How has the Franchise Adapted Over the Last Five Decades in Order to Remain One of the Most Successful Film Series of All Time?

Name: Latham Wright Extended Essay Subject Area: Film Word Count: 3988 Candidate Number: 000046-176 International School Manila Session: 2013

Page 1 of 20 Abstract: This essay investigates how the James Bond film series has adapted to fit the changing world and appeal to the expectations of the modern audience through changes in production, story and portrayal of characters. This investigation focuses on four aspects of the Bond franchise that have adapted over the years: the role of women, the actors, production techniques, and technology. To investigate the roles of women will analysed with the gaze theory, showing that in the James Bond films women have gone from being simply elements of the male gaze, to a sidekick of Bond. The range of actors is the most obvious change in the franchise; however, the resulting change that each actor brought to the series will be explored. Film production has changed in general, however this investigation looks at how this change has altered the portrayal of Bond himself and kept the interest of its worldwide audience. Technology has not only changed the production of the film but the story as well. The stories have had to adapt from ’s original texts to be relevant to the era the film was made in. Other action franchises appeared after James Bond and have aimed at challenging his status as the number one action series. Yet, by managing all of aspects mentioned in this essay, the Bond series has remained the most successful action franchise of all time. I have watched many Bond films focusing on those made at the beginning and end of decades including the newest film SkyFall, released 2012. I have also watched many documentaries about the making of the James Bond films along with the bonus DVD’s special features. I purchased many books about the actors and women of the Bond franchise and obtained much of the remainder of my research from online resources.

Word Count: 300

Page 2 of 20 Table of Contents

Research Question------4

Thesis------4

Introduction------4

The Changing Roles of Women------4

The Many Faces of Bond------6

James Bond’s Fancy Gadgets------8

Changes in Production------10

Screenwriting and Adaptation------11

Bond’s Competitors------12

Conclusion------13

List of Figures------14

Appendices------15

Appendix A------15

Appendix B------16

Works Cited------17

Page 3 of 20

How has the James Bond Franchise Adapted Over the Last Five Decades in Order to Remain One of the Most Successful Film Series of All Time?

Thesis: The James Bond franchise has made many changes over the last 50 years in order to continue being a successful action franchise. Many aspects of history and technology have changed the films’ production, plot and characters. James Bond is a franchise ahead of its time, adapting its production to keep the interest of a worldwide audience.

Introduction: In 1952 Ian Fleming wrote , a book about a MI6 agent with a license to kill. His character was based on several men known by Fleming during the war and a little of his own experiences. He created a witty, charming action hero who was to become one of the most iconic characters of film history. The book was the first of its kind, filled with humor and action and received excellent reviews. In 1954, director and producer, Gregory Ratoff bought the rights to make a TV adaptation of James Bond on CBS. The first episode of this series failed to attract sufficient viewers and for this reason production of new shows was canceled.1 James Bond remained off the screen until the early 1960’s when producers Albert Broccoli and picked up the story to create the first ever Bond feature film, Dr. No and was the beginning of the James Bond film franchise. Today the films have just celebrated their 50th anniversary, and are still going strong as the second highest grossing film franchise after Harry Potter.2 In this essay I will be investigating how the franchise adapted and changed to keep the greatest spy in film history alive. This success is evident by the fact that the films have been around for over 50 years, and by the box office profits trend for each film bringing in more than the last. The James Bond franchise has been successful and yet not many question how it was able to last so long without becoming repetitive or losing the interest of the audience.3 The evolving aspects under investigation are the role of women, the actors playing the lead role, the use of technology, production, and competition with other franchises; all showing how James Bond has been able to continually stay ahead of it’s time to remain successful.

The Changing Roles of Women: Women play a huge role in the Bond films. They have been Bond’s lovers, enemies and even his boss. As women’s roles changed in the real world, they needed to change in the Bond films as well to become more independent and less of a stereotypical femme fatal in cinema.4 "Especially in the last 15 to 20 years, there's been a marked shift in their [Bond Girls] greater involvement in the

1 ITV. South Bank Show. 2008. 2 RSS. The 10 Most Successful Action Movie Franchises Ever at the Box Office. 2011. 3 The Numbers. The Box Office History for James Bond Movies. 2013. 4 Smelika, Anneke. Feminist Film Theory. 2012.

Page 4 of 20 action of the story line and also the motivation for Bond, especially Daniel Craig's Bond", Karen Tongson, an English and Gender Professor at the University of Southern California.5 A large part of Dr. No’s success is credited to Ursula Andress’s iconic appearance in the film, which many believe to be the greatest moment in Bond history. Ursula first appears walking out of the ocean in a white bikini.6 Albert Brocoli said, “I think, obviously, at that time, Ursula’s whole look was very different from the women that had come before [in film]. It was a very athletic, very strong, physical look. She meant business, and she is so stunningly beautiful.”6 As the first ever Bond girl, she set the future standard for what a Bond girl should be. The Bond girls in the 60’s were very consistent with Fleming’s novels. Tongson futher comments that, "Initially, Bond girls were part of the aesthetic of the series. They had more transient roles."6 They were purely there at Bond’s disposal and for the gaze of the men watching the films with barely any true purpose in the plot. In the feminist film theory of gaze, the male gaze is defined as the pleasure of viewing of something, often treating women as objects to be looked at.7 Alfred Hitchcock is well known for his objectified gaze on women in his films. Hitchcock used lighting and colours to make the beauty of the actress stand out.8 Similar techniques were mostly used in the Bond films because of how Fleming portrayed them, such as Andress’s dramatic emergence from the water in Dr. No, where she became a direct object of Bond’s and the male audience’s gaze. The female character names such as Honey Ryder and Pussy Galore were not there to be taken seriously, reflecting how the audience was meant to perceive them. They were simply sex symbols of their day.6 In some of the films, Bond went through 3 girls in the first half of the film, showing how disposable they were considered at that time. In the early 70’s the role of women regressed as they became less more obedient. Often they got in the way, causing more problems for Bond. They were damsels in distress, doing nothing for themselves, very similar to most women in Hollywood films at the time. Instead of Bond’s earlier charming tactics, he now forced them to do what he wanted. Bond often tricked them or pushed them into having sexual relations with him.9 By the mid 70’s, Albert Broccoli tried to adapt the films in order to reflect the changing roles of women. “The 70’s was a new time, women were beginning to assert themselves”, continues Broccoli.6 By the late 70’s women were fighting for more rights and were given a larger role in the Bond films in recognition of this. The 1979 film, Moonraker, was the first ever Bond film where the woman was just as capable as Bond. A Bond girl was now no longer primarily a subject of the male gaze; she was a capable aid to Bond and a vital part of the films’ stories. In the 80’s Bond girls were tough, rebelled against Bond and their bodies were rarely shown off.6 After the production of the first Bond film of the 1990’s, , made the filmmakers re-evaluate the image of the Bond girl. At that point they had both kinds of girls; incapable but beautiful, and strong and

5 Daily Herald. Role of Women Evolves during 50 years of James Bond Films. 2012. 6 D’Abo, Maryam. Bond Girls Are Forever. Book. 2003. 7 Paul, S. K. Introduction to Elements of Gaze Theory. 2008. 8 Mulvey, Lara. Visual Pleasure in Narrative Cinema. 9 Cork, John and D’Abo Maryam. Bond Girls Are Forever. Documentary. 2002.

Page 5 of 20 resistant to Bond’s charm. They decided that those stereotypes along with the term “Bond Girl”, were unsophisticated for their time. They needed more “Bond Women”, not girls. A good example of a “Bond woman” was Halle Berry. Berry appears in the beginning of Die Another Day (2002) wearing a very similar bikini to Ursula Andress’s in Dr. No, showing off her body, while at the same time outwitting Bond. Her character was a element of the new Bond girl/woman formula: a woman that appeals to the male gaze but can fight for herself and is not dependent on Bond.6 The trend of the changing roles of women in the films clearly shows that the franchise had to adapt to not be considered sexist. Because women are such an important part of the Bond films, not adapting to the roles of women in society would have meant the movies would have become outdated.

Fig. 1- Halle Berry (left) and Ursula Andress (right) making their entrance to the films. Halle Berry’s costume is homage to Andress’s from 1962. (Halle Berry vs. Ursula Andress. 2008.)

The Many Faces of Bond: One of the most obvious changes to the James Bond movies over the years has been the different actors that portray him. Each actor has played him differently, showing a lighter or darker side of Bond. But how have they changed the franchise? And why did the filmmakers choose these actors, who each bring their own interpretation of Bond? Each generation of James Bond viewers has an actor they believe to be “the” James Bond, and are fast to criticize the next Bond for not living up to the last. However, the filmmakers insightfully choose the actors so that the franchise can evolve and appeal to a changing audience.10 Although often it’s the writing that changes Bond’s character, the producers and writers didn’t change the characters style until a new Bond actor was hired, as an actor’s style causes certain aspect of Bond to be developed such as the humorous charm of Pierce Brosnan.10

10 Desowitz, Bill. James Bond Unmasked. 2012.

Page 6 of 20 Producers Saltzman and Broccoli saw great potential in the James Bond character, but needed an actor that would fit the character and present a future for the franchise. Sean Connery, a Scottish TV actor was selected as he was a perfect fit for the physical description of Fleming’s Bond as he was written. “Sean did fit physically, better than any of them, the description of Bond by Fleming: lean, dark, sardonically looking”, said director Terence Young. However, capturing the personality was a challenge for any actor as it was undefined on camera. As the first James Bond, Sean Connery set up guidelines on how Bond would be played and every Bond since has brought a new twist or attitude, but they all learnt from Connery.10 George Lazenby said in an interview, “For the life of me, I didn’t believe I could be as good as Connery, he created the character.” 10Sean Connery acted as Bond for the first 6 films, and a 7th unofficial film ( in 1983). 10 George Lazenby was an Australian model with no previous acting experience who took a huge risk to try and fill Connery’s shoes. The producers instantly liked his personality and his bold “Bond-like” style. In the end, with hardly anyone else attempting to follow Connery, Lazenby was one of the only choices available. Director, Peter Hunt, liked the idea of casting a man with no acting experience, as it gave him control over his acting. Although Lazenby’s one film, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, wasn’t a huge success, Lazenby’s style of acting brought a new side to the Bond character that no one had ever seen before. He showed us that Bond could be vulnerable. Bond falls in love and gets married; something unheard of in a James Bond story. When his newly wed bride is shot dead, we see Bond cry and mourn.11 Many criticized Lazenby’s portrayal of Bond simply because he wasn’t Connery and wasn’t quite able to match his hard, suave style. As a result, Lazenby decided to turn down a 7-film contract and leave the role behind.10 In 1973, Roger Moore was cast as the new lead because the producers wanted to give the 80’s Bond a more light hearted feel and a humorous side to fit the 80’s. Instead of emphasizing the spy aspects and earlier violence of the films Moore portrayed Bond as someone who was in the business for the women, drinks and lifestyle. He was a Bond that got his information by sleeping with women and sneaking around with expensive gadgets rather than using his gun. Much of Moore’s Bond style was to do with the screenplay; however, the writers also wrote Bond to fit Moore’s style. With 7 films in just 12 years Moore was able to keep the name Bond yet redefine the character as his owm. He retired from the position after the release of A View to a Kill in 1985.10 The next actor, Timothy Dalton, did just two films as 007. After Moore’s party Bond, Albert Broccoli felt the world needed a Bond who would be taken seriously, a more “human” character rather than a superhero. Dalton, a Shakespearian actor, preferred to play a character that changed over the course of the story. Bond is a generally unchanging character, meaning that he is the same person at the end of the film as he is at the beginning. Dalton’s Bond was the first Bond to have uncertainties when presented with danger. Very often he didn’t know what he was going to do and was unsure of his plan. It was a new level of vulnerability, developing Lazenby’s portrayal, which allowed Dalton to make him stronger as the film progressed. This human Bond received good

11 Hunt, Peter. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. 1969.

Page 7 of 20 reviews, as the audience viewed him as more realistic. Timothy Dalton played 007 at the end of the 80’s during the onset of AIDS and views on promiscuity were changing. For this reason, Dalton played a dangerous Bond, rather than a promiscuous Bond willing to sleep with anyone for information. The sale of MGM to Pathe caused a 6-year break in the production of Bond films and Dalton was never asked to return.10 When Pierce Brosnan took on the role in 1995, the world had yet again changed dynamics. The fall of the Soviet Union and the Berlin wall changed the world’s politics and Russian and German stereotypical “bad guys” were no longer relevant. Writer Michael G. Wilson took this opportunity to take Bond back to Fleming’s original character because Dalton had strayed so far away. Some believe that Brosnan was even closer to the literary Bond than Connery. Many consider Brosnan’s Bond to be nearer to the book than any of the others because of his good looks and humor. Brosnan often used Connery as his acting role model in order to keep the original James Bond characterization. His first film, GoldenEye set a new record, grossing at over $356 million. Each succeeding film he made outgrossed the last. Going back to a more relaxed, yet strong,Bond, Sean Connery was very popular. However, in 2005, although Brosnan was considered for the next film, but was ultimatelydenied the role because the producers decided they needed a new face for Fleming’s first book, Casino Royale, the next planned James Bond film that the Broccoli’s had been saving for nearly 40 years.10 In 2006 the franchise was for 44 years old but still had not made Casino Royale. Barbara Broccoli, now succeeding her father, Albert, as producer, had been saving it for the next Bond actor. Broccoli chose Daniel Craig, an actor with a lot of previous action film experience and, although he had a very different physical appearance from the rest of the Bonds, his character was very similar to the way Fleming wrote him.10 Craig showed the vulnerability of Bond again in Skyfall when he becomes physically unable to perform his duties. Craig is essentially a modern hybrid of Bond because he is able to be tough, vulnerable and add a touch of humor and class.

Fig. 2- All six James Bond actors: Sean Connery, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, Peirce Brosnan, and Daniel Craig (from left to right). (Who Is The Best Looking James Bond Ever?. 2012.)

Page 8 of 20 James Bond’s Fancy Gadgets: Gadgets have always been a big attraction of the Bond films. Just like women and expensive cars, they contribute to Bond’s sharp image. Most action films have guns and fast cars, but Bond’s unique gadgets allow the franchise to stand out. Q, MI6’s gadget designer, has new gadgets for Bond to use in nearly every film. However, as technology had advanced over the last 50 years, the gadgets have had to adjust so that they continue to appear very advanced.12 Interestingly, many of the Bond gadgets have introduced new emerging technologies to the world. One of the gadgets in From Russia With Love (1963) was a pager, which sent Bond messages. Although this had already been invented, it wasn’t sold commercially for another 11 years.13 By using very recent, of emerging technology the filmmakers were able to create gadgets that weren’t too unbelievable but could still awe the audience. On the other hand, some of Bond’s gadgets in the past are still beyond modern science. The underwater car, x-ray glasses, laser watch, and invisible Aston Martin are far beyond what we use in our everyday lives today. In recent years, Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace both omitted Q, and although Bond had advanced computers and phones, he lacked the gadgets we were used to. This may be a sign that people today are so familiar with technology that they are less impressed by the traditional James Bond gadget.14 The recent SkyFall film contained one single gadget, a gun that only shoots when Bond holds it. “What did you expect… an exploding pen? We don’t do that kind of thing anymore 007.”15 This humorous quote by Q shows that although there is a demand for the gadgets to come back, the filmmakers are resistant to go back to gadgets from the old films, which now seem ridiculous.

Fig. 3- James Bond taking off in jetpack in the film . The jetpack was one of the first James Bond gadgets to thrill the audience. (Thunderball Jetpack. 2012.)

12 The Global History Network. Technology in the James Bond Universe. 2008. 13 Basulto, Dominic. James Bond and the Modern Gadget Economy. 2012. 14 Yusuf, Bulent. Double-o-Snooze: Why the Gadgets of James Bond Don’t Excite us Anymore. 2011. 15 Mendes, Sam. Skyfall. 2012.

