A Homage To 007. Of Sorts.

As the clock struck 0.07 hours on Friday 6^th Oct 2012,, the new Bond theme was released to mixed reviews. It was called a lot of things from a poor man's Shirley Bassey to a poor imitation of Sheryl Crow to a modern day masterpiece. On a personal note, it is what it is cause of that immensely talented phenomenon we all know as Adele. What no one noticed that the world's favorite secret agent celebrated a rather mellow 50th birthday.

Penned by Ian Fleming in the late fifties and adapted to the screen in 1962, Bond has been one of the few things that link the generation of today with that of yesterdays. To pay homage to 007 is no small task. A film career spanning 23 movies, 6 different Bonds(one would like to forget Lazenby, but that cannot be the case. Personally, I thought Moore was worse.), girls, themes, villains, and many more, James Bond has slowly become an integral part of our movie going experience.

My first run-in with Messers Bond was when I was seven having just watched Goldeneye(Rest assured, my mum had my eyes covered whenever Xenia Onatopp showed up on screen) and I was transfixed. This was the guy every kid has ever wanted to be. Be it his gadgets, his women or even his suave, James Bond has been the perfect example of the Alpha Male of today.

And so began my Bond adventure. Tomorrow Never Dies followed. Soon after that was The World Is Not Enough. And so on. During the phase, I went back to the Bonds of old, the ones that had left an everlasting impression on our parents.

From the suave and swagger of Sean Connery to the physicality of Daniel Craig, Bond has evolved since his induction into our world five decades ago. From destroying the villain and saving the world (girl in tow) without breaking into a sweat to being what one would call almost thuggish, brooding and impulsive, Bond has done a Benjamin Button in terms of his mannerisms, something that the majority of audience around the world have come to appreciate.

But we mustn’t forget about the others who’ve contributed siginificantly to his part. George Lazenby, the only other actor not from the British Isles to play 007, was critically applauded for his performance. However, ‘On Her Majesty’s Secret Service tanked severely at the box office, he had a run-in with the producers and promptly stated that he wouldn’t return to play the character ever again, which sent his career spiraling. Connery was brought back a second time before quitting for good and passing on the mantle to his successor, Roger Moore. Under Moore, the series saw a good share of its ups and downs. By the time, ‘A View To A Kill’ was released, Moore was pushing sixty plus and was literally quite pushing it. His movements were lazy, his delivery had gotten pathetic and the man who’d turned Bond into an almost comical character was now making a mockery of the role. The Studio Bosses intervened, Moore was sacked and Timothy Dalton was brought in for what would be the final two feature films for more than a decade, before quitting despite having signed a six film contract with EON. The series later resumed with Pierce Brosnan taking over the role and receiving a lot of acclaim for his portrayal. Brosnan was both enigmatic and thuggish and under him the series went through its most successful phase starting with Goldeneye all the way up to the critically panned Die Another Day. Bond went on a hiatus again for four years returning with Casino Royale with a different James Bond in Daniel Craig, much to the intial annoyance of Brosnan who later went onto declare that he (Craig) was the best Bond in the history of the franchise. Casino Royale was a commercial and a critical success that brought fame and glory to Craig. He also happened to be the only Bond since Connery to not have his career stall whilst playing the famed Mi6 agent, landing films like ‘The Adventures Of Tintin’, ‘The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo’ and so on and so forth. He returned for the mildly entertaining ‘Quantum Of Solace’ and is set once again to reprise his role in ’Skyfall’ which is out this November.

It isn’t always the actor that defines a James Bond movie. There is a lot more to it than just that. The themes , for instance. Ever since ‘Goldfinger’(1964), every Bond movie barring ‘On Her Majesty’s Secret Service’ has had an opening theme song played to the backdrop of silouhettes of naked girls and guns, a  tradition that has been carried on till today. From Shirley Bassey to Nancy Sinatra, From Duran Duran to A-ha, from Sheryl Crow to various contempary artistes such as Madonna(touted to be the worst opening theme song in the history of the franchise), Chris Cornell, Alicia Keys & Jack White to Adele, the series boasts of a number of talented performers lending their voices to the opening sequences, each having their own separate fanbase. This is one tradition that seems highly unlikely to be broken any time soon.

Which brings us to the women. Many will say that their only purpose in the movie is to serve as eye candy. However characters such as Pussy Galore (Goldfinger), Elektra King( The World Is Not Enough) to Vesper Lynd(Casino Royale) have all shown that they aren’t afraid to get their hands dirty. All these characters have created their own little niche in history, one that will not be overlooked or forgotten anytime soon. Not to forget Judi Dench   who some feel, was a better ‘M’as Bernard Lee ever was. However I must sing to the tune of the crowd and admit that Denise Richards is perhaps the worst of the lot. Those who have watched the World Is Not Enough will understand what I mean.

Sadly enough, one always forgets poor Mrs. Moneypenny.

The villains form a very integral part of Bond. They’ve been portrayed by a number of talented actors each delivering memorable performances.  Gert Frobe(Goldfinger), Christopher Lee(The Man With The Golden Gun),  Charles Grey(Diamonds Are Forever), etc have all left indelible marks on their respective works with their performances. In a recent poll, Frobe was adjudged as the Best Bond villain of all time for his portrayal  of Auric Goldfinger. There have also been a couple of highly erratic performances namely Toby Stephens as Gustav Graves from Die Another Day.

What would Bond be without his gadgets? Every Bond film has had its fair share of gadgets ranging from exploding pens to highly customized Aston Martins each designed by the ingenious Q,( portrayed by Desmond Llewelyn for the better half of four decades, John Cleese and more recently Ben Whishaw). These gadgets have always had a significant part to play in any of the films. They took a bit of a sabbatical in the Craig era, but judging by the promos of the latest film they seem to be making a comeback of sorts.

