Tuesday, 17 August 2021

BONDIFICATING: GOLDENEYE and the potential of de-centring franchise protagonists

I started a draft of this post awhile ago, but with the extended wait time until Bond 25's release, and with what we know from the first teaser trailer, now felt like a good time to start pontificating into the digital abyss.



I still have not seen Avengers: Endgame. Having followed reactions online, I was interested in how a sizable chunk of viewers were unhappy with how the characters acted, in contrast with their previous appearances, particularly Black Widow. Watching these reactions reminded me of an idea I’ve been rolling over for a couple years - a way to change the format in which franchise characters are presented.


The key flaw in this thinking is that the nature of franchises now is to keep them going, and - with rare exceptions - it means the character generally starts every story back at 0, with whatever character development they have accrued in the last instalment forgotten. Now these movies have been able to get around this by releasing films at 2-3 a year, with storylines carried over via cameos and end-credit stings. For now, this has worked, but with Disney's focus shifting to their streaming service (accelerated by the pandemic), it is inevitable that Marvel's mega-narrative is going to lose its appeal.


One of the byproducts of Marvel's success is that other studios have tried to emulate its template, and none have been a success: Universal's Dark Universe, Warner Bros' post-Nolan roadmap and King Arthur, to name a few.


The James Bond franchise is rather famous for jumping on trends, and Spectre saw the franchise attempt some late-stage world-building. There is nothing wrong with linking Bond movies: we have had returning supporting characters and callbacks to previous stories (Tracy Bond being the big example).


But what Spectre did was retroactively turn Craig's franchise into an extremely personal arc, where every mission is now reduced to a long-game feud from within his own family. 


If the franchise permanently shifts to the idea that every Bond film has to have an arc.  


Three films released in 2012 illustrate this point:

  • Dredd: while the title character is important, the character arc is instead handled by the rookie he is training, Anderson (Olivia Thirlby)

  • Jack Reacher: Reacher is a superhero, whose own implacability rubs off on the good people he runs into, like Rosamund Pike’s defense attorney Helen Rodin

  • Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation: the story is based around Ethan Hunt’s relationship with Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson), whose story is ultimately the most important part of the film. 

A less well-known example (and the reason for writing this spiel) is Natalya Romanova from the James Bond film GoldenEye.


Let me lay some foundation.


The one overriding question I have around with James Bond is what makes him relevant? 


Under that question, is a more subject I've one: Why am I invested in this series?


I like action movies where I care about the characters - without meaningful characterisation and relationships, the action is meaningless.


It has taken me a long time to realise this. I used to think I was a snob for not sharing other people’s love of Seagal, Van Damme et al. It is just not in my taste - I was spoiled by having my intro to the genre be The Terminator and Die Hard


And the most resonant experiences I have with James Bond have been when the filmmakers gave a crap about the lead woman, primarily OHMSS and Casino Royale.


However, this post is not about either of those films. Instead I want to focus on GoldenEye, and a key element which I believe could be key to the series’ rejuvenation and continuation.


While they rank high for me, OHMSS and Casino Royale are strongly aligned with Bond’s POV. This is not a criticism, but I highlight this because GoldenEye takes a deliberate shift in the opposite direction.


For a good deal of the first act, the viewer follows the story from Natalya’s POV, which re-contextualises some of the familiar Bondian plot moves. 


When the villains steal the super weapon, the filmmakers cross between the villains and Natalya. When the villains kill her colleagues, it carries more emotional weight because we spent time with them. 


There is more suspense in this sequence because not only are we invested in Natalya, Bond is nowhere near her. Bond can be a get-out-jail free card for stakes, and it allows the filmmakers to increase the suspense, and to show Natalya’s intelligence in how she gets out of danger.


While later movies have focussed on developing more complex leading women, none have gone back to this narrative perspective. If the franchise wants to keep progressing the series forward, GoldenEye feels like a solid template to build off of. 


If you are new to this blog, I also co-host a podcast on James Bond, The James Bond Cocktail Hour


You can subscribe on iTunes, or wherever you get your podcasts.

No comments:

Post a Comment