Page 9 of 20 Changes in Production: James Bond films are famous for their action. High speed car chases, one- on-one fights, guns and snowmobile pursuits are what make any Bond film thrilling. However, if James Bond were unable to keep up with changing film technologies and techniques it would quickly become outdated and boring. Barbara Broccoli has continued to produce action movies able to compete with Hollywood blockbusters.1 One of the most popular action sequences in Bond films are the car chases. Car chases are one of the highest points of action in the Bond films because there is some much going on at anytime and they normally take place in an interesting place such as along the edge of a cliff. By comparing car chases in Dr. No (1962), For Your Eyes Only (1981), (1997), and Quantum of Solace (2008) we can see how editing and cinematography contribute to the level of action. Dr. No has the shortest car chase of 45 seconds. To stay consistent, the first 45 seconds of each chase will be analysed.

Film Number of Cuts Average Duration Between Cuts Dr. No (1962)16 15 3 Seconds For Your Eyes Only 31 1.45 Seconds (1981) 17 Tomorrow Never Dies 49 0.92 Seconds (1997)18 Quantum of Solace 68 0.66 Seconds (2008)19

As seen in the table above, over the years the edits have become much faster. This is something that can be observed in cinema in general. Overall films have picked up their pace with faster editing and more action packed into a short period of time. Back in 1962, 15 cuts in a car chase were enough to thrill the audience. However, nowadays, a medium close up of Bond in front of a poor rear projection lasting more that a second makes the audience lose interest. Fast paced editing draws the audience and keeps Bond looking like a professional to the modern eye. In Quantum of Solace the fast edits show how many things are occurring simultaneously in the scene and highlights Bond’s professionalism. Audiences have a much shorter attention span today than 50 years ago., easily losing interest if the film is slow. These fast edits make us pay attention intently to catch every shot and stay engaged. It’s not just the edits that keep Bond up-to-date. Another trend is the greater variety of cinematography. The Dr. No car chase previously mentioned consists of a few medium close ups of Bond and a few long shots of the cars. Tomorrow Never Dies and Quantum of Solace contain a large variety of shot sizes and angles including close ups of Bond’s eyes, hands, and the pedals and lights of his car. The lighting in recent Bond films is more contrasting, almost chiaroscuro

16 Young, Terence. Dr. No. 1962. 17 Glen, John. For Your Eyes Only. 1981 18 Spottiswoode, Roger. Tomorrow Never Dies. 1997 19 Forster, Marc. Quantum of Solace. 2008.

Page 10 of 20 at times, creating a dark image of the character. Many of the older Bond films used rear projection and green screen to convince the audiences of the exotic locations the story takes place. Most scenes in recent films are filmed on location leaving only a few scenes to the studio. Similar to the editing in it effect, this variety allows us to know everything that James Bond is capable of.

Fig. 4- James Bond maneuvering his car in pursuit in Dr. No. The rear projection technique behind does not convince modern audiences. (Dr. No Car. 2011.) Screenwriting and Adaptation Ian Fleming’s original Bond that was adapted to film in 1962 has generally stayed the same. No matter which film, we think of a cool, bold, charming, action prone, spy. However what has changed is how he is portrayed, and the adventures he experiences.1 Most of the writing for the Bond films was either directly adapted from a James Bond book written by Ian Fleming or, if not, loosely based on the story and characters. There have only been 6 films that were not based on an original James Bond book. 5 of these were consecutive between the years 1989 and 2002. In this time period the filmmakers were running out of books by Fleming and, in order to avoid remaking old films, they decided to create their own Bond plots by studying Fleming’s style. They surprisingly did an excellent job, resulting in the highest grossing Bond films of that time.20 In 2006, the franchise portrayed Fleming’s first and most well known book, Casino Royale for the first time. Ian Fleming also wrote many short stories about Bond for magazines and television. Some of these stories such as, For Your Eyes Only and Quantum of Solace were adapted to create full-length feature films. 20 The antagonist of the Bond films is always based on the fears of the society at the time. Just as the early films featured Russian or German villains, The World is Not Enough (1999) is about an oil company with secret operations that Bond uncovers. This story was specifically written for a modern audience, now aware that resources are growing scarce. Moonraker(1979) was written for

20 Bouzereau, Laurent. Lee Pfeiffer, and Dave Worrall. The Art of Bond: From Storyboard to Screen. 2006

Page 11 of 20 a post moon landing audience aware of the new dangers space travel could bring.21

Fig. 5- (Left to Right) Harry Saltzman, Sean Connery, Ian Fleming, and Albert Broccoli discussing the film script for Dr. No. (Saltzman, Broccoli, Connery and Fleming. 2010.)

