Opinion: Why James Bond has a one-track mind

Can a reinterpretation of James Bond save the franchise? - writes Clinton Gillespie for Story Entertainment.

When blond-haired Daniel Craig replaced Pierce Brosnan as James Bond, there was hardly a headline writer who couldn't resist calling him "James Blond". Purists were appalled. In Ian Fleming's novels, Bond is dark-haired. In the first book written by the author and which the new movie is based, Casino Royale, the character Vesper Lynd says of Bond, "He reminds me rather of Hoagy Carmichael, but there is something cold and ruthless."

The cold and ruthless side of Bond is the reason why scruffy Craig was chosen to interpret the new Bond. In an interview with SuperHeroHype, producer Barbara Broccoli said her company is going back to the origins of the character and the story, which she says is rougher and more complex. "It's more realistic and it's not as fantastical as the last couple have been or we've made through the series. There were times, when the films got very fantastical like with "Moonraker" and things like that. You change because you change with the times," Broccoli said.

Since Thunderball was released in 1965, the fourth film, the franchise has struggled to remain fresh and in-touch in face of competition of other action films. Actor George Lazenby played Bond in only one film, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, because he refused a seven-film contract believing the character couldn't survive the changing times and audience attention.

Seventeen films later, the producers continue the struggle to enthrall audiences while giving them something unique that they're finding in other movies such as the Bourne films or even spoofs on the franchise such as Austin Powers.

The Structure of a Bond Film

Bond films, like the original novels, were based on a simple quest. Bond's object of desire, what he truly wants, in every film is to capture the villain to be able to set the world right. He has no other desires that impact the spine of the story.

Fleming said about his character, "Exotic things would happen to and around him but he would be a neutral figure — an anonymous blunt instrument wielded by a Government Department."

Audiences today may want more.

The trend in action and superhero movies is to explore the unconscious desire of the hero, seen in recent movies such as Batman Begins, Superman Returns, and X-Men, which often creates a darker story with conflicting desires. "At the moment, I think everybody is feeling very serious about the world and they don't feel frivolous about the world, and I think it's the right time to tell this story and Daniel's the right actor to play him," Broccoli said.

Story analyst Robert McKee wrote in his book, Story, "An unconscious desire is always more powerful and durable, with roots reaching to the protagonist's innermost self. When an unconscious desire drives the story, it allows the writer to create a far more complex character who may repeatedly change his conscious desire."

The complex story Pierce Brosnan wanted?

Realizing the scriptwriter is the only one who can give Bond unconscious desires, Pierce Brosnan is quoted on more than one occasion saying that he wanted to bring more emotion and depth to the stories. He explained he was tired of the formulaic dramas where Bond saves the world from a madman. In an interview with The Daily Mirror after he was removed from playing Bond, Brosnan said, "I had all these stupid one-liners and loathed them. I felt like such a phony. It never felt real to me and I never felt I had complete ownership of the role. I'd look at myself in the suit and tie, and think 'What the heck am I doing here'?"

Part of Brosnan's wish may come true.

In the same interview with SuperHeroHype, Daniel Craig explained how Casino Royale would explore Bond on a deeper level. "Bond is damaged. His reason for being marked is because of the upbringing he's had and the profession he's taken on. What we do discover in this movie is why he becomes damaged and his relationship with Vesper is the key to this. It really forms this character. What you'll see is that there's a fallibility to him that sort of slides as the movie goes on and he becomes stronger and stronger. He always takes things on the nose, and as the movies goes on, his single-mindedness starts to come out, and you start to understand why he's [the way he is]."

Are audiences prepared to watch a multi-dimensional Bond?

Timothy Dalton played Bond twice in the 80s and tried to give the role more depth by playing him darkly, particularly after Roger Moore's lighter interpretation. But the stories remained the same with James Bond only having a single object of desire to save the world -- no one but a scriptwriter could change that.

When Peter Hunt directed George Lazenby, he would reshoot scenes in which he was unhappy with Lazenby's portrayal of emotion. In an interview, he said he was insistent that the actors stay with the story of the book. In On Her Majesty's Secret Service, considered to be the closest movie that followed the novels, the writers included important background which added depth to the character not seen in the other movies: Bond contemplated resigning from MI6, he was briefly married, and then his wife was murdered. Critics still hotly debate whether this is the best or worst of the Bond films.

How the scriptwriters craft Bond's desires will probably be the sole determination of the movie's success. If Bond is over-treated and becomes sensitive like Bryan Singer's Superman or too cryptic, mysterious, and dark, audiences may react negatively and long for the Bond they've known in the past twenty films.

Thanks to `Astral` for the alert.

Discuss this news here...