Wednesday, 5 December 2012


"The name is bond, James bond"
I have lost count of the number of times I have repeated the dialogue. Most of the times trying to modify it to fit my name. "The name is Kumar, Namita Kumar". Sounds wrong, doesn't it?
Along with that dialogue, the bond series brought along with it other epic lines like the "License to kill" or one of my favorites "Vodka martini, shaken not stirred".

I guess there no longer exists a need for me to specify that I am a bond fan! Everyone has a favorite when it comes to a bond, mine being Sean Connery. Connery brought the entire package. He had the charm, the looks, the slight humour. In other words, he was the perfect choice to be the first Bond. He allowed us to visualise Bond to be the most ultimate spy.

Apart from Connery, I loved Roger Moore's version of Bond. No other bond could match up to him when it came to the subtle sarcastic comments. Most of my friends prefer Pierce Brosnan. According to me, he failed in bringing something new to the character. But he did manage to reinstate the touch of Scottish accent in Bond's speech.

 Finally there is, Daniel Craig who is considered by many to be a disappointment to the role of bond. He lacked the dashing looks and the flair to carry out the role. Also his movies were considered to be boring and lacking the qualities that made Bond films what they are. This is where my opinion differs from those of my friends.

I believe Daniel Craig was chosen with an initiative to show the vulnerable side of bond. As much as we'd like to believe against it, Bond is human. His debut as Bond was in Casino royale. Bond falls in love, something we haven't seen since Lazenby's "On her majesty's secret service". Who would have pegged bond to be willing to give up his career and settle down. The second, Quantum of Solace focused on Bond's hurting, which I agree was a snoozer.

I understand that its a bit to late to give my review on the latest Skyfall, since most of you would have already read reviews or written some of your own. But, I just had to voice out my take on it. Just a few words.

While watching skyfall you need to take into consideration two critical points. The first, this is the end of Daniel Craig series. So it is only apt to make this movie a bit more dramatic by having Bond return to his home in Scotland. It is the only way to tie up all the loose ends created in the first two Craig films. The second, this was the last movie we got to see Judi Dench as M. In other words it was an end to an era. This justifies the dramatics involved in the film. Taking in the two points made above, it makes sense that the movie focussed on Bond's childhood insecurities and the relationship between M and Bond. One thing I'd to applaud them on, is how they gave us an insight into the new Q without the showy equipments. Also the introduction of Ralph Fiennes as the new M did get me excited. Another thing that I liked about the movie was, the subtle manner in which they managed to explain the story of Ms.Moneypenny. I couldn't come up with it in any better way. It was unexpected and innovative!

Hopefully the next bond movie will be better. Maybe we might be in for a classic Bond movie because by the looks of it, they are starting over. New characters like the young and quizzical Q, Ralph Fiennes as the new M, and not to mention a new Bond leave me wondering about the new series. And maybe just maybe we might get to see a younger bond, combining the accent and the acting skills of Sean Connery, the looks of Timothy Dalton and the wit of Roger Moore!

No comments:

Post a Comment