You`re history, Mr Bond - an essay

“Bond, James Bond…” and the rest, as they say, is history. When 007 made his first appearance at the baccarat table (Dr No) never before had audiences met an anti-hero quite like Fleming’s creation. Bond was a connoisseur of fine food and drink. He attracted and bedded legions of beautiful women to satisfy his own healthy sexual appetite. He travelled the world in luxury with the most generous expense account ever granted to a British civil servant and he was witty, charming, fearless and incorruptible. Bond unquestionably became Britain’s greatest contribution to modern cinema and has now become a cherished part of popular culture as it is estimated that at least one quarter of the world’s population has seen one or more Bond films - writes Justin Camilleri
for the Malta Independent.

The historical and cultural importance of this phenomenon deserves serious consideration, as the political themes of the Bond movies over the years have drawn parallels with Britain’s own political scenarios and world politics.

When the first Bond film, Dr No, was released to popular acclaim in October 1962, few people would have failed to draw parallels with real-life events such as the Cuban Missile Crisis. The plot of the film revolved around the evil Dr No and his willingness to interfere with the telemetry of US rockets stationed at nearby Cape Canaveral. Subsequent films such as From Russia with Love (1963) developed explicitly Cold War themes and centred the action around such strategic gateways as Istanbul and South East Europe. The film locations were important in not only developing a geopolitical realism but also in promoting plots that were informed by a world arguably made extreme by the superpower confrontation. The use and abuse of rockets, nuclear energy and weapons featured strongly, as western powers such as Britain and the United States were shown as being more vulnerable in Thunderball (1965).

When a NATO bomber carrying nuclear weapons is stolen, Bond travels to the Bahamas to foil a plot to detonate a bomb close to Miami Beach. Goldfinger (1964), on the other hand, warns of the possibility of Chinese plotting in the development of dirty nuclear bombs which are nearly used in the contamination of the United States’ gold supplies held at Fort Knox. Both Goldfinger and Thunderball point to the need for constant vigilance and also unintentionally call into question the claims made at the time that nuclear weapons promoted “national security”. During the 1970s, when the Cold War entered a less dangerous phase, the producers experimented with stories involving the drugs trade (Live and Let Die, 1973), solar energy (The Man with the Golden Gun, 1974) space-based viral plotting (Moonraker, 1979) and, most memorably, Anglo-Soviet cooperation (The Spy who loved Me, 1977).

The latter was released during the Queen’s Silver Jubilee celebrations and it is still considered the most blatant depiction of British endeavour. Audiences cheered at the opening scene, which witnessed 007’s parachute embossed with a Union flag as he escapes his Soviet attackers. By this time, Bond had become a television ritual, with a regular appearance on Christmas Day. Appropriately, he followed on from the Queen’s speech as millions watched Britain’s finest once again save the world at a time when Britain stood condemned for being the “sick man of Europe” on account of its patchy record of labour relations, declining empire and financial instability.

Updating and extending the Bond formula was essential in a world undergoing dramatic change in the late 1980s and the 1990s. With the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Bond’s missions were updated by new political and cultural developments. In an era dominated by AIDS and HIV, Bond became less sexually aggressive. While he continued to get the girls, the average girl per film dropped to two. Licence to kill (1989) ushered in stronger female co-stars and Bond’s partner showed herself capable of resisting his charms for much longer than his previous female counterparts.

Brosnan’s vehicles, Goldeneye (1995) and Die Another Day (2002), have deliberately echoed contemporary US foreign policy concerns with Russia, and “axis of evil” states such as North Korea. Given the need to sustain audience figures in North America and elsewhere, this intervention makes commercial and artistic sense, because for the Bond formula to exist, it must depend on a hint of political realism. Indeed, after the release of Die Another Day, the North Korean government complained to the US administration about the scenes featuring Bond’s torture by North Korean guards. The official statement noted that the US was a libellous empire of evil.

Casino Royale’s latest villain, banker to the world’s terrorists Le Chiffre, (Mads Mikkelsen) demonstrates how truth has outpaced fantasy. For a start, Le Chiffre is an accountant. Before, it would have been unheard of for the villain in a spy film to be an accountant. Again, you have to turn to the annals of real-life espionage to find a true villain.

Real life could not be further from what is depicted onscreen, especially when Dame Judi Dench’s M mentions her nostalgia for the Cold War. Ironically, the film was released before the horrifying death of former KGB agent Alexander Litvinenko.

Craig’s new Bond is still the “sexist, misogynistic Cold War dinosaur” we love; he is also very much a survivor who has consistently proven wrong the Jack Bauers and Jason Bournes that claimed he was outdated.

James Bond is now as alive as he has ever been, a rich resource in charting the political and cultural trajectory of the last 40 years.

Indeed, the post-Cold War years have brought the films their largest box office grosses ever.

While audiences were thrilled by Brosnan’s exploits after the fall of the iron curtain, and questioned Britain’s new role in the world as a former imperial power transformed to a multi-cultural European state, Craig’s new films might ponder over whether it was right for the Blair government to assist Bush in the Iraq War, in an attempt to restore Britain’s power status through humanitarian military interventions, or whether the quality of military intelligence has been effective in ensuring peace in the region. While one cannot imagine James Bond providing such sloppy intelligence, our fears post 9/11, and now the spectre of the former KGB looming over us, will no doubt provide further material for this cinematic institution to prosper as James Bond enters his second century.

Thanks to `` for the alert.

Discuss this news here...