The Living Daylights - Dir. John Glen (The Bond Project #15)

The Living Daylights (1987)

Dir: John Glen

Time for a New Bond

By Jay Maronde

                 

                Everyone knew it was bound to happen at some point. Roger Moore was super old, and while Moore will forever claim that he “retired,” I’m sure the official story will always be that Cubby Broccoli fired his old dinosaur ass. So while The Living Daylights was still in pre-production, the Broccolis began the search for a new Bond—and the beginning of a new era for the franchise. This Bond search could easily be the most perilous and interesting one yet as many actors were tested, including a man who would eventually become Bond (Pierce Brosnan),  a man who would eventually become a Bond villain (Sean Bean in 1995’s GoldenEye), and even Mel Gibson.

                The drama of this movie began long before filming. As already mentioned numerous actors were screen tested in a very public search for the new Bond. The producers eventually cast Timothy Dalton as Bond.  While Dalton was easily one of their top choices, he was certainly not number one, as Cubby Broccoli originally offered the role to Brosnan after 3 days of screen testing. These screen tests proved interesting and actually very fruitful in several ways.

First, the original actress hired to screen test against the Bonds was Maryam d’Abo. D’abo would eventually also get the lead female role in the film, as she impressed the director and producers so much with her performance that they decided she would be perfect for the role of the Czech cellist Kara Milovy.  Second, the producers were quite sure that they wanted Brosnan as Bond, so they attempted to hire him, but that’s when the real drama started. Pierce Brosnan had been the eponymous star of the 80’s detective television program Remington Steele.  The show had been failing in the ratings for a long time and had been officially canceled when Cubby Broccoli offered Brosnan the role of Bond in this film. Brosnan committed, and then the story leaked to the press. When the world caught word that Remington Steele would be James Bond, a tremendous amount of interest was again sparked in the show, and on the last possible day, NBC utilized a contractual loop hole to un-cancel and re-hire Brosnan as Remington Steele. NBC was super excited about this turn of events and offered to completely rearrange their shooting schedule to accommodate the Bond Production. Unfortunately, Cubby Broccoli was infuriated by this scenario and famously declared that “James Bond will not be Remington Steele and Remington Steele will not be James Bond!”

Brosnan’s Bond contract was canceled, and Timothy Dalton as the #2 was again approached. He initially didn’t want to do the film at all but was eventually enticed and so filming began with a new Bond playing a new type of Bond. And Dalton was, definitely, a new type of Bond. He strayed away from Roger Moore’s “all suave, all the time” approach, and played the role as more of an “angry assassin” type. He smokes cigs like a champ, he’s much younger, and looks great doing a lot of his own stunts. Dalton’s more focused action-packed Bond is shown even in the pre-titles sequence, which happens to be one of my favorites in the series.

As the movie opens, 002, 004 and 007 are all being briefed by M that they will be parachuting out of a plane and trying to infiltrate the British radar station at the rock of Gibraltar (actual British military outposts at Gibraltar were used in the filming, making for some very excellent footage). The other two agents were chosen because they bore slight resemblances to former Bonds Moore and Lazenby. So, the three men jump out of the plane and begin their assault. One of the agents is immediately eliminated by a patrolman, and the other is murdered by a spy enemy. Bond is the last man standing and not only manages to catch up with and explode the henchman (in a fantastic scene where Dalton performed his own highly dangerous stunts on top of a jeep) but also parachute safely into the arms of a beautiful woman. All and all, many people criticized Dalton’s performance as Bond, but personally I think he’s way better than alright. He may not be all suave and goofy as Roger Moore, and he definitely has really bad poofy 1980’s hair, but Dalton is a very believable Bond and his willingness to do his own stunts really make the films that much better than the entire Roger Moore section of the Canon.

                Much like ole Timmy Dalton’s performance, the rest of The Living Daylights is not so bad, and while Timmy suffers from stupid hair the movie features a little bit of a silly plot, I say that the plot is only a little bit silly, and the reason is because the truth is almost always stranger than fiction and The Living Daylights is somewhat based on a true story.