Bond’s Competitors: Over the last 50 years the James Bond franchise has adapted so well it leads the list of all time greatest action films. Below is a chart shows the top 10 grossing action film franchises of all time. 2 Fig. 6- Top 10 Grossing Action Series

RSS. The 10 Most Successful Action Movie Franchises Ever at the Box Office. 2011.

21 Chapman, James. License to Thrill. 2000

Page 12 of 20 Mission Impossible and Die Hard are the two action movies most like James Bond at the top of the list because of their experienced, invincible main character, and non-stop action. Below is a table comparing the box office results of the film made closest to the year 2008 in each franchise. 22 Film Box Office Income Live Free or Die Hard (Die Hard 4) (2007)23 $383,531,464

Mission: Impossible III (2006)23 $397,850,012

Quantum of Solace (James Bond 22) (2008)23 $586,090,727

James Bond was the first of it’s kind, and still manages to make more money than it’s competitors. Many people believe that Bond is the template for may action genre films. The new Die Hard film premiering 2013, A Good Day to Die Hard, has recently released a trailer ending with John McLane, the stories protagonist, saying, “I’m the Double-O Seven of Plainfield New Jersey.”24 This is a direct reference to Bond, showing the influence of Bond on modern action entertainment.

Conclusion: When investigating how and why the Bond franchise adapted over the last five decades, we can see that many elements of the Bond films changed significantly in order to remain successful. These changes were made for many different reasons since Ian Fleming’s book was adapted to film in 1962, and all of the aspects discussed must continue to change in the future. The status of technology and women in the world is continuously changing and the Bond series to continue to reflect that. The advancing cinematography, editing, special effects and writing of the James Bond films have allowed them to produce a high action, fast paced story with a technology-driven feel that audiences now expect. Many classic and modern action series are known for their special effects but the Bond films have been doing it better and for a longer time very successfully. Explosions, gunfights and incredible locations are what the Bond series are about. However, an equally important aspect is the writing. Although it has strayed from Ian Fleming’s novels at times, it has managed to stay true to the character and story style. There is a definite future for the Bond series. The high popularity and profit generated by the films means that the filmmakers aren’t going to stop producing films anytime soon. Daniel Craig has already signed a contract to do 5 more films after Skyfall and is enthusiastic about the future of the series.22 Skyfall broke James Bond box office income records as it brought in over 1 billion dollars and shows a clear demand and continuing interest in Bond.3 Just as producer, Albert R. Broccoli, passed his job onto his daughter, it’s very possible for the franchise to continue in the hands of new producers. James Bond may in fact be invincible.

22Browne, Niall. James Bond 007: A Cinematic Legacy. 2007. 23 Internet Movie Database. 24 Die Hard 5 Trailer. 2012

Page 13 of 20 List of Figures

Fig. 1- Halle Berry (left) and Ursula Andress (right) making their entrance to the films. Halle Berry’s costume is homage to Andress’s from 1962.

Fig. 2- All six James Bond actors: Sean Connery, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, Peirce Brosnan, and Daniel Craig (from left to right).

Fig. 3- James Bond taking off in jetpack in the film Thunderball. The jetpack was one of the first James Bond gadgets to thrill the audience.

Fig. 4- James Bond maneuvering his car in pursuit in Dr. No. The rear projection technique behind does not convince modern audiences.

Fig. 5- (Left to Right) Harry Saltzman, Sean Connery, Ian Fleming, and Albert Broccoli discussing the film script for Dr. No.

Fig. 6- Top 10 Grossing Action Series

Page 14 of 20 Appendices:

