Why I love Bond films and hated the last two

Over the last couple of nights I’ve been watching old Bond films. When I say old I mean Bond films with Pierce Brosnan rather than Daniel Craig. I have watched the 2 Daniel Craig films and I didn’t like them. I have to admit that I wasn’t a bit shocked when the latest Bond film got cancelled indefinitely.

I think that the latest iteration of James Bond was a huge mistake. Trying to make 007 gritty and real simply goes against the whole spirit of the films and doesn’t work at all. A 007 film has to have a set of core elements without which it can’t be called a Bond film. Here’s what you need.

  • A bad guy. Preferably with a scar and stroking a white cat. They also need to be attempting to take over the world in some despicable manner
  • A base. This can be in a hollowed out volcano or a space station. Ideally with a monorail system inside and the ability to launch either a space craft or something of similar scale
  • Henchmen. This is really important. Henchmen must be in uniform otherwise they don’t count at all.
  • Some form of incredible weapon such as a laser in orbit or something that can cause global disruption

Without these things you can’t really call it a bond film at all. The last couple of films had none of these features at all. In fact in Casino Royale the bad guy was an asthmatic accountant! That’s not right! And if that wasn’t enough there’s a brief shot of 007’s email inbox where you can see he’s sent an email request for stationary! That is so wrong.

Anyway, my point is that the direction for the last 2 films was awful and I’m glad there won’t a 3rd. I hope that in the not too distant future we might see another Brosnan or Connery style 007 return with lots of gadgets and John Cleese back as Q as well.