The true story that the film is based on is basically the defection and subsequent “re-defection” of real life Russian General Vitaly Yurcheko. The character in the film is called General Georgi Koskov, and he is played very well, but rather effeminately, by classic actor Jeroen Krabbé. In the movie, Bond helps Koskov to defect, and he is then “kidnapped” from an MI6 safe house. What the viewer doesn’t learn till much later on is that Koskov’s kidnapping was completely staged so that he could run off with his drug dealing ally and co-villain Brad Whitaker. Whitaker is played famously by one Joe Don Baker, who is one of only three people to appear in the James Bond Franchise as both a villain and an ally (he returns in GoldenEye and Tomorrow Never Dies as James Bond’s American CIA contact). His performance in this movie almost reminds me of the type of silly southern sheriff character that the franchise had done away with during the Roger Moore era. Shockingly it works well in this film, as he is playing a rogue American West Point dropout now looking for the drug deal of a lifetime, and his reckless cowboy attitude only enhances his performance. These two may not be the most macho, or wealthy, or even most serious Bond Villains of all time—but they are certainly shiesty. Their goal in the film is to take money given to them as a down payment for an arms deal with the Russians and spend it in Afghanistan on Dope (of course), then sell the dope in the western market making a tremendous profit and using said profit to deliver to the Russians their promised guns. The complication comes in that they need to remove the Russian General Pushkin (the new head of the KGB, because in real life the actor who had been playing General Gogol was in fact in poor health, and unable to act in such a substantial role) because Pushkin has realized that they are scam artists and wants Russia’s money back. The whole defection is a scam to get Bond to kill Pushkin (who is played wonderfully by a young John Rhys-Davies*) and therefore free up this goof troop of villains to go on with their dope deal. Bond sees right through all of this and fakes Pushkin’s death before being captured by the villains and taken to Afghanistan (note to super villains: if you are doing crime on the other side of the world, it is best NOT to bring James Bond with you.) Bond escapes the airbase, unites with the Mujahedeen, storms back to the villains, steals their airplane full of dope and eliminates their best henchmen. In what could be some of the best stunt work in the entire franchise, Bond and the henchman fight it out on the back of a cargo net full of dope that is hanging out the cargo door of an airborne AC130.

                This movie also contains two of my favorite scenes in the entire franchise. First, at Q branch headquarters we not only meet the New MoneyPenny (played by a very sexy-librarian-looking Caroline Bliss) but we also see a new device that Q “has been developing for the Americans…we call it a Ghetto Blaster.” The device is really a shoulder mounted rocket launcher disguised as a standard 1980’s boom box. The really interesting trivia about this scene (besides that I think “ghetto blaster” is a super awesome name) is that while filming this scene, Prince Charles happened to be touring EON studios that day, and was actually the person who fired the rocket we see whizzing across the lab.

While on the topic of Q branch, I would be remiss not to mention that James Bond is back behind the wheel of an Aston Martin.  This particular Aston Martin is the V8 Vantage, and it is definitely rapper Rick Ross’s favorite Aston, as it’s the one he features in his music video for his chart-topping hit “Aston Martin Music.” But this particular Aston could easily be one of my favorites too, as Q branch has it souped-up with such a wide and spectacular array of gizmos that the viewer almost wants to cry when Bond totals and then self-destructs the vehicle.

