I’m using this as my source:
https://www.007museum.com/kill_in_bondfilm.htm
It lists Bond as making 47 kills in GoldenEye compared to 30 in Tomorrow Never Dies.
I don’t particularly care for the Express, but I found this article interesting;
And might I add: those who think Bond machinegunning down enemies is cool never understood Bond in the first place.
Indeed. From the back cover of the American first printing of Zero Minus Ten, written by someone you’d think would understand Bond if anyone did (bold emphases mine):
Bond stood there a moment, breathing heavily. He was still filled with rage, an emotion he usually tried to avoid because it could cause recklessness. This time, however, it served as a goad. Blasting away the guards had actually felt good. My God, he thought. This is what he lived for. It was no wonder that he inevitably became restless and bored when he was between assignments. Living so close to death was what invigorated him and gave him the the edge that had managed to keep him alive for so many years.
Feeling invincible, Bond walked outside into the broad daylight of the courtyard. He didn’t care that his clothes were wet and bloody. He didn’t care if the entire Chinese army was waiting for him. He was quite prepared to blast his way out of Guangshou until he had no more ammunition or he was dead, whichever came first."
That should’ve tipped me off. But I bought it anyway.
I don’t remember that book being that violent. This was after Goldeneye N64, right? Benson hasn’t aged well.
I haven’t read it since back then. Maybe it wasn’t all that violent overall, and maybe my issue wasn’t with Benson so much as whatever editor or marketing person decided that out of the whole book, this was the passage that would most appeal to customers.
If I remember correctly - not a given - this part happens after Bond was subjected to a caning that left his behind in a state impairing on his judgement - though Bond has met with similar discomfort over the course of his career without giving in to indiscriminate killing frenzies. It’s one of those things one has trouble to imagine in a Fleming story.
So injury to his buttocks caused temporary mental impairment? I knew he did his thinking in that general region, but I’d have thought it was a bit more to the anterior.
No. No she has not.
One death is a tragedy and a million a statistic. I don’t think Bond should necessarily enjoy gunning down countless goons, but it’s something he should be willing to do if required. The scene on Safin’s island is a good example. He has to get from point A to B in a short space of time, so he does what he has to. Even quips after he’s killed people come across as detached self-amusement rather than any real care. He gets the job done and moves on.
In my head every single time I read one of those
This is by far the best option and all they need to do.
Missed this the other day, but I think I could get behind perhaps an Amazon limited series (or film) based on the idea of Bond’s daughter seeking revenge. It would have to be set up in a way where she’s going after Fiennes’ M some years later after the events of NTTD. Could be an interesting way of turning the traditional tropes of a Bond film on their collective heads, with an older Mathilde being the hero of the film, but based on the traditional machinations of a Bond film, she would be cast as the villain. A similar idea to Skyfall, in a way, with Fiennes’ M, now on the verge of retirement, having Heracles come back in the last hour to bite him, with Mathilde looking to expose him for his crimes and wanting revenge for the father she never knew. Double-oh agents would be dispatched to apprehend or eliminate her, while she continues to try to work her way closer to her goal.
But why though?
Because she has worked on many projects as well as many attempts to make you a Bond film!
The world doesn’t revolve around you
@secretagentfan im tagging you in.
I’d like to see a Bond who’s more about ingenuity and slyness and less about brute force–though he uses force when he needs to. A little more of the old coolness and polish.
Within this specific context … the world 100% revolves around Bond fans.
I’ve seen the rundown of those “other projects.” They don’t exactly help your argument.
Given these points, I don’t think it’s too much to ask for them to do what they are best at doing. Things they have made millions doing. Millions that come from tickets bought by fans the world doesn’t revolve around?
Perhaps it’s the way you, specifically, write down your thoughts. They come across as entitled, mysogonistic and frankly aggressive. The reason most of us are here is because we exchange views and have a bit of fun. To demand is possibly something for a Star Wars fan site. I don’t know, I would never contemplate being on such a thing.
That’s why the crying toddler from @Orion is a gentle and subtle metaphor to relax.
Yes. Let’s all do that.