour of becoming a girl of independent means.

KT Tunstall also has fun with brassy Bassey without crossing over into kitsch on the bluesy strut of Nice Men, a good bad girl song on which Bassey demands to know “where have all the nice men, where have all the good men, where have all the bad men gone?”

Gary Barlow’s This Time is an old school Bacharachian ballad which is infinitely more dynamic than anything on the most recent Take That album, while Nick Hodgson’s classy composition I Love You Now also evokes old-school pop glamour without being a slavish pastiche of the sequined 1960s.

Best of the lot is Bassey’s beautifully controlled rendering of the tremulous, melancholic After The Rain, written by Richard Hawley, who is on formidable form right now.

Compared to these gems, Arnold’s two contributions are a little Bassey-by-numbers. No Good About Goodbye boasts a great title but sounds like an inferior Mad About The Boy, while As God Is My Witness is just plain turgid.

An old-school performer like Bassey knows that you need to hold something back for the finale – and the Pet Shop Boys-penned The Performance Of My Life provides the quintessential grandstanding finish which will please those looking for some va-va-voom from the Dame. It is to the writers’ credit – and Bassey’s, and Arnold’s – that this performance, along with the rest of the album, is more about soul-baring integrity than retro camp.

 

Sounds promising. I can’t wait to hear the album for myself. Keep an eye out for it on November 9th. I’m sure it’ll be worth the money.

Ve lo ricordate Moonraker? Il fantascientifico 007 del 1979.

Locandina Americana del film

Sicuramente vi starete chiedendo che centra in questo blog, guardate il video di seguito a partire da 3:52:

Un cameo davvero bizzarro, 007 a Venezia contro un kendoka

Non tutti sanno che: nel 1967 in “Agente 007, si vive solo due volte” Lewis Gilbert porta per la prima volta sullo schermo in occidente il ninjutsu, ebbene si, il primo film non-orientale nel quale compaiono i ninja.
Probabilmente Moonraker è lo stesso per il Kendo, andando a memoria del sottoscritto è il più vecchio film occidentale ove compaia il Kendo.

A behind-the-scenes look (or listen) at Dame Shirley Bassey’s new album project has been launched on YouTube. Here’s the video:

It’s obvious that this legend still has “her groove”. Those song excerpts are astonishing. I really can’t wait to hear this album in full.

EON Productions… do yourself a favor. Hire Dame Shirley Bassey to sing the theme song for the next Bond film. David Arnold’s got her back (he’s producing her new album), and she’s never failed the franchise.

Keep an eye out for “The Performance”, coming to stores November 9th. For more information, check out Dame Shirley’s home page: http://www.dameshirleybassey.com/

By Rory Reynolds

A RARE first edition copy of Ian Fleming’s Live and Let Die has turned up in a bin bag at a charity shop – the second time a Bond book has scooped the store a fortune.

Staff at the Oxfam bookshop in Edinburgh spied the rare 007 thriller – first published in 1954 – in a bag of donations.

They couldn’t believe their luck when they fished out the Scots author’s second novel.

The novel – which was made into the first Roger Moore production in 1973 – is due to go under the hammer at Bonhams in Oxford next week and is estimated at £800.

But its good condition could see it fetch far more.Last week, a first edition copy of Fleming’s Moonraker – in poor condition – was sold to a private bidder for £1300 at Lyon & Turnbull in Edinburgh.

Bookshop manager Andy Crosby said: “007 seems to bring a bit of luck to our shop.

“We don’t know who donated the book but I would like to thank them very much for their extremely generous donation.”

The book is the second Bond novel to make the shop a packet after first edition of From Russia With Love, worth £300, turned up last year.

Live and Let Die is often considered the most controversial of the Scots author’s books due its depiction of Afro-Caribbean people and voodoo practices.

See more of our pictures at our Flickr site and videos at our dedicated channel,  Deadline TV.

It can be difficult to separate history from myth in nailing down the particulars of the James Bond icon. There’s also an element of timing when considering first-hand research versus relying on the initiatives of others.

Playboy magazine is an invaluable resource when it comes to the James Bond legacy. At once, it captures snapshots in context, and provides that to researches for the most part, as said.

The following is from the November 1965 Playboy, titled, “Playboy Interview: Sean Connery – A candid conversation with James Bond’s acerbic alter ego.”

