04 January 2007

On Bond

After reading through SavageCat's posts1 on Bond, I've been thinking about how the Bond flicks, while based off the writings of Ian Fleming, have always been relevant to the world at the time of filming/release.

Now, there have been many movies that reflect the issues going on at the time, but they seem to skirt around the real issue. MASH was really about the Vietnam War, but it was set during the Korean War. Why? Because it was more politic. There is a long history of public entertainment dealing with sensitive current topics - The Crucible was a thinly veiled commentary on McCarthyism and the Red Scare - but Bond seems to be one of the few entertainment franchises that actually deals with the issues that are relevant in the now and makes no bones about it.

Let's look at Casino Royale, shall we? The essential premise is that terrorists are bad and we need to keep them from being funded, however the funding occurs. There is the added bonus of turning a character that has been recently known for finesse into one that is single-minded as to his task and will do things through brute force if necessary. The Bond they've written for Casino Royale reflects the sensibilities of what people think need to happen today. In the "War on Terror2" a lot of the Western World wants a protaganist that's closer to Anti-Hero than Hero. Someone that will skirt that line of being more lawless than the outlaws. And, to a certain extent, that's always been the appeal of Bond. The individual against the mob.

So, I'll put that into my writing bank, figure out if there's anything to it, if anyone else has written on it, and call it a day.


1Do The Running Man, Hypocrisy! Nudity! Torture!, and Beating A Dead Horse, The Anal Bead Edition
2What a crock of shit this is, but I'll save those observations for another time.

No comments: