Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Fact and Fiction Behind Bond's Gadgets

Posted by michael on Tue Nov 19, 2002 03:09 PM
from the movie-promotion-entirely-coincidental dept.
bubblegoose writes "With the new 007 movie coming out soon MSNBC is running a story about some of the fact and fiction behind the Bond gadgets."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by grub (11606) <slashdot@grub.net> on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:11PM (#4709515) Homepage Journal

    Troll... James Troll.

  • YAWN! (Score:5, Funny)

    by jmoriarty (179788) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:15PM (#4709573)
    That's nice. Someone please wake me for the article on the Fact and Fiction Behind Bond's Women. (Especially the Fiction!)
    • by IPFreely (47576) <mark@mwiley.org> on Tuesday November 19 2002, @04:11PM (#4710032) Homepage Journal
      ... the special on cable TV (What channel was that anyway?) called "Bond Girls". It was reviews and interviews with most of the women who have played Bond girls over the years.

      It was hosted by Maryam d'Abo [imdb.com] of The Living Daylights. She went around searching for and interviewing women from Ursula Andress (of Dr. No) through Hally Berry.

      It's probably not the show you were looking for (no pr0n here), but it was a good show.

        • Re:What the hell... (Score:5, Informative)

          by Enry (630) <enry@w a y g a .net> on Tuesday November 19 2002, @06:09PM (#4711006) Journal
          Go read "The Spy Who Loved Me". It's a drastic departure for what you expect from Bond. For one thing, it takes place in upstate NY (Lake George area). For another, it is written from the perspective of a Canadian woman who was educated in England and was driving from Canada to Florida and got stuck...in Lake George.

          For those of you that think Fleming wrote most of the movies, it WAS true for a little while. Dr. No, From Russia With Love, and most of Goldfinger were true to the novels. Even Thunderball and On Her Majesty's Secret Service. But most of the rest were either very different from the books, or were short enough to be reduced to the opening sequence (The Living Daylights). Go spend the time to hunt through E-Bay or your local used bookstore to find them. It's worth it.
          • Re:What the hell... (Score:5, Informative)

            by Robotech_Master (14247) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @06:34PM (#4711190) Homepage Journal
            Just be sure you don't end up with a book I picked up in a used bookstore a while ago because it looked amusing: the novelization of The Spy Who Loved Me, written by Maibaum's co-script-writer for that movie. Apparently the filmmakers were uncomfortable about the movie being so different from the book, so they wanted to put something on store shelves that people would at least recognize as similar. Quite bizarre.

            Many people don't realize this, but the fact is, Fleming never intended to write the James Bond books just for the sake of writing them. From the very beginning, he had his eye on lucrative TV/movie adaptations. The very first adaptation was of Casino Royale in 1959, on an otherwise forgettable CBS anthology TV series. It made James Bond American and put him in the CIA. (I saw a tape of that episode in Best Buy years ago, before I knew what it was, and I'm still kicking myself for not buying it.) The rights issues surrounding this early sale led to the subsequent Casino Royale Woody Allen parody.

            When interest arose in making movies from his books (largely because President Kennedy was seen reading Dr. No), Fleming told the Broccolis, in effect, "If you can use the plot, use it. If you can just use the title, use it. I don't care, as long as you pay me."

            If you're wondering how I know this, I took an intersession course in James Bond a couple years ago at my local college (Southwest Missouri State University)'s media department. It was most informative.

            (Did you know that Ian Fleming also did the concept development work for The Man From U.N.C.L.E.? Or that all three leads from the Bond-copycat series The Avengers ended up with roles in James Bond movies?)
  • by Sensitive_Clod (625347) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:19PM (#4709602)
    "CIA-types and geeks love to bicker over that one." i always thought it was the dmca.
  • by Indras (515472) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:19PM (#4709603)
    "The world of James Bond is fiction. Bond wouldn't last 4 minutes as a real spy."

    Spoken like a true jealous wannabe.
  • by unfortunateson (527551) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:19PM (#4709604) Journal
    I'm not a huge fan of Brosnan as Bond, but one of the few high notes of his 007 career is the glee on his face while operating the BMW from the rear seat using his phone as a controller. Too bad there's probably too much concrete in that garage to get a decent cell signal. Could be Bluetooth in addition to cell, neh? I don't recommend that as an option in newer cars: I've seen how my kids drive on the PlayStation.
  • by garoush (111257) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:20PM (#4709610) Homepage
    While Bonde may have the coolest gadgets of them all, the best are those used in the movie: "The Sum of All Fears" where our hero's c-phone and PDA just keeps on working fine in the middle of a radioactive explosion. Can Bonde beat that? I think not -- he is British not an American. Go figure.
  • by infolib (618234) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:22PM (#4709630)
    Now if you're the type who can't help un-suspending your disbelief

    I am not able to flatly deny that I couldn't be the type of person that isn't completely excluded from that set of people. Are you?
  • by joebagodonuts (561066) <cmkrnl&gmail,com> on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:23PM (#4709639) Homepage Journal
    "The girls, you could argue, are just a distraction in James Bond films."

  • by DougJohnson (595893) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:24PM (#4709657)
    A big part of this article is how the movie "Just doesn't get it" which is of course the biggest load.

    Of course the movie gets it. What the commenter doesn't get is that the movie is about fantasy. It's not trying to be a realistic portrayal of life as a spy, it's about selling copies, giving kids a fantastical role model, and being down right entertaining. everyone (well, men) want to be Bond at some point of Bonds career or another, loads of people mimic Bond's speach. I'd say that Hollywood gets it

      • Oh, and the theme tune was a big let down, too. Definitely not in the same category as Bond films of yesteryear. Don't get me wrong, it's a decent film, and worth seeing

        Have you seen many Bond films in the theatre in the past? a BUNCH of them left me with that 'eh, it was okay entertainment' aftertaste. Bond is the perfect 70% demographic franchise. Since it doesn't aleniate by being too intelligent, nor too stupid, it makes a ton of money.

        That said, I want his car...

        ...any of 'em.

  • by 95_gst_al (601102) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:25PM (#4709661) Homepage
    "The movies just don't get it," Melton says. "A spy wants the fewest gadgets possible. Because being caught with a gadget is a death warrant. ... There is no real-world counterpart to a car that shoots with machine guns." Real spies carry as little technology as possible, and draw as little attention to themselves as possible -- hardly 007's style. "The world of James Bond is fiction. Bond wouldn't last 4 minutes as a real spy."
    Like I want to watch a guy running around with microcamera and a pen copying machine stealing important documents and taking photos for 1.5 hours.
  • Art Imitating Life (Score:5, Interesting)

    by pennsol (317791) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:26PM (#4709678) Homepage
    "In that sense, the problem facing Bond filmmakers is similar to the problem faced by software companies, cell phone carriers, and other high-tech firms, who seem to only offer barely noticeable incremental improvements to technologies their consumers already have, rather than radical new products. In this sense, art is imitating life -- or at least the Nasdaq." At This point, And it's been said here on /. many times.. What is left for the younger generations to invent.. it seems that the more the tech sector grows..the less the "real" or "radical" inventions come to be a reality.. or it could just be me...

  • The girls, you could argue, are just a distraction in James Bond films. The gadgets are the real stars, and time and time again, they save Bond's skin.

    Obviously written by a Nerd.

  • by Prince_Ali (614163) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:27PM (#4709683) Journal
    What does he use to keep his hair so tidy? He can be shot at roughly 40 times, jump on a bike, and jump onto a train without messing up his hair the slightest bit.
  • by m.lemur (618095) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:30PM (#4709709)
    mmmm Aston Martin.

    I'm so glad they got rid of the BMWs
  • by Triv (181010) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:32PM (#4709722) Journal
    it's sister-article is much more interesting. It's on how much product placement is featured in the new bond movie, and how some are worried that the franchise is sliding downhill into 2-hour ads.