My other favorite scene in this movie actually comes only moments after the Aston explodes, as Bond and Kara Milovy (played, as mentioned above, by the very beautiful Maryam d’Abo) still need to escape from pursuing villains. Bond and Milovy escape from the villains by sledding across the border on the cello’s case, and telling the awestruck border guards that, “We have nothing to declare. Only a cello.” In real life, this scene almost didn’t happen as when director John Glen originally pitched the idea the producers thought it would be unfeasible and possibly stupid-looking. To prove them wrong, Glen himself found an empty cello case and actually showed the producers how feasible/cool-looking this stunt would be. Dalton and d’Abo both look great in this scene which both actors really performed themselves (i.e. without the assistance of stuntpersons). I should also take this moment to note that d’Abo was a fantastic casting in this film, as she and Bond’s escape from the Soviet Block is remarkably reminiscent of From Russia with Love, and d’Abo is a great and even better looking substitute for that film’s lead actress, the eternally lovely Daniella Bianchi.

                With this film the James Bond franchise managed to introduce yet another Bond to the Canon, which I feel is extremely important to the series as a whole, because James Bond is so epic that he is no longer any one actor, he’s a character who almost every living male actor wishes he could be. Further, while many complain of Timmy Dalton’s performance, I think his new “colder” Bond is great. It is interesting to note that this film was written with the silly suave of Roger Moore in mind, and as such does not “comply” with Dalton’s hard-nosed Bond as much as his other appearance as Bond. The film is certainly a quality entry into the series and definitely worth a viewing.

 *Another veteran of the Indiana Jones franchise (playing Sallah in Raiders and Last Crusade), further developing some kind of vague connection between the two. – JK

James Bond 007: From Russia, With Love - Dir. Terence Young

The Best Bond?
by Jay Maronde

James Bond wasn’t born--he’s a fictional character.  In fact, as I’ve already discussed in previous articles, he didn’t even originally appear in films, he was a character of literature, and From Russia With Love wasn’t even his first appearance; but for many people, From Russia, With Love defines the epitome of Bond. FRWL is consistently rated by both professional and amateur interweb critics as the “Best Bond” or “Highest Rated Bond” or “The ‘classic’ Bond” for numerous reasons: not necessarily for the plot (convoluted), nor the actors (because one of the female leads was (hopefully) cast for her atrocious hideousness), but instead for its classic Bond conventions (which weren’t the classic Bond ‘things’ when the movie was released, merely new directions the burgeoning franchise had chosen to take).  However, the rosy goggled 20/20 vision of hindsight has since made those producers in 1963 seem like geniuses with some sort of super-secret Q branch future vision machine.

            Speaking of Q branch: let us start right there. From Russia With Love was the first movie to have real James Bond Gadgets, and the first appearance of one Desmond Llewelyn (who still holds the record for most appearances in Bond Films, appearing in every film until Bond19 (The World is Not Enough)).  Credited only as Boothroyd, (in later films referred to only as Q), Bond and "Q" meet early in the film for their equipment briefing, a scene which becomes standard in all Bond films up through Bond20 (Die Another Day) and Q presents Bond with a rather interesting piece of luggage. While the briefcase is certainly no x-ray specs or invisible Aston Martin it definitely is a very cool package that not only packs quite the wallop, but also foreshadows many of Bond’s exciting exploits ahead.  The movie also contains a scene with a helicopter; making this the first Bond Film to include a helicopter, even though every Bond movie since has included at least one scene with a helicopter, and I believe this particular scene inspired one Steven Spielberg in his filming of Sean Connery disabling the plane in Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade.

              Bond’s Quartermaster briefing isn’t the only convention defined and typified by this film--so much of “classic” Bond franchise originates with this film. First-off we notice that there is now a scene before the opening credits. This opening pre-credits scene at the time was a new concept, and while now we almost take this idea for granted, it was groundbreaking at the time. Further, From Russia With Love was the first Bond film to have a theme song made just for the film. Again it seems obvious to us now that a movie needs a theme song, but in 1963 these producers were breaking new ground. Also while this seems like a rather obvious idea now, FRWL was one of the first films ever to include a stylized opening credits sequence.