Here’s Sean Connery on “the phenomenal success of the Bond books and films.”

Well, timing had a lot to do with it. Bond came on the scene after the war, at a time when people were fed up with rationing and drab times and utility clothes and a predominantly gray color in life. Along comes this character who cuts right through all that like a very hot knife through butter, with his clothes and his cars and his wine and his women. Bond, you see, is a kind of present-day survival kit. Men would like to imitate him — or at least his success — and women are excited by him.

Then there is this on the character of James Bond in particular, in an attempt to reconcile what’s said by those who criticize and defend.

He is really a mixture of all that the defenders and the attackers say he is. When I spoke about Bond with Fleming, he said that when the character was conceived, Bond was a very simple, straightforward, blunt instrument of the police force, a functionary who would carry out his job rather doggedly. But he also had a lot of idiosyncrasies that were considered snobbish — such as a taste for special wines, et cetera. But if you take Bond in the situations that he is constantly involved with, you see that it is a very hard, high, unusual league that he plays in. Therefore he is quite right in having all his senses satisfied — be it sex, wine, food or clothes — because the job, and he with it, may terminate at any minute. But the virtues that Amis mentions — loyalty, honesty — are there, too. Bond doesn’t chase married women, for instance. Judged on that level, he comes out rather well.

Ten years earlier, however, this is how the recollection above would have compared to what Ian Fleming wrote of James Bond in Moonraker.

It was only two or three times a year that an assignment came along requiring [Bond's] particular abilities. For the rest of the year he had the duties of an easy-going senior civil servant — elastic office hours … evenings spent playing cards in the company of a few close friends … or making love, with rather cold passion, to one of three similarly disposed married women….

When he was on a job he could spend as much as he liked, so for the other months of the year he could live very well on his £2000 a year net.

He had a … 1930 4½-litre Bentley coupé, supercharged, which he kept expertly tuned so that he could do a hundred when he wanted to.

On these things he spent all his money and it was his ambition to have as little as possible in his banking account when he was killed, as, when he was depressed, he knew he would be, before the statutory age of forty-five.

Most James Bond fans know that 007 creator Ian Fleming served, during World War II, as special assistant to the Director of Naval Intelligence for Britain. Fewer know that Fleming participated in concocting some real-life missions for the British during the war — missions which clearly reflected the capacity of his Bondian imagination.

One of these operations was Target-Force. Launched in 1944 by the Allied High Command, and not dissimilar to the American’s later Operation Paperclip, the mission was to round up as many Nazi rocket scientists as possible before they were captured by the advancing Soviet Red Army.

In his new book T-Force: The Race for Nazi War Secrets, 1945 (Constable and Robinson), military historian Sean Longden tells the amazing story of this hitherto little-known wartime op. Of special significance for James Bond fans are the startling parallels he traces to Ian Fleming’s third 007 novel Moonraker! While reading the thriller, he noticed that one of the German research team was named “Dr. Walter,” which immediately put him in mind of T-Force’s juicier targets — of the same name. This discovery led him to work out other similarities:

• One of Drax’s key henchmen is a Dr Walter. In real life, Dr Hellmuth Walter ran the Walterwerke factory in Kiel, Northern Germany, which was secured by T-Force in 1945. It was responsible for the design of the engines used in V1 and V2 rockets.
• Sir Hugo Drax works on the “Moonraker” rocket project for the British. This was similar to Operation Backfire, a British project to test German V2 rockets, which T- Force was involved with by recovering missiles.
• In the book, 50 German scientists – described as ‘more or less all the guided-missile experts the Russians didn’t get’ – are working on the Moonraker project. T-Force had extracted Nazi rocket scientists from the Soviet zone and Dr Walter assisted in this.
• The fictional Drax had worked for steel company Rheinmetall-Borsig. This was a real German company and had been one of T- Force’s primary targets.
• The Moonraker rocket is compared to a V2 and is to be test-fired into the North Sea. In Operation Backfire, the British had test-fired V2s into the North Sea.
• The Moonraker is powered by hydrogen peroxide. The real Dr Walter was a specialist in hydrogen-peroxide engines and worked on engine design for the V2 missile.

