Tag: First Light

007 First Light II: Second Light

Listen, I know I said that I wouldn’t talk about James Bond again until Denis Villeneuve announced the name and cast of the next film, but there’s a lot at stake here. Despite the talent and resources that Amazon has poured into the 007 franchise, I’m still bearish on its prospects. Disney did the same thing for Star Wars and look at what that got us. And before they got their hands on Star Wars, JJ Abrams and Alex Kurtzman torpedoed Star Trek. So all I’m saying is that we should prepare ourselves for the enshittification of yet another legacy IP. For 60 years prior, The Broccoli name, in addition to being behind the famous vegetable, rested on the quality and success of the James Bond franchise. That is no longer the case. Jeff Bezos’, Denis Villeneuve’s, Steven Knight’s, Amy Pascal’s, and David Heyman’s careers will all go on regardless of the success of the next production. In other words, James Bond is no longer a family operation. It’s now a product that can be bought and traded like any other commodity. So beware.

But, on a positive note, the first Bond video game in years has been overwhelmingly well received. And it should have. Whoever made it apparently spent $200 million to make it. I watched the first 13 minutes of it on YouTube. I’m not a gamer, so I can’t assess its quality as a game. But I guess the premise is that you play as James Bond, starting as a British SAS operator, on until he receives his license to kill from MI6. From what I saw, it didn’t feel like James Bond, but so what? I suppose the idea is to follow him from being James Bond, common pissant, to becoming James Bond 007.

There’s a lot of speculation over how much this video game is informing us on the future of the film franchise. And it shouldn’t come as a surprise that, in my personal view, watching the “birth” of James Bond 007 might make a good video game, but it would make a disastrous film concept. I’ll reiterate that James Bond has no beginning. He’s more myth than man. While No Time to Die controversially killed him at its conclusion, death is such a connecting theme across all the movies that I thought it was a fitting end to Daniel Craig’s tenure. While Casino Royale did show Bond briefly before he became 007, it was maybe three minutes of the total runtime and it was disconnected from the larger plot. Casino Royale also hinted at Bond being prior SAS, which would make sense, but should that aspect of his career be explored?

There’s a lot of problems with it. First off, Bond is a lone wolf. Being former military (I’m a veteran of World War Two AND One), I can tell you that Bond’s proclivity for winging it and ignoring orders whenever it damn well suits him wouldn’t go over well in any Army. And two, Bond is well educated and has an appreciation for the finer things in life. That alone wouldn’t prevent him being in the Army and/or Royal Navy, but, with all due respect to those who served, his posh lifestyle wouldn’t mesh with military culture. ADDITIONALLY, being Cambridge educated, he probably wouldn’t have been an enlisted grunt. He would have certainly entered military life as a commissioned officer. So James Bond as a troop commander? I mean, it makes more sense than seeing him as an enlisted piss ant. But even then, Bond would likely grow tired of this role, probably not understanding why his troops don’t have the same kill and survival skills that he has. In short, while a great filmmaker can make anything work, I think it’s best if we leave this aspect of James Bond’s life to the video games and not put it on the big screen.

But there’s something here that producers HAVE to get right. While there’s been many interpretations to the character, there’s something they all share: James Bond is a broken man. He’s not a moral man. If the winds have blown slightly differently, he would have been MI6’s enemy and not its hero. The franchise isn’t about tropes and cliches—the tux’s, the martinis, the women, or the gadgets—those are all distractions for both the audience AND for the character himself. Because James Bond at his core, for a lack of a better description, is suicidal. He’s nothing without the mission. Only danger provides any sense of comfort. Long before the SAS and long before MI6, James Bond made a wager on himself: It’s much more interesting to be alive than to be dead.

And whatever caused this gigantic hole in his soul can be hinted at. But it can never, ever, EVER be explored in great detail.

First Light

Things are at a fever pitch within the James Bond universe. B-heads are in a tizzy. For the first time in a long time, a new Bond video game is coming out, First Light, with the title song by Lana Del Rey. Additionally, we inch closer to production of the Denis Villeneuve-directed installment. And until the cast and title of the production is announced, this will probably be the last time I will discuss James Bond for the foreseeable future.

I’ve discussed what I think will probably happen — we’ll probably get a cerebral look into James Bond’s origins. I’ve stated my objections to this premise but it’s out of my control. The best I could offer is how to make that premise work, assuming that’s the direction they’ll go down.

But the question is: what do I want?

I’ve said time and time again, the objective for screenwriter Steven Knight and Denis Villeneuve is simple: just tap the ball. Audiences are already primed so there’s no need to do too much. I’m sure Steven Knight is more than capable of delivering a solid script. My concern is for Villeneuve. I’ve seen nothing in his filmography that would suggest he could handle the James Bond aesthetic. But time will tell. To be honest, I’d rather have a non-auteur behind the camera, someone who knows how to deliver the goods. I’m thinking of someone like Top Gun:Maverick director Joseph Kosinski.

But if I had a shot at the script, I’d simply restore the formula: a cold open that’s unrelated to the main plot, a complicated and hilariously convoluted plot, and an over-the-top yet simple villain. Are all of those things somewhat out of step with modern storytelling? Absolutely. But that’s part of the charm. James Bond is a callback to escapist cinema. Besides, it would be refreshing to see at this point. In our dark and cynical times, seeing a crazy villain out for world domination, without respect to global politics, would be a return to an older era: when good guys were good guys and bad guys were bad guys (even if Bond himself is a morally grey character working for the good guys). It would be a good jumping off point for the main plot: world leaders on edge over some realistic crisis are suddenly brought together to handle an ACTUAL bad guy. So the level headed British dust off the world renowned alcoholic, gambling addict, womanizer, and borderline sociopathic serial killer James Bond to save the day. And save the day he does. By the end of the film, the nations of the world are united thanks to Bond’s PP and his Walther PPK. Meanwhile, Bond himself couldn’t give less of a shit. While the United Nations uncork Champagne bottles and cigars, he’s in some mountain hideout and fuckin his way from one end of the room to the other. And the ending title card reads James Bond Will Return.

Audience applaud.

As for actor playing James Bond, I have no opinion. Villeneuve expressed a desire for a Sean Connery-like portrayal and I’m fine with that. But if that’s the direction they want, they’ll have to get an actor in his late 30s to 40s. In fact, Bond should perpetually be late 30s and 40s. He’s a force of nature and not necessarily a character with an origin and an ending. He’s a living myth. So no need to give him a biography or motivation. Just send him on a mission and let him cook.

THAT’S the James Bond movie I want.