              Another huge Bond convention that started with From Russia With Love was Bond's proclivity to jet-set to numerous exotic locales during the course of his mission (or the course of the film).  Bond begins the movie in Britain, as almost always, but during the course of the film, jaunts first to Istanbul, where the Cold War isn’t so cold, and the work of a spy involves an amazing and gorgeous scene of canoeing through the underground reservoir of the Emperor Constantine, followed by peering into the Russian Consulate with a re-purposed Submarine Periscope. After a brief stay at a Gypsy camp, (with a tremendous girl fight/ belly dancing / gun battle scene that could easily be a defining moment in any movie) Bond really gets to business. He seduces / manipulates / cavorts with a Russian file clerk, and later escapes from Turkey with her, and a stolen Russian Lektor Decoding machine, via the Orient Express. Eluding the Russians to make it on to the train, and then cleverly dealing with a SPECTRE agent who poses as an ally but exposes his true criminal nature by “ordering red wine with Fish,” Bond escapes with the girl from the train, and then from the helicopter, and then from a regatta of enemy boats, all while making his way towards safe territory in Venice. After watching this film one definitely gets the feeling like they have gone on a mini European vacation, a sensation that audiences have always loved, and as such the producers have always kept Agent 007 moving through as many exotic locations in the films as possible.

                Perhaps the most compelling plot facet established by FRWL is the fictional James Bond’s place in the very non-fictional Cold War. It has become so ingrained in our collective unconscious that Bond has always been a crusader for “our side” that without serious thought the average viewer could easily assume that the “bad guys” are the Commies in almost any or all of the early Bond films. In reality, (or Bond’s reality anyways) the “bad guy” is almost always SPECTRE. However at the time when the film was made you have to look at history to grasp the full gravity of what the film meant to the free world. The year was 1963, Dr. No had been a smashing success, and the producers had been green-lighted to begin work on the sophomore film in an extremely popular franchise. JFK was in office and he had been a huge fan of the first film, so when the producers began to debate which novel they should bring to life next for the silver screen, the fact the President’s favorite Bond novel was From Russia With Love, the decision became very easy. Tragically, From Russia With Love would be the last film that JFK screened in the White House theatre before leaving for Dallas. 

                From Russia With Love is without a doubt an outstanding Bond Classic, with so many memorable scenes one could easily dub it the “Citizen Kane” of the James Bond franchise. Director Terence Young easily outdoes his original film. Daniela Bianchi while not the most gorgeous in the long litany of Bond Girls (certainly no comparison to Ursula Andress) portrays an extremely believable Tatiana as the lead female and Sean Connery seems to grow into his Bond tuxedo almost perfectly. In the very last moments of the film, the final James Bond convention which we have all grown to know and love, is introduced, and so much like this series of reviews: “James Bond will return in Goldfinger.”

Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress: Trust No One, Dr. Jones (The 50/50 Rule)

For my sixth column for BLS Advocate, I decided to write about an issue that's been bothering me a lot this year - the problem of un-cool classmates.  This column is a brief explanation of the 50/50 Rule.  For those that have not heard me speak of it, the 50/50 Rule is the theory that 50% of law students (and lawyers) are cool, and the other 50% are not.  Please note this is a 1,029 word post, thus 279 words longer than my cap allows - and this is by no means a comprehensive exploration of the topic.  

                On the first day of my preliminary “introduction to the law” class last year, our instructor asked us, in the first minute, if we knew any good lawyer jokes.  Half a dozen classmates offered their best, and I put my head down in shame.  Really?  This was the way we were going to start law school?  After about a year, it made sense to me. 

                Your classmates are not here because they want to be your friend.  Your classmates are here because they happen to be at the same school where they hope to earn a J.D.  Of course, many of us have similar reasons for coming (*cough*scholarship*cough*) but many of us have divergent interests.

                Brooklyn Law School prides itself upon its students’ commitment to public service, and indeed there is a very high percentage of students that are members of BLSPI, that participate in Pro Bono Projects, that become involved in other clubs, and that generally have no problem volunteering, provided it is not such a burden that it causes other parts of their lives to suffer. 