Longden knew that Fleming would have seen reports on T-Force’s activities coming out of Germany, so it was a very small jump indeed for him to conclude that Fleming based his novel on these real-life events.

The UK Daily Mail website has the complete story, Hitler’s rocket scientists… the incredible real-life events that inspired… Moonraker posted as of today. Longden’s book is also reviewed at the Financial Times “View from the Top” website; you can read it HERE.

Pretty cool stuff, huh?

Following the down-to-Earth, Fleming thriller, “For Your Eyes Only”, “Octopussy” seems to relax a bit, and reverts to the jolly, humorous Roger Moore Bond film style — but this time, in moderation.

The film starts off with some great espionage and action. James Bond uses a disguise to infiltrate an air base and plant a bomb. The plan ends up falling through, and Bond comes face to face with the man he’s imitating. After being captured, Bond is able to escape from the back of a military truck with the help of his attractive, fellow agent. Cleverly hidden within a horse trailer, Bond hops into his AcroStar Mini Jet and flies off — only to come into contact with some opposition. After dodging a heat-seeking missile, and performing some amazing stunts, Bond casually lands near a gas station. After pulling up, he lightheartedly says, “Fill her up, please.”

The characters in this film aren’t of the high quality of the characters in “For Your Eyes Only”, however, they work well with the material. I’ve never really been amazed by Louis Jourdan’s performance of the villain Kamal Khan. He certainly doesn’t rank up there with Wiseman’s Dr. No, or Sheybal’s Kronsteen, or even Savalas’ Blofeld. On the other hand, though, he’s not a terrible character. I just never found him to be menacing. On the other hand, Kabir Bedi’s performance (as Gobinda) was quite menacing; I consider him to be a henchman to match the might of Oddjob. I like how the character was taken rather seriously, instead of being turned into a joke like Jaws. Perhaps that’s what added so much menace to the character. The knife-throwing twins, Mischka and Grischska, and the power-hungry General Orlov held these similar characteristics. As far as allies go, Vijay was pretty standard. He wasn’t as amazing as Jack Lord’s Felix Leiter, but he wasn’t as terrible as, say, Rosie Carver. The Bond girls seemed standard to me, also. Maud Adams returned to play Octopussy — but, Bond’s been there and done that. Kristina Wayborn (Magda) played a minor Bond girl, but I seemed to think that she wasn’t much of an actress, and more so an object to please the average male viewers’ eyes. It was fun to see Q in the field, though, landing a hot-air balloon on top of some of Khan’s goons.

John Barry did a favorable job with the film’s score. Though, I don’t consider it to be as legendary as the scores to “You Only Live Twice” or “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service”, it still beats the hell out of Bill Conti’s dated, cheesy score to “For Your Eyes Only”. Rita Coolidge’s theme song was decent, also, but surely doesn’t match some of the classic themes of the series. Again, I prefer it to that annoying, sappy theme to “For Your Eyes Only”.

As far as locations go, India worked well in this film. The locations in Germany seemed grim, but worked well, also. The rest of the film tends to stay pretty serious, although we do get some ridiculous scenes that tend to take an audience out of “the moment”. For example, there’s a scene where Bond tells a tiger to “sit”, a scene where Bond swings across some vines and the Tarzan jungle-cry is heard, and then just plain-old cheesy lines like “That should keep you in curry for a few weeks”. Though Roger Moore was nearly 60-years-old at the time of the film’s release, he still held up pretty well, and looked pretty damn good.

Overall, the film is a laid-back successor of “For Your Eyes Only”. There are some scenes/aspects in which “Octopussy” tops “For Your Eyes Only”, but there are also some scenes/aspects in which “Octopussy” reverts back to the old, ridiculous nonsense that plagued Bond films like “Moonraker”. Roger Moore’s Bond era tend to catch a lot of harsh criticism, but sometimes for good reason. This film, however, doesn’t deserve any of that. It’s serious, yet fun. And most of all, it’s Bond. This is one of Moore’s best portrayals, I’d say.

7.5 / 10

We’ve noted some of these and skipped others. In any case, this is proving to be quite the year for notable James Bond and/or Ian Fleming-related anniversaries. Here’s a recap:

April: 100th anniversary of the birth of 007 producer Albert R. “Cubby Broccoli.