Appendix A: List of James Bond Films and Information.23 Year Film Released Bond Actor Director Story Dr. No 1962 Sean Connery Terence Young Ian Fleming From Russia With Love 1963 Sean Connery Terence Young Ian Fleming 1964 Sean Connery Guy Hamilton Ian Fleming Thunderball 1965 Sean Connery Terence Young Ian Fleming You Only Live Twice 1967 Sean Connery Lewis Gilbert Ian Fleming On Her Majesty's Secret Service 1969 George Lazenby Peter R. Hunt Ian Fleming Diamonds Are Forever 1971 Sean Connery Guy Hamilton Ian Fleming 1973 Roger Moore Guy Hamilton Ian Fleming The Man with the Golden Gun 1974 Roger Moore Guy Hamilton Ian Fleming The Spy Who Loved Me 1977 Roger Moore Lewis Gilbert Ian Fleming Moonraker 1979 Roger Moore Lewis Gilbert Ian Fleming For Your Eyes Only 1981 Roger Moore John Glen (Mostly) Ian Fleming Octopussy 1983 Roger Moore John Glen Ian Fleming A View to a Kill 1985 Roger Moore John Glen Ian Fleming The Living Daylights 1987 Timothy Dalton John Glen Ian Fleming Micheal Wilson and Richard Licence to Kill 1989 Timothy Dalton John Glen Maibaum GoldenEye 1995 Pierce Brosnan Martin Campbell Micheal France Roger Tomorrow Never Dies 1997 Pierce Brosnan Spottiswoode Bruce Feirstein The World is Not Enough 1999 Pierce Brosnan Micheal Apted Neil Purvis and Robert Wade Die Another Day 2002 Pierce Brosnan Lee Tamahori Neil Purvis and Robert Wade Casino Royale 2006 Daniel Craig Martin Campbell Ian Fleming Ian Fleming and Micheal Quantum of Solace 2008 Daniel Craig Marc Foster Wilson John Logan, Neal Purvis, and Robert Wade Skyfall 2012 Daniel Craig Sam Mendes

Page 15 of 20 Appendix B: The Gross Income of Each Bond Film Released3

Production Worldwide Release Date Movie Budget Box Office

May 8, 1963 Dr. No $1,000,000 $59,567,035

Apr 8, 1964 From Russia With Love $2,000,000 $78,900,000

Dec 22, 1964 Goldfinger $3,000,000 $124,900,000

Dec 29, 1965 Thunderball $9,000,000 $141,200,000

Jun 13, 1967 You Only Live Twice $9,500,000 $111,600,000

On Her Majesty's Secret Dec 18, 1969 $8,000,000 $82,000,000

Service

Dec 17, 1971 Diamonds Are Forever $7,200,000 $116,000,000

Jun 27, 1973 Live and Let Die $7,000,000 $161,800,000 The Man with the Dec 20, 1974 $7,000,000 $97,600,000

Golden Gun

Jul 13, 1977 The Spy Who Loved Me $14,000,000 $185,400,000

Jun 29, 1979 Moonraker $31,000,000 $210,300,000

Jun 26, 1981 For Your Eyes Only $28,000,000 $195,300,000

Jun 10, 1983 Octopussy $27,500,000 $187,500,000

Oct 7, 1983 Never Say Never Again $36,000,000 $160,000,000

May 24, 1985 A View to a Kill $30,000,000 $152,627,960

Jul 31, 1987 The Living Daylights $40,000,000 $191,200,000

Jul 14, 1989 License to Kill $42,000,000 $156,167,015

Nov 17, 1995 Goldeneye $60,000,000 $356,429,941

Dec 19, 1997 Tomorrow Never Dies $110,000,000 $339,504,276 The World is Not Nov 19, 1999 $135,000,000 $361,730,660

Enough

Nov 22, 2002 Die Another Day $142,000,000 $431,942,139

Nov 17, 2006 Casino Royale $102,000,000 $596,365,000

Nov 14, 2008 Quantum of Solace $230,000,000 $591,692,078

Nov 8, 2012 Skyfall $200,000,000 $1,005,279,626

Totals $1,281,200,000 $6,095,005,730

Averages $53,383,333 $253,958,572

Page 16 of 20 Works Cited

Films:

A View to A Kill. Dir. John Glen. MGM Home Entertainment, 1985. DVD.

Dr. No. Dir. Terence Young. MGM Home Entertainment, 1962. DVD.

For Your Eyes Only. Dir. John Glen. MGM Home Entertainment, 1981. DVD.

On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Dir. Peter Hunt. MGM Home Entertainment, 1969.

DVD.

Quantum of Solace. Dir. Marc Forster. Sony Pictures Entertainment, 2008. DVD.