                I made the point earlier, in my application for a BLSPI fellowship, that about 50% of the students at BLS are cool, and the other 50% are un-cool.  I did not get offered an interview.  This apparently has nothing to do with my commitment to public interest – but I promise to show you that it does.

                 What makes someone a “cool” BLS student?  First, they are not snobby in who they talk to.  You know what I am talking about here – you have about 100 classmates in your “big” classes, and you may sit next to someone for an entire semester and barely speak a word to each other.  It’s possible you’re both just shy (indeed, this was the case for me my first year) but it’s also possible one of you is a member of the “un-cool contingent.”  Members in this class look upon students that they consider unfocused, lazy, stupid, wasted, or “unclean” in some other way and decide that it is not in their best interests to associate with this person.  This is what I mean when I say that the social life of law school is like a weird cross between the pains of high school cliquery and the freedom of experimentation that college nurtures—hearing new ideas, having an open mind, and making friends with people that you never might have associated with in high school.

                Law school is a reversion backwards from college.  Though we are still interested in hearing new ideas, supposedly, finding students with an “open mind” is more difficult, because by now many of us consider ourselves “informed, responsible adults” who choose our friends wisely and have a firmly set stance on the issues that matter to us.  Public interest students clique around with other public interest students (though they are, actually, really nice…), bankruptcy law students clique around with other bankruptcy law students (and we are the coolest of the cool), IP students clique around with other IP students, public defenders hang out with public defenders and prosecutors hang out with prosecutors.  Of course, reality is hardly so simple – but my point is that, sometimes a law student’s area of focus will affect their personality to a degree that renders them incapable of friendship with non-like-minded individuals.

                The second factor that makes a BLS student “cool” is not judging someone for being cheap.  Some of us have rich parents that float us money and we can go clubbing and buy fancy shoes and dresses and suits and look like a million bucks at the Barrister’s Ball – but some of us are nearing 30 (or older) and feel a bit, oh, childish relying on our parents for so much.  Whether it be pride or necessity, our savings accounts are mostly depleted, we have no income, we carry significant debt, and it’s important that we “spend like law students” and not like lawyers.  This may seem like a petty complaint but I do not think I am the only one who feels left out when they miss out on a birthday party because people would rather have it at a bar than their house.  I am preaching at the top of my lungs from this soapbox: HAVE MORE HOUSE PARTIES, PEOPLE!

                Finally, if law students are un-cool, part of the problem is that lawyers are un-cool.  The 50/50 rule is in effect not only for law students, but also for lawyers.  Lawyers who lie, tell their secretary to tell callers that “they’re in a meeting” when it’s convenient to do so, or act like they’re an expert in the ways of the world and refuse to waste their time giving a thorough explanation of why this argument is going to work and that argument will not, may be considered un-cool.  Lawyers that rent out a shoddy house in clear violation of the Implied Warranty of Habitability and tell the tenants that, if they don’t like that the stairway to the basement has no railing, “Tough.”  Un-Cool.  Professors that talk for 90% of class time because really, WE HAVE SO MUCH MATERIAL TO COVER, and really just like to hear their own voice, and thereby intimidate students to speak with them for extra help, creating an unfair subconscious exam handicap, are un-cool.

                My hope is that this “problem” will be remedied by cold, hard experience in the real world.  Once you get out there, and you realize that really, you are not that important, maybe you go broke once or twice, maybe you move back in with your family, maybe you go through a serious depressive episode – maybe then you’ll wake up and realize it’s better to be compassionate (cool) than fiercely self-interested (un-cool).

Christopher J. Knorps is a 2L at Brooklyn Law School.  He enjoys studying bankruptcy law and finds the psychology of human emotions fascinating.  Please join him in such explorations at the Open Mic on Thursday April 5, at Geraldo’s, from 7:00 – 10:00.  Please e-mail him at Christopher.knorps@brooklaw.edu if you are interested in performing.