May: 100th anniversary of the birth of 007 screenwriter Richard Maibuam

June: 30th anniversary of Moonraker’s premier
20th anniversary of Licence to Kill. (world preimier in U.K.; U.S. premier was in July)

September: 45th anniversary of world premier of Goldfinger

45th anniversary of the debut of The Man From U.N.C.L.E. Ian Fleming helped name the lead character, Napoleon Solo, dropped out of project due to pressure from Bond producers Broccoli and Harry Saltzman.

November: 10th anniversary of world premier of The World Is Not Enough.

December: 40th anniversary of world premier of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.

35th anniversary of world premier of The Man With The Golden Gun

It has been 24 years since Roger Moore last played James Bond. Yet it seems as if Sir Roger stirs the most emotional reactions among 007 fans. His detractors really don’t like him. His fans are equally strong in their opinions.

Here’s a sampling. For detractors, it is too much humor, Moore doesn’t take the role serious enough and his seven films, for the most part, stray too far from Ian Fleming. In fact, the parent Web site of this blog has carried many such comments over the years For a few examples click HERE, not to mention RIGHT HERE and let’s not forget RIGHT HERE.

For that matter, some fans refer to the 1970s — where Moore accounted for four of the five 007 films of that decade — as the dark ages of the film series.

Moore supporters say this is poppycock. Perhaps the Moore film that gets the most flak is 1979’s Moonraker, where 007 goes into space. Fans of Sir Roger say it’s entertaining, including THIS ARTICLE and this thread on the CommanderBond.net message boards.

What’s more (or what’s Moore, if we were into puns), supporters will say Sir Roger kept the series going at a time many critics thought it couldn’t survive Sean Connery’s departure. Finally, when Sir Roger returned for his sixth 007 film, Octopussy, it prevented James Brolin from being cast in the role:

And that, some believe, was a very good thing, the comments by John Glen and Michael G. Wilson notwithstanding.

Finally, there’s the argument that the actor didn’t control scripts and directors. When he got a good story to work with, such as For Your Eyes Only or The Spy Who Loved Me, some fans feel he did just fine, even if they didn’t like efforts such as Moonraker or Live And Let Die.

This post isn’t likely to change anyone’s mind. We just hope it provides some food for thought among 007 fans. And we hope our friends at the I Expect You to Die! and CommanderBond.net sites don’t mind us linking. The purpose was to demonstrate the diversity of thought among fans and not to criticize or pick on anybody.

The impetus for this Blog is to address the too-widespread ignorance of the origins and fundamental value of brand references in James Bond stories.

Criticism can be dated back to the third Ian Fleming novel, Moonraker, published in 1955.

Rupert “Hart-Davis noted that a friend had told him that whenever Fleming mentioned any particular food, clothing or cigarettes in his books, he was rewarded with presents in kind,” biographer Andrew Lycett reports in Ian Fleming: The Man Behind James Bond (1995). “‘Ian’s are the only modern thrillers with built-in commercials,’ a friend remarked.”

But Lycett goes on to conclude: “In fact, there is no evidence of Ian seeking to capitalize on his ‘product placement.’

When Floris sent him some soaps as a thank-you for mentioning his company in Moonraker, Ian replied, ‘My books are spattered with branded products of one sort or another as I think it is stupid to invent bogus names for products which are household words, and you may be interested to know that this is the first time that a name-firm has had the kindly thought to acknowledge the published tribute.’

Author Kingsley Amis provided deeper analysis in his book, The James Bond Dossier: Is he in Hell or is he in Heaven – That damned, elusive 007?

In 1965, he wrote about “all those brand names that make the critics so cross. I thought of taking one volume, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, and listing all the names of things …; one reviewer said he had counted fifty-six such names.”

Again, to Fleming’s strategic purpose: “To mention any given brand of car tells you quickly and in some detail about its driver. To name the brand at all helps to conceal the fantasizing, wish-fulfilling element….”

A failure to understand the unique, historical, and necessary role of branded product placements in James Bond stories is a failure to understand one of the key elements by which a character created in 1952 has enjoyed an uninterrupted continuity of success through today.

Kingsley Amis summarized it thus: Ian Fleming “names things to provide a linkage with reality, very desirable when the plot and much else is nonrealistic; to appeal where possible to our own experience; to act as shorthand in sketching character or milieu; and to encourage our sense of participation.”

It’s difficult to read a James Bond book and think about it critically. Bond is a character I grew up with, and still want to emulate! I couldn’t help but watch the true James Bond (Roger Moore, come on people!) seducing women, killing baddies and quipping while they die, an eyebrow raised mischievously. Having grown up with the films, in the same way I grew up with the Conan novels, I can’t help but cherish them and know that no matter how life changes, they will always have a place in my heart.

I’ve probably seen the Doctor No film, or at least bits of it, dozens of times. Some of the scenes are so familiar they are instantly recognisable, although I’m pretty sure I’ve never actually watched Ursula Andreas walk up the beach in her bikini.

But the books are slightly different, as you would expect. Moonraker bares little if any resemblance to the original novel.

I can’t remember the film enough to do a critique of the development of novel into film and I’d prefer not to. People with too much time on their hands can do that while I simply offer my opinion on a book that cleverly encompasses the extremes and thrills of the pulp era, whilst nodding towards the realism and action of the modern thriller. That’s what sets the Bond novels apart from many of their contemporaries, such as Chandler. There’s still a healthy dose of nostalgia for earlier times, a retro pulp action-thriller feel to the novels.

When two secret agents go missing in Jamaica, Bond is sent in to investigate, with the help of Quarrel Bond finds himself on an isolated island owned by the mysterious Doctor No, who protects his privacy by murdering all trespassers. Bond meets up with a young innocent girl, Honeychile, who turns up naked on the beach searching for shells in the area. Unfortunately Doctor No’s troops are alerted to their presence and set out to find them, and the poor girl is dragged into a cat and mouse chase across the island, until they are eventually caught by a dragon!

The pulp tradition is strong in this novel, our hero is tortured by the mad genius, and must go through a series of hideously painful challenges, which even include fighting a giant squid. But where Bond moves the genre forward is the level of detail and the general realism that Fleming uses to describe his hero and the situations he faces, and his weapons.

Bond is the essence of the modern pulp hero, he’s courageous, he’s strong and intelligent, and despite the backing of the British Secret Service, he’s on his own fighting all manner of super villains. In the same way that Batman or The Spider fight crime, with his hands, his ingenuity and his weapons, Bond is also a superhero in the same league, having no special powers (apart from his own God-given abilities) and fighting crime simply because it’s wrong and must be stopped.

Fleming’s original books have dated, just as the original Batman comics and the adventures of The Spider, Fu Manchu and Charlie Chan have also dated, but they were a product of their time, and that’s what still makes them so powerful. Because back then there was hope that one man could make a difference, and that’s why I find these pulp characters so appealing. There’s no modern cynicism to get in the way of the innocent enjoyment of the books and comics and films.

Bond lives forever, unstoppable, in the hearts of his fans, and that’s why he continues to live on through his many different incarnations, but the original books will also live on forever.

Programmierbare Nanotechnologie.

Die Jungs bei Paramount sind echte Witzbolde. Weil das Ungleichgewicht zwischen Kritiker- und Zuschauerreaktion im Fall von „Transformers – Revenge of the Fallen“ kaum größer hätte ausfallen können, hat man sich in den USA die überflüssige und im Grunde auch ziemlich lästige Antiwerbung, die negative Presse mit sich bringen kann, für die ähnlich gelagerte Spielzeugverfilmung um harte Kämpfer in schicken Uniformen einfach mal gespart und die Parasiten von der Schreibfront außen vor gelassen („Sollen die sich doch ihre Tickets selber kaufen“, wird man sich gesagt haben, „kostenlose Pre-Screenings fallen diesmal jedenfalls aus“). Für die großen Studios ist die Filmkritik eben nur noch ein verlängerter Arm der Marketingabteilung, und wenn der Effekt ohnehin gleich Null ist, warum dann noch Aufwand betreiben? Ökonomisch betrachtet hat ein solches Vorgehen durchaus seinen guten Sinn, und für geringer budgetierte Schlachtplatten aus dem Slasher-Umfeld ist Derartiges schon lange gängige Praxis, bei einem Blockbuster wie „G.I. Joe – Geheimauftrag Cobra / Rise of the Cobra“ jedoch ein Novum, das vermutlich Schule machen wird. Das anvisierte Publikum liest ohnehin keine Kritiken und sucht sich seine Empfehlungen lieber in den einschlägigen sozialen Netzwerken und Blogs. Dem gemäß gab es dann doch ein paar Privilegierte, die vorab einen Blick auf den Film werfen durften. Dabei achtete man allerdings peinlich genau darauf, wer hier nützlich sein könnte (also mit großer Wahrscheinlichkeit positiv schreiben würde), und wer eben nicht. Multiplikatoren wurden gesucht, keine Kritiker. Über die Qualität des Films sagt das zunächst einmal rein gar nichts aus, wohl aber eine Menge über diejenige Bedeutung, die Kulturkritik aus Sicht der US-Studios für ein Blockbuster-Publikum hat: Keine nämlich. Schnell ist man versucht, die Schuld ganz auf die Verantwortlichen abzuwälzen, aber vielleicht liegt das Problem auch zu einem nicht unbedeutenden Teil auf Seiten der Filmkritik selber. Bevor die Welle auch hierzulande ankommt, ist für so manche Feuilleton-Redaktion jedenfalls derzeit noch genügend Zeit, den Gedanken bestenfalls nicht einfach so von sich zu weisen.