Skyfall. Dir. Sam Mendes. Perf. Daniel Craig. Sony Pictures Entertainment, 2012.

Film.

The Living Daylights. Dir. John Glen. MGM Home Entertainment, 1987. DVD.

The World is Not Enough. Dir. Michael Apted MGM Home Entertainment, 1999.

DVD.

Tomorrow Never Dies. Dir. Roger Spottiswoode. MGM Home Entertainment., 1997.

DVD.

Documentaries and DVD Extras:

Bond Girls Are Forever. By John Cork. Perf. Maryam D'Abo. Boxtree, 2002. DVD.

Page 17 of 20

"James Bond Special." South Bank Show. ITV. London, 18 Oct. 2008. Television.

Online Articles: "The 10 Most Successful Action Movie Franchises Ever at the Box Office." Live for

Films RSS. Vue Cinemas, 15 Nov. 2011. Web. 25 Nov. 2012.

movie-franchises-ever-at-the-box-office/>.

Associated Press. "Role of Women Evolves during 50 Years of James Bond Films."

Daily Herald. Paddock Productions, 04 Oct. 2012. Web. 06 Oct. 2012.

Basulto, Dominic. "James Bond and the Modern Gadget Economy." Washington Post.

The Washington Post, 05 Oct. 2012. Web. 20 Oct. 2012.

"Box Office History for James Bond Movies." James Bond Franchise Box Office

History. N.p., 7 Jan. 2013. Web. 08 Jan. 2013.

Browne, Niall. "James Bond 007: A Cinematic Legacy." Screenrant. LLC, 12 Mar.

2007. Web. 06 Sept. 2012.

IMDb. Amazon, n.d. Web. 08 July 2012.

Kiisel, Ty. "Is Social Media Shortening Our Attention Span." Forbes. Forbes

Magazine, 25 Jan. 2012. Web. 06 Jan. 2013.

Mulvey, Lara. Visual Pleasure in the Narrative Cinema. Southwestern, n.d. Web. 23

Oct. 2012.

Page 18 of 20 html>.

Paul, S. K., Dr. "Introduction to Elements of GAZE Theory." Web log post.

Understanding Media. Blogspot, 07 Oct. 2008. Web. 27 Sept. 2012.

gaze-theory.html>.

Smelika, Anneke. Feminist Film Theory. University of Utrecht, n.d. Web. 23 Oct.

2012. .

"Technology in the James Bond Universe." The Global History Network (2008): n.

pag. Web. 12 Sept. 2012.

.

Yusuf, Bulent. "Gizmodo UK." Gizmodo UK. Future, 03 Nov. 2011. Web. 06 Jan.

2013.

gadgets-in-james-bond-films-dont-excite-us-anymore/>.

Books: Bouzereau, Laurent, Lee Pfeiffer, and Dave Worrall. The Art of Bond: From

Storyboard to Screen : The Creative Process behind the James Bond

Phenomenon. New York: Abrams, 2006. Print.

Chapman, James. License to Thrill: A Cultural History of the James Bond Films. New

York: Columbia UP, 2000. Print.

D'Abo, Maryam, and John Cork. Bond Girls Are Forever: The Women of James

Bond. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 2003. Print.

Desowitz, Bill. James Bond Unmasked. S.l.: Charles Helfenstein, 2012. Print.

Page 19 of 20

Images:

Broccoli, Saltzman, Connery and Fleming. 2004. Photograph. Tumblr. 08 Apr. 2010.

Web. 9 Jan. 2013.

Dr. No Car. N.d. Photograph. Film OVI. By Irena Paulus. 06 Mar. 2011. Web. 9 Jan.

2013.

Halle Berry vs. Ursula Andress. 2010. Photograph. Because I Am Fabulous. By Sai

Sankoh. Intuition, 20 June 2012. Web. 9 Jan. 2013.

Thunderball Jetpack. 2012. Photograph. Film School Rejects. By Scott Beggs. Reject

Media, 08 Oct. 2012. Web. 9 Jan. 2013.

Who Is The Best Looking James Bond Ever? 2012. Photograph. Viral Bits. Naxaf

Digital Solutions, 31 Oct. 2012. Web. 9 Jan. 2013.

Page 20 of 20