@Foolio:
Yup. Bond is about outlandish villains and outlandish spies, basically.
So Moore is the golden age of Bond and the first two Bond movies that established a fuck ton are not Bond movies?
Actually I take that back because Moore himself was not outlandish….this is aided by the fact that no Bond could really be desribed as outlandish except Lazenby's frilly dress suit thing.
You totally missed the point by trying to list specific themes.
I'm listing tons of different premises, many which sound silly or dull in quick driveby descriptions to people who have never seen the movies.
Selling Casino Royale as "a poker game" is missing the point.
Infiltrating and irradiating Fort Knox is a lot more supervillainy than laundering money through the most boring casino game ever conceived.
Early Bond was VERY campy and cheesy.
No it wasn't.
The first two are very very straight-forward aside from one thing or two. They are not campy nor cheesy, let alone very.
From Russia With Love especially is a very sober movie with virtually nothing camp in it.
Goldfinger and Thunderball are also lacking in camp. Things got more fantastical bit by bit until the volcano base in You Only Live Twice.
But really the entire 60's was fairly toned down in camp and cheese including Lazenby's film.
The camp and cheese arrived with the 70's with Diamonds and kept getting worse with each new film, with the exception of The Spy Who Loved Me.
Then it kind of went away again over the course of the 80's, especially the Dalton films. On into Goldeneye. Then the camp and cheese came back really suddenly with Die Another Day.
People have really funny memories and ideas about how things "were".
Although Dr. No, as the first film, does in fact leave a lot to be desired. Though let's be honest, a portable Geiger counter at the time is at least as interesting as a car defibrillator.
Dr No is indeed fairly dull, but Connery is awesome just to watch because the character itself is so great. Dr No is also a cool character, which is too bad since he's underused in his own named movie.
From Russia With Love is an incredible movie though. The entire train sequence in the second half is the best slow burning villain hero showdown in the entire series.
As the series progressed it got more big-budget,
Yes.
and started to take itself somewhat more seriously,
No.
The Moore and Brosnan era's both became self parodies that refused to take themselves seriously at points.
Watching from Dr No to The Man With the Golden Gun is really surreal, as you can clearly feel the series going from "serious action suspense" to "cartoon".
I'd end that with Moonraker but again, Spy Who Loved Me fucks that slide up.
The 80's Moore films feel like they're desperately trying to be taken more seriously AFTER the series had already slid into cartoon territory. They are however not good at all.
In fact after Die Another Day and Moonraker I'd say the worst Bond is For Your Eyes Only. Because it's dull as FUCK. It's the biggest failure of trying to take Bond more seriously and down to earth in the franchise.
What we have from that is that no it's not the cheese and camp that makes Bond, but it's not seriouzness and realizm either. Moonraker and Eyes Only are the double major fuck up in a row that shows the Bond people just forgetting what mattered in both regards.
I think a better word than camp or cheese is "style". Bond has to have style. Yeah, there is totally a shallow element that makes it such a fun series. I just disagree on which shallow element. What does work in Dr No is alllll in just the cool ass cold charm of Connery (likewise Dr No is a cool villain for similar reasons minus the charm).
It's the reason people still worship Connery. That style. It's absolutely integral. It's even the reason people are thinking of Idris Elba. Not because WE NEED BLACK MAN. But because "hey look a black guy who is super Bondish, wouldn't it be neat to use him?".
but almost never lost the theme of crazy villains, crazy henchmen, and crazy gadgets (and awful one-liners).
But crazy how? Wacky crazy? Creepy crazy? Or even realistic crazy? Lots of the villains aren't even crazy so much as their plan is crazy.
Moonraker is the craziest of all, but Drax is like…really vanilla and boring. The German shark guy from Loved Me has a silly base and big plan...but he's really just a german guy who sits behind a desk. Even the Christopher Walken character was (sadly) not all that crazy acting.
The difference between most of these guys and Le Chiffre is ONLY their villainous plot and not their actual personality and even appearance.
Most Bond villains are actually cold and reserved, not crazy. Henchmen vary incredibly.
Like crazy you mean immortal voodoo god? Or just a really nasty dude.
Or how about Jaws…stupid goofy cartoon tall strong man? Or genuinely creepy assassin with metal teeth?
With a few snorefests (On Her Majesty's Secret Service, anyone?).
It had Blofeld, an Alpine peak base, some super camp in the form of the radioactive harem or whatever that was, and a final battle with two dudes on a slalom.
Yet it doesn't pass the camp test?
That movie owns.
Honestly if it's just going to be regular action suspense flicks, nothing makes it special in any way.
Aside from it's incredibly distinct atmosphere and style?
Give me a henchman who throws his hat at people
Whose boss is just a fat orange haired guy.
and a character called Pussy Galore over that any day.
Tell us about the actual character with whom that name is attached, because she is one of the most simultaneously boring and dumb Bond girls in the franchise.
Also she sound like Katherine Hepburn. Hubba hubba.
And I didn't say there was a set definition of what Bond is, just that I don't think Craig fits the role well. That's just my opinion. Like all of this. And it's kind of hilarious for you to attack me so hard for my opinion, which really isn't going to change.
Yeah it's hilarious of me to do that thing I always do.