Zu denjenigen, die kein Stück interessiert, was die Kritiker zu sagen haben, gehört neben dem Studio und dem Zielpublikum vor allem auch Spielzeughersteller Hasbro, der offenbar ganz gehörig Blut geleckt hat. Man mag sich lieber nicht vorstellen, wie groß die Stückzahl an Transformern ist, die seit dem ersten Film, und nun erst recht nach dem zweiten zusätzlich über die Ladentheke gegangen sind – von Lizenzgeldern für allerhand weiteres Merchandising ganz abgesehen. Nicht anders wird es im Fall von „G.I. Joe“ aussehen, und eine spezielle Movie-Edition der Elitetruppe ist selbstverständlich längst erhältlich. Nun hat man sich wohl gedacht, was mit Actionfiguren gut funktioniert, kann mit anderem Spielgut aus dem Unternehmensbestand wohl kaum schlechter laufen – zum Beispiel Brettspielen. Wer es nicht glaubt: Ridley Scott arbeitet bereits an einer Filmversion von (bitte festhalten) „Monopoly“. Und wem bei dem Gedanken gerade der Zauberwürfel (Hersteller – na wer wohl?) aus der Hand gefallen ist, sollte sich darüber im Klaren sein, dass Hasbro auch die Rechte an „Scrabble“ hält. Außerdem „Trivial Pursuit“ (ideal für ein US-Remake von „Slumdog Millionaire“), „Taboo“ (Zotenhumor mit Adam Sandler) und „Play-Doh“ („The Blob“ für das neue Jahrtausend). Also bitte.

Hasbro gehört neben Marvel ganz klar zu den Gewinnern unter den Seiteneinsteigern im Blockbusterkino. Was seitens der Computerspieleindustrie bisher nur sehr eingeschränkt funktioniert hat, nämlich den eigenen Produkten eine passende filmische Form zu verpassen, führt hier zu ganz beachtlichen Erfolgen. Marvel war es irgendwann leid, an den Leinwandversionen ihrer Hausmarken nur marginal mitzuverdienen, und so entschloss man sich 2007, einfach selber als Studio aufzutreten. Wenig später belegte „Iron Man“ in aller Deutlichkeit, dass diese Entscheidung goldrichtig war – selbst wenn seitdem keine der sonstigen Eigenproduktionen („The Incredible Hulk“ oder gar „Punisher: War Zone“) an den Siegeszug des Mannes im Stahlkostüm anschließen konnte.

Übrigens Stahlkostüm: Stark Industries scheinen offensichtlich auch die Eliteeinheit auszustatten, die unter dem Decknamen „G.I. Joe“ operiert. Beweis: Eine mechanische Rüstung mit dem ebenso beliebigen wie nichtssagenden Namen Delta-6 erlaubt seinem Träger, mal schnell mit 100 km/h voranzuspurten oder in kugelsicheren Siebenmeilenstiefeln größere Schritte zu machen als King Kong und der Marshmellowman zusammen. Dass der „flexible, aus einer metallischen Mehrkomponentenlegierung bestehende Anzug“ (O-Ton deutsches Presseheft, das angesichts derartiger Anpreisungen eher wie ein Bestellkatalog für die US-Army anmutet) zudem mit allerlei Schusswaffen ausgestattet ist, versteht sich von selbst.