    This quote cracked me up:

    Norelco's senior vice president of marketing Nina Riley won't reveal how the new Spectra shaver is used in the film except to say it's in a "very pivotal scene."


    The article's here [msnbc.com].

    Triv
    • The movie is being referred to as... Buy Another Day.
    • it's sister-article is much more interesting. It's on how much product placement is featured in the new bond movie,

      Do they talk about how much product placement is featured on the front page of MSN, too? Or are we to assume Norelco paid the movie producers to put their product in the movie, but the movie producers did not pay MSN to put their movie on the front page?
  • by Dareth (47614) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:34PM (#4709743)
    ... all those women he sleeps with?

    Oh yeah... a simple condom I presume.

    "Need a condom?" "No thanks man, I got the lucky condom my dad gave me. He swears it always worked for him."
    • by Jerf (17166) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @04:11PM (#4710031) Journal
      Comedy Central recently re-ran a Sat. Night Live skit on that theme. "Mr. Bond, you have 127 venereal disease, including 18 we haven't identified yet. We've named them after you: Bond 1, Bond 2, Bond 3, etc." **beep beep beep** "Excuse me Mr. Bond, I have to go. Good god, Bond 17 has broken out of its beaker!"

      One of the better such things I've seen, and I'm not generally a Comedy Central fan. I think they actually had Pierce Brosnan on for that show, so it was even one of the real Bonds. ;-)
  • Neat! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:34PM (#4709745)
    In other words, CIA agents rarely carry pellets which allow them to breath under water for extended periods, Earnest said.


    But they do carry them on occasion? That's the coolest thing I have ever heard of.
  • I Submit... (Score:4, Funny)

    by milesbparty (527555) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:36PM (#4709760)
    ...that Inspector Gadget was a MUCH better crime fighter than 007. Ejector seats??? Bah! Once bond gets a hat that doubles as a helicopter, then I'll be impressed!
  • Product Placement (Score:5, Insightful)

    by zuhl (202285) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:37PM (#4709763) Homepage
    I used to enjoy the Bond flicks. They were fun. Connery was witty and all the Bonds are sleek and the women are certainly easy on the eyes.

    But the last few movies seem to have been nothing more than extended commercials for huge corporations. Ericsson, BMW. etc. Convergence with a vengence. Now there never really was much of a plot or meaning in Bond films, but now they border on the ridiculous. Even the action scenes are completely subsumed by the products they are hyping. James Bond remote controling his super-neat-o BMW with his tricked out Ericsson phone.

    I will see the movie and probably drool over Halle Berry, but I will never, ever buy anything that they are "advertising" in the film. Branding a product or company is fine, but I have a problem with it completely subverting a movie. And the Bond francise seems to be ONLY about pushing specific products/gadgets down our collective throats.
    • by sczimme (603413) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:47PM (#4709846)
      Convergence with a vengence.

      Convengence?

      (Yes, I know vengeance was misspelled.)
    • Just 2 points:

      1 - I'm happy to see marketing departments that are actually trying to entertain me. Seems for a long time they were simply bent on insulting me... like that ad where the company tries to fix all it's web problems with a song. I can imagine an Ericsson ad where some soccer mom is desperately searching for her lost child (The Beatles "Help" plays in the background) when AHA, she remembers her little munchkin carries a CELL PHONE!
      I'll take Bond over that any day.

      2 - If the movie does entertain me, I don't care how many product placements are in it. As long as their irrelevant to the enjoyment of the movie. Silly example comes to mind... Superman II wouldn't have been any better or worse had Superman crashed into a Cola sign instead of a Coke sign.
  • XXX (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Russ Nelson (33911) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:40PM (#4709792) Homepage
    You could argue that XXX is today's version of James Bond. They even have a version of Q. I love how he modified the Pontiac with all sorts of gadgets, which were so far from self-explanatory that it needed a user's manual. So he's driving along at whatever speed while she's trying to figure out how to use the car's gadgets.
    -russ
    • Re:XXX (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Robotech_Master (14247) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @06:44PM (#4711277) Homepage Journal
      I think that in some ways, XXX was a parody of James Bond. Just look at the opening sequence where the tuxedo-clad agent meets his end.