Be it financial crises or destroyed sets (Pinewood Studios), James Bond has seen it all and has somehow managed to stand his ground. He may not be around forever,  but as long as the world needs him, Britain’s top agent will always be there sitting at a Baccarat table, sipping on his Vodka Martini planning and waiting for his next adventure.

Bollywood: View From A Bin.

Bollywood has mutated since its inception into our world. What started off so promisingly in the earlier half of the twentieth century has now sunk to depths we didnt know existed. We dish out over 500 films a year, and only a good 20 of them are worth watching. 

But then again, can you blame the industry? They dish out and we accept.For example, an upcoming script writer approached an industry bigwig with a script he'd painstakingly written for the last two years. The producer gave one look at it and said, 'accha hai. Ek item number aur ek sex scene dalo, picture chalega(the concept is good. Just throw in a sex scene and a dance number and your movie will run).

For the better half of the decade now the industry has adopted the tactic of 'stars and sex sells'. Which is sadly true. There is no disrespect directed to the stars, but it's time they pulled their head out of the water and realize what they're doing.

You've got Akshay Kumar who does 4 movies a year on an average. Out of that one is barely tolerable while the others can only fairly be described as cringe worthy. You've got Salman Khan who's adopted the south Indian hero's role with aplomb and that has set the cash registers ringing and has caused his stock to rise simultaneously.  SRK who once was deemed untouchable seems to have lost that air of invincibility that has surrounded him for the better part of two decades. It started long before Ra.One was even conceived (revert back to OSO in 2007, I hated that movie) and Ra.one was just an eye opener to the world to see to what depths that the king has fallen. Aamir Khan does one maybe two films a year, but thanks to a brilliant marketing strategy, you realize you've been duped a good two months after you've viewed whatever body of work he's been in. (Read SMJ. Looked scripted right from the start.) you've got Ranbir Kapoor who with an exception here and there his movies are mainly with debutant actresses. He's a terrific actor no

Doubt  and his choice of films are refreshingly different for which i applaud him,but he's also extremely cunning. Majority of his movies are with people who can't act to save their lives(read Fakhri(my word, ducks could've played her role better ), Padmasee, Kapoor!, etc etc) who are so bad that they make him look the Daniel Day-Lewis of Bollywood. Which he isn't, but he's certainly one of the best we have. Thank you, Chintuji.

The problem lies not in the industry but on the public on whom it thrives. In a country like ours the crowd would rather watch a superstar beat up sixty thugs under a hundred and twenty seconds rather than w sit through a film that makes you sit down and think. For example take SLB. I was one of the few who actually thought Saawariya was worth a watch. Heck, I liked it better than OSO. It was horribly paced yes, but the art direction was top notch and the acting wasn't stupendously bad either. Maybe I'm a sucker for tragic movies but I enjoyed what I saw. Guzaarish was SLB showing the world they he was up there with the best when it comes to showcasing opulence on screen. But somewhere along the way he forgot that you need a story for the film to run. He was so obsessed with how beautiful he wanted his film to be, that he ended up dishing a beautiful but an utterly soulless film about a quadriplegic magician. The audience doesn't give two farts about art direction. They'd rather see buxom beauties shake their assets on screen with the hero gawking awkwardly. SLB sold out, produced Rowdy Rathore(another piece of crap from the Haus Of Kumar) and that ran into a 100 Crores worth of collections at the BO. Sad really.

Which brings me to award ceremonies. There was a time when these so called 'award shows' were telecast live. They're meant to be watched live. It's a completely different experience. Good performances were appreciated, good films were appreciated and the humor didn't really involve men dressed as transvestites or poking fun at the gay community. Take the Oscars for example or even the Globes. There isn't a single moment where you feel it's been scripted. For example two years ago, Ricky Gervais took to the stage at the Golden Globes and ripped into the who's who of hollywood without batting an eyelid. When it comes to our industry, we get a sliced, diced,

Coupled with ample sound and visual

Effects end product that we lap up without a care in the world. Honestly, we'd rather not watch Sonam Kapoor dancing pathetically on stage with soft light emitting from her lady parts. It's bad enough watching her act let alone dance. And how a movie like Housefull can win Best Picture is beyond me.  I've tried finding a reason to no avail.

Another sad fact is that directors who make good, thought provoking cinema are left in the lurch.  Only in an industry like ours can Anees Bazmee be more successful than a Sudhir Mishra or Rituparno Ghosh. The latter isn't exactly Bollywood, but you get my drift. For those of you who don't understand, it's like saying that the Farrelly Brothers are better than Martin Scorcese. (actually, the Farrelly Brothers shouldn't be compared to Bazmee. No one should be compared to Bazmee. The man is in a league of his own. I will never understand his mentality.)

For those of you who feel that I lean a lot more  to the Indian Cinema of old, I must correct you. All I mean to say, that back in the day,  the movies that were being churned out had a lot more interesting premises than the ones we have to deal with. You had Pyaasa, kaagaz ke phool,  Mughal-e-azam and even a comedy like Jaane Bhi Do Yaaron. These are all part of a wonderful collection of films, an era that we, as things stand will not ever be part of again. But then again, we've been on the decline since the mid eighties so we can't really blame the present crop of directors. It's time people woke up and realized that Bollywood isn't going to change for us. As long as our mentalities remain the same, people like Anees*#&(& Bazmee and Sajid Khan shall continue to rule and plunge our beloved industry further and further into the darkness to its impending doom.

P.S: how did Housefull win Best Picture?? How?? I need to know!