Aber auch sonst bedient sich die erwartungsgemäß äußerst CGI-lastige Actionfantasie von Stephen Sommers („Die Mumie“ und „Van Helsing“) ungeniert hier und dort. Eine zerstörerische neue Superwaffe, die in der Lage ist, ganze Städte dem Erdboden gleichzumachen, und in gewissem Sinn als MacGuffin der Geschichte fungiert, verkauft sich zwar als „programmierbare Nanotechnologie“, bei der „[j]eder Sprengkopf … sieben Millionen Nanomilben (enthält), mikroskopisch kleine Roboter, die gemeinsam ihre Aufgabe auf molekularer Ebene ausführen“ (so jedenfalls erklären es erneut die Quantenmechaniker aus der PR-Abteilung von Paramount), in Wahrheit haben die Waffenexperten von MARS Industries (Military Armaments Research Syndicate) jedoch einen Pakt mit Klaatu, dem außerirdischen Besucher aus „The Day the Earth stood still“ geschlossen und ihm die Baupläne für dessen Erdzerstörungstechnologie abgekauft – oder vermutlich eher abgeluchst, denn hinter MARS verbirgt sich – das weiß der Zuschauer, sobald er das erste Mal in die grimmigen Augen des Konzernvorstandes James McCullen blickt (Christopher Eccleston mit forciertem schottischen Akzent) – eine ziemlich größenwahnsinnige Terrororganisation.

Deren eigentliches Mastermind ist jedoch ein anderer, und der geht möglicherweise mit dem Gedanken schwanger, sich langfristig seinen eigenen Todesstern zu bauen. Jedenfalls hat es „The Doctor“ etwas arg ernst genommen mit seiner Bewunderung für einen anderen Allmachtsfantasten der Filmgeschichte. Von Verbrennungen vollkommen entstellt, trägt er beständig eine Atemmaske, welche die untere Hälfte seines Gesichtes gänzlich verdeckt, und ihn deshalb nicht nur aussehen, sondern auch noch röcheln lässt wie – tja, wer wohl?

Ansonsten ist „G.I. Joe – Rise of the Cobra“ vor allem eine Art Ensemble-Bond im Umfeld von „Moonraker“ und anderen 007-Spektakeln aus der Pre-Craig-Ära, bei denen der Gegenspieler für gewöhnlich in riesigen unterirdischen Kampfstationen daran arbeitete, die Welt wahlweise zu beherrschen oder zu zerstören. Bei MARS ist es wohl eine Mischung aus beidem, und an die Stelle des Lieblingsspions seiner Mäjestät tritt eine vergleichsweise disparate Gruppe von Elitekämpfern, die von einer geheimen, ultramodern ausgestatteten Gefechtsstation aus operieren. Q bleibt hier zwar gesichtslos, entwickelt aber äußerst fleißig ein absurdes Kriegsspielzeug nach dem anderen: Eine Armbrust, die Laserpfeile schießt, flüssige Rüstungen, unsichtbarmachende Tarnanzüge und anderes mehr – Spielzeuge, an denen angeblich längst auch reale US-Militärexperten herumbasteln. Denn schließlich ist die Geschichte in der nahen Zukunft angesiedelt, und da soll aus Sicht der Macher alles eben möglichst realistisch aussehen.

Realistisch ist ansonsten allerdings so ziemlich das letzte Attribut, das man diesem Film zuordnen würde. Aber wozu auch? In erster Linie bietet „G.I. Joe“ rasantes, explosionslastiges, buntes und niemals ideenloses Entertainment, das sich auf der großen Leinwand gut macht. Die einzelnen Figuren bringen ihre Historie aus den Comics mit, die seit 1982 auch den Gegner „Cobra“ kennen, und einer TV-Serie aus den 80ern. Immerhin verhilft diese Tatsache einigen Charakteren zu einer gemeinsamen Vergangenheit, die sich in Form von Rückblenden immer wieder in die rastlose Action der Haupthandlung einfügen und der ganzen Sache so doch zumindest eine gewisse Ration Identifikationsfutter unterjubeln.