      And the scene where XXX and the girl are racing along the highway, and she's trying to figure out the instruction manual seems to me to be an inverse reference back to The Spy Who Loved Me where the female KGB agent was able to use the weapons in the car as expertly as if she'd been trained on them, because she'd stolen the plans for the car the year before.

      That female agent's code name? Triple-X.
  • by CaffeineAddict2001 (518485) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:42PM (#4709807)
    He makes all these awesome gadgets and James uses them in some unintended way and they always break.

    If I were Q, I'd keep the laser\toothbrush and replace it with a real toothbrush.

    James would probably save the day anyway.
  • by Shadow Wrought (586631) <shadow,wrought&gmail,com> on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:42PM (#4709817) Homepage Journal
    I think my favorite product placement happened in Waynes World when Wayne went through about a handful of products saying their slogans.

    "Nuprin- little, yellow, different."

  • by Sabalon (1684) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:49PM (#4709857)
    I don't mind the gadgets getting a bit out of hand, but the crash/fx stuff is getting ridiculous.

    They need to have a little more of Bond using his wits and physical skills to survive a situation, not some gadget and car.

    On Her Majesty's Secret Service and For Your Eyes Only stand out in my mind as some good examples - as does much of The Living Daylights.

    Yeah...the stories are a bit over the top - so what...that's the idea...an over the top agent for an over the top situation...but give us at least some espionage, etc...

    Hell...even A View To A Kill had a) bond undercover, b) surviving by sucking the air out of the tire on the Rolls, c) making a getaway on a fire truck (this I would call part of the using his wits).

    Now adays he'd walk into the horse stables shouting "I'm James Bond...try to stop me...I work for MI6", have a minisub in the trunk of the rolls, and make a getaway in a Harrier while blowing up 30 cars.

    BTW - can't wait for Die Another Day to open :)
    • <quote> Now adays he'd walk into the horse stables shouting "I'm James Bond...try to stop me...I work for MI6", have a minisub in the trunk of the rolls, and make a getaway in a Harrier while blowing up 30 cars. </quote>

      Oops, how did you get Arnold's next movie plot summary?!?

  • by RobertB-DC (622190) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:51PM (#4709870) Homepage Journal
    From the article: Military designers watched Bond films for inspiration, he said, and the films gadgetry helped inspired a prototype called the SmartTruck, a technology-loaded, anti-terrorism personal mover.

    I thought that the idea came from the Combat Ready Recreational Vehicle in the movie Stripes [slashdot.org], didn't it?

    John Winger (Bill Murray): "It's not the speed that's important, I just wish I hadn't drunk all that cough syrup this morning."
  • The Tank (Score:5, Insightful)

    by IPFreely (47576) <mark@mwiley.org> on Tuesday November 19 2002, @03:58PM (#4709923) Homepage Journal
    Of all the gadgets I've seen in all the Bond movies, the only one that really grabbed me and made me say "I want THAT!" was the soviet tank he drove through the streets of Moscow. All the rest was tripe or too unbelieveable to even illicit interest.
  • by Guppy06 (410832) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @04:14PM (#4710055) Journal
    He must be a pretty lousy spy, then.
  • by Rand Race (110288) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @04:49PM (#4710409) Homepage
    Dr. No: Walther PPK (in 1961 it was a gadget) and a geiger counter

    From Russia With Love: Attache case, garotte watch, pager and car phone

    Goldfinger: Aston Martin...


    And by Goldfinger it had started to get simply silly, it went downhill from there... gadget-wise at least. The Masterson sisters on the other hand...

  • by _ph1ux_ (216706) on Tuesday November 19 2002, @04:51PM (#4710429)
    ....is Pussy Galore!