Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

End of James Bond?

Discussion in 'The Big Adda' started by Guynextdoor, Apr 18, 2017.

?

Is James Bond out for Good?

  1. Yes, he's out.

    8 vote(s)
    47.1%
  2. No, he will continue

    9 vote(s)
    52.9%
  1. Guynextdoor

    Guynextdoor BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2010
    Messages:
    4,843
    Likes Received:
    1,737
    I was reading the newspaper today and it suddenly hit me- one fallout of the Brexit vote will be the end of James Bond and similar 'espionage' characters (like Smiley's people etc.). These characters were based on the idea that there is some kind of special (though we know non-existant) competence that the Brits have despite their size. Now who can ever imagine a bloated character like James Bond will have any relevance in the years ahead? I used to like Daniel Craig but even there you have to accept that the movies began to increasingly look weird.

    'Q' is obviously a completely cooked up character because UK is technologically behind in many areas and Q obviously can't match up to today's technology (hell one old or young guy against the sophisticated labs of big powers itself is a stupid idea). 'M' in real life probably runs an agency that's smaller than ISI. The very idea that the CIA cannot do things that MI6 can't itself is a strange one. Plus Bond Girls are average and some of them are coming down to Bollywood to build their careers.

    All in all, I think we're looking at the end of this piece of fiction.
     
    YarS and GSLV Mk III like this.
  2. WhyCry

    WhyCry Reaper Love Developers -IT and R&D

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2017
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    384
    Country Flag:
    India
    Daniel Craig is out. Director Sam Mendes is gone for sure.

    @BMD can play the role of James bond. :yey:
     
    Guynextdoor likes this.
  3. Abingdonboy

    Abingdonboy Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2016
    Messages:
    2,755
    Likes Received:
    12,321
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    What are you talking about bro? Why would BREXIT mean no more Bond? When has the UK's decline ever had a resultant effect on the capabilities of Bond as portrayed in the movies? If anything, the faster the UK has declined the more grandiose and more flamboyant the Bond franchise has become, the latest installments portray the UK as a near superpower.

    The Bond franchise is entirely fictional and will remain in such a bubble and disconnected from the geopolitical realities.
     
    Grevion, YarS and GSLV Mk III like this.
  4. YarS

    YarS Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2017
    Messages:
    671
    Likes Received:
    326
    Country Flag:
    Russian Federation
    As for me, Bondiana was a kind of comedy - really Brits know about Russia less that even Yanks. I don't understand modern Anglosaxon humour, but I hope they make it just for lulz. Something like Mr. Bean.

    Requiem.
     
    Abingdonboy, Guynextdoor and Grevion like this.
  5. GSLV Mk III

    GSLV Mk III Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2016
    Messages:
    1,373
    Likes Received:
    1,899
    Country Flag:
    India
    Enjoy this...

    James Bond delusion: Britain’s military power an illusion made from myth, says scholar

    [​IMG]
    Daniel Craig © Luke MacGregor / Reuters

    Britain ignores its dependence on stronger allies and the dilapidated state of its “clapped out” armed forces in favor of a deluded 007 self-image, which came to the fore during the Brexit referendum, according to a leading scholar.
    Writing for the Democratic Audit UK website on Tuesday, University of Warwick academic Dr. Mike Finn gave a savage critique of the James Bond self-delusion which helped fuel the EU referendum ‘Leave’ campaign.

    Brexit bluster

    Finn argued the campaign led by the likes of Michael Gove and Boris Johnson – “who consider themselves to be historians of sorts, articulating Britain’s place in the world in historical terms” – was based on contrived post-war ideas about “British pluck” and a myth of “specialism.

    Their heady “visions of Britain’s past” are “rooted in myth, not history, and this has implications for the decision they are asking us to take,” Finn said.

    Standing alone has been the exception, rather than the norm. Apart from those heroic months in 1940 and early 1941, Britain has faced the world – in war and peace – with allies.

    Since the Harold Macmillan government’s courting of the US since the 1950s – a period in which the UK self-importantly tried to position itself as a sagacious ancient power ready to guide an emergent America – the UK has allowed itself to buy into its own spin.

    This attempt at defining a ‘special relationship’ owed much to British culture and snobbery; Americans might have the money and the power, but they didn’t have the class or the guile. On those scores, nobody did it better than Britain,” he said of the strategy.

    Bond self-delusion

    In popular culture, says Finn, this “escapism” was represented by Britain’s most famous fictional cold warrior: James Bond 007.

    Bond was the living embodiment of Britain’s self-delusion, superior in every way to his American counterparts,” he argued.

    Successive generations of Britons internalized the Bond mythology; Britain might be outnumbered and outgunned, but in the end ‘nobody does it better’.

    Best in world’?

    This is nowhere better demonstrated than in Michael Gove’s attitudes towards the UK’s Armed Forces, Finn claims, arguing that the British military, far from being “the best in the world,” is dilapidated and of debatable utility.

    The fantasy of the “supposedly-supernatural powers” of units like the SAS “are invoked by the tabloids, politicians and pub pundits alike for any crisis Britain may wish to involve itself in,” said Finn.

    Likewise the Royal Air Force (RAF) – “itself part of the ‘British specialism’ narrative” – is put on a pedestal due to the “undeniable heroism against superior numbers in the summer of 1940” yet now “operates clapped-out ancient Tornado airframes.

    He cites one RAF source who, before the December 2015 vote on bombing Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) in Syria, claimed “operations from Cyprus were being conducted with ‘broken jets and tired … fed-up people.’”

    According to Finn, Britain’s heroic mythology also tends to obscure the fact “the two conflicts of Iraq and Afghanistan, followed by subsequent defense cuts, have dealt huge blows to the army’s ability to operate autonomously.

    British sea power fares little better given “today’s Royal Navy has no aircraft carriers and it is questionable whether it can really consider itself a ‘bluewater navy’ given its lack of organic air support and dwindling numbers of escort vessels.

    At least in part this is due to [Conservative-Liberal Democrat] coalition cuts which Gove was a party to,” he adds.

    Facing reality

    Far from being an independent or specialist power, Finn points out that British military planning “has increasingly moved towards models of co-dependency on allies for resources the UK simply cannot provide. But whether one takes a positive or negative view of such dependency, it is the reality.

    For decades, the EU has been an easy target to pass the buck for British politicians keen to abdicate responsibility for their own choices,” he argues of the Brexit vote, adding that the European Union had been too often framed as a “sinister continental conspiracy when it was in fact an elective choice of successive British governments.

    For several generations, Britain’s politicians told themselves – and their publics – comforting lies about Britain’s place in the world.

    Now, for reasons of a petty party squabble, the British public is expected to sort that out for them. The outcome of any Brexit, however, will more than likely be an ever-diminishing return on Britain’s post-war fantasies,” Finn concluded.
     
    Abingdonboy, Guynextdoor and Wolfpack like this.
  6. Guynextdoor

    Guynextdoor BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2010
    Messages:
    4,843
    Likes Received:
    1,737
    No dude, the bond frachise has to be 'refreshed' again and again and again. That's why in the modern Bond series no flying cars and guns that look like cigarette lighters. Daniel Craig has to take a straight beating (no exotic trained snake sent to kill him etc.). It is entirely a British identity and current status has to directly link with the power of the character. Britiain declines, and no one thinks JB will do anything the movie says it will. It really is a 2017 (or whichever year the movie is shot) type setting, not 'in the KGB days we did this' type setting that Smiley's People shows.
     

Share This Page