Schauspielerisch ist dieser Film selbstverständlich eher eine Dehnübung. Die meisten Darsteller fallen nicht wirklich sonderlich auf. Sienna Miller ist bereits damit ausgelastet, sich in ihrem hautengen Ganzkörperkostüm möglichst geschmeidig zu bewegen, Dennis Quaid chargiert, als gäbe es kein Morgen, und Channing Tatum entscheidet sich geradewegs für die entgegengesetzte Richtung: Er spielt einfach gar nicht. Dass der US-Präsident in diesem Film übrigens das Klischee des weißen (nicht unbedingt weisen, aber vor allem halt nicht farbigen) elder Statesman bedient (Jonathan Pryce, war sowohl schon mal Bond-Gegner als auch Regierungschef – wenn auch von Argentinien), hat seinen guten Grund und liefert eine durchaus sehenswerte Pointe. Aber für die muss man schon bis zum Ende durchhalten.

Artikel © 2009 Thomas Lenz. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.
Filmplakat: Paramount Pictures Germany GmbH

Weitere Filmkritiken | Startseite | Impressum

Diese Filmkritiken könnten Sie interessieren:

Tell us if you bought Clickbank Pirate at the launch on 4 August 2009. (Moonraker did!)

And for those who slipped and fell in the rush, don’t worry, you still have a chance to join and avoid the crush. Just hold your breath, hang on tight, and see where this takes you:

Semesterrapport: I måndags hade jag följande krönika om fanfilmer inne i SvD. Nu lär jag av filmbranschen och levererar den här med extramaterial – ett antal relaterade Youtubeklipp. Jag vill särskilt rekommendera Joe Nussbaums Star Wars-romcom George Lucas in love.

Regissören Michel Gondry myntade häromåret ett nytt ord. I filmen Be kind rewind försökte Mos Def och Jack Black rädda en videobutik där alla band hade avmagnetiserats genom att sweda filmerna, spela in egna versioner av dem.

”Sweding” var ett påhittat begrepp. Men amatörinspelade remakes finns faktiskt på riktigt. I verkligheten kallas konceptet fanfilm och har enligt en ny bok existerat ända sedan 20- talet.

Homemade Hollywood av journalisten Clive Young redogör för fanfilmens klassiker. Det är Spindelmannen som kastar sig i ett rep från ett sexvåningshus, allt för att hans hobbyfilm ska bli trovärdig. Det är tonåringarna som jobbar i sju år med sin Jakten på den försvunna skatten, så att Indiana Jones är tolv år i en scen och sjutton i nästa. Det är leksaker som agerar ubåtar i Moonraker, strykjärn som föreställer rymdskepp i Star wars.

Länge kunde dessa amatörfilmare bara visa sina verk på science fiction-konvent. Men när nätet nu löser upp gränsen mellan kulturkonsument och aktör har fanfilm gått från nördobskyritet till en genre med underkategorier: remakes, parodier, filmer med ny story men kända karaktärer, korsningar av filmkoncept som The odd star wars couple samt latmansversionen – klassiska scener dubbade med nytt ljud.

Till skillnad från i Gondrys film, där kunderna älskar heminspelningarna, blir riktiga fanproduktioner tyvärr sällan mer än charmiga. Vissa är tvärtom rent plågsamma att genomlida. Verkligheten överträffar däremot feel good-komedin på ett annat plan.

I Be kind rewind hotas filmamatörerna av 63 000 års fängelse, varpå onda advokater mosar deras vhs-band med en ångvält. Clive Youngs bok slutar lyckligare. Bolag som Lucasfilm, DC Comics och Paramount har börjat inse att fanfilm är gratis reklam och låter entusiasterna hållas, så länge de inte tjänar pengar på filmerna.

I en tid då nöjesindustrin tycks lägga all energi på fildelarjakt är det uppmuntrande läsning.

FANFILM I URVAL

Hardware Wars, 1977:

Raiders Of The Lost Ark – The Adaptation, 1989:

Spiderman – The Green Goblin’s Last Stand, 1992:

Troops, 1997:

The Odd Star Wars Couple, 1997:

George Lucas In Love, 1999:

Pink Five, 2002:

Batman – Dead End, 2003:

Star Trek – New Voyages, 2004: