by Mark Edlitz
The Academy of Motion Pictures made a short video on Bond that they planned to run during the show [to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the Bond franchise]. They grabbed me and asked, “What did it mean to you to be in a Bond film?” I said, “If I had realized it was going to follow me for the rest of my life, I would’ve tried harder.”
[I laugh.]
Thank you for laughing. You got that it was a joke. It’s funny that the other roles that meant so much to me at the time didn’t go anywhere but Bond persists. Sometimes I think that I should’ve made Plenty more animated, but I wanted to keep her simple. She’s not thinking about what she’s doing or making any judgments; she’s just working on the assembly line. I didn’t want to make her too multifaceted.
It doesn’t seem like she’s putting on an act.
Oh, absolutely, without question. She doesn’t know who he is other than he’s a great good-looking guy she’s attracted to and who’s winning at the craps table. She’s impressed by him.
I think that’s a correct choice. Like us, she seems to be legitimately impressed by Bond. Your character feels the same way about Bond as the audience does.
I’m glad you said it, because I still question it. This one role has followed me forever. It’s absolutely incredible. I had no idea that it would continue on like this. When it was first released, the studio sent me on a world tour for the film. I hadn’t even seen the film and I left on tour—Europe, the Orient, everywhere. I returned home, went to the Grauman’s Chinese Theater, and sat down to watch the film for the first time. That’s when I discovered that they cut out an entire section of the movie with Plenty. I was absolutely shocked and I felt rather betrayed. I was upset and I called Guy Hamilton. He said the additional scenes with Plenty were sweet but they weren’t moving the plot forward.
In terms of his craft, how did Connery approach the part?
Sean knew that he could do Bond in his sleep, and he is James Bond. Bond must be a killer and come across as someone who shouldn’t be messed with. But, at the same time, he’s so charming that he overrides it.
As moviegoers, we sit back and we watch Connery, but you had a unique perspective. You’re in that world with him when you’re doing a scene. What is that experience like?
You are very much taken there, that’s where you are, and that’s who you are. You’re not aware of the fact that you’re acting; you are completely sucked in by that entire experience at that point in time. Sean is very much that character and by the time we worked together, he had him down pat. I don’t think there was a great deal of effort in trying to sustain a character. He was very comfortable with Bond.
What was his attitude about returning to the character?
You can’t fault anything that Sean did because he was James Bond. But I think that he wasn’t finding anything new or a great deal of joy in playing the character. He was always true to his craft but I got the feeling that he was waiting for them to say, “It’s a wrap,” so that he could play golf.
Are you in touch with other Bond women?
Maude Adams and I are dear friends. We travel a lot together to various Bond conventions. It’s usually George Lazenby and me and Maude and me. Before one of the screenings, she asked if I wanted to leave and I said, “More than you know.” We got up and snuck out of the theater. I told her, “I felt sort of dismissed by Guy Hamilton. Did he talk to you at all about your character or give you any direction in the scenes [for the Hamilton-helmed The Man with the Golden Gun]? She said, “No.” I said, “I thought perhaps he didn’t care for me or didn’t find my character of that much importance because he didn’t give me any direction at all.” Maude explained that Guy allowed people to do their thing and took the Bond films as they were, which is a great action-adventure fantasy and escapist entertainment. After speaking with her I felt better because I had always thought that he just didn’t care for me and that he was disappointed that I was hired.
I imagine there is kinship among the Bond women?
Absolutely, it’s quite wonderful. The first time we all got together for the Vanity Fair shoot that Annie Leibowitz did [in 1999], it was quite amazing. Then, I guess because we kept being thrown together, we’ve become friends. I traveled extensively with Maude, with Gloria Hendry [Rosie Carver in Live and Let Die], and with Lynn-Holly Johnson [Bibi Dahl in For Your Eyes Only], who directed me in a short film that she was making a couple of years ago. Tanya Roberts [Stacey Sutton in A View to a Kill] is sweet. I was one of the producers on the Mike Hammer TV movie Murder Me, Murder You [1983] with Stacy Keach, and I had cast Tanya in it.
I have a particular affection for Maude Adams, Caroline Monro [the helicopter-flying villain Naomi in The Spy Who Loved Me], and Martine Beswick [Zora, one of the two fighting gypsies in From Russia with Love and MI6 operative Paula Caplan in Thunderball], whom I just absolutely adore. Yes, there’s an interesting camaraderie, even though most of my friends worked with Roger Moore. I think he’s wonderful; he’s funny, relaxed, and works differently than Sean does. He’s a lot of fun on the sets but I just didn’t care for him as Bond. I tease Maude about that.
Is being a Bond girl a part-time job?
Certainly. It is something that remains with you. I had no idea that it would continue on like this. It was a part that I was doing that I was thrilled to do, but I did not think that it would have the continued impact that it has. After it was over, I went back home, back to my old-time boyfriend and back to my life and onto the next film. Bond went out of my mind and I just went back to doing TV. I then got married, had a child and more or less dropped off the face of the Earth for a couple of years. But then about ten years ago—and I don’t know what began the parade again—Bond nostalgia and all the films seemed to come to the front of people’s memories. I was suddenly caught up in going to shows and traveling and going from this photo shoot to that photo shoot and people would request, “Please film something for this show.” So, I’ve been busy with Bond.
What’s it like to be back in the Bond spotlight after it dimmed for a while?
It’s surprised me when the Bond thing started catching up with me again, but I’m delighted because it meant a lot to me. Now I wish people would say, you were so wonderful in QB VII [a 1974 miniseries] in your scenes with Ben Gazzara. But I’m Plenty O’Toole. There are far worse things that one has to cope with.
Are there any drawbacks to being a Bond woman?
As with any actress, you are under a microscope and that can become uncomfortable. I do feel scrutinized. It’s tough at times. I feel a great deal like Natalie [Wood, Lana’s sister and a three-time Academy Award nominee] did. She used to tell me that when she steps foot outside the door she always has to be “Natalie Wood.” At the time, I never understood it. But because of Bond, I finally do. I know that when I walk out of my hotel room door to go to the convention or to film an interview, people want to see me looking terrific and want me to be witty and well-spoken. Being examined like that can be tough sometimes, and I don’t have the best self-image. But I do the best I can and that’s all I can do. I’m content with that.
On the other hand, I was at my pharmacy last week standing in line and one of the pharmacists said, “I’ll take care of you at the front register.” Then he said, “I’m sorry that you had to wait.” I couldn’t figure out why I was suddenly getting this lovely treatment. But then he said, “I’d love to get an autographed photo.” That sort of thing is a plus. I can’t speak for other actors, but every little bit of kindness is nice. It keeps you going. I’m delighted with it.
I’ve made some absolutely wonderful friends, so it’s all been good. When I was producing another TV film for ABC [The Mystery of Natalie Wood (2004), directed by Peter Bogdanovich], I called Sean to see if he would say a few words about Natalie. He was very sweet and he called me back immediately. He would’ve been happy to do it if we could have accommodated his schedule a little bit better but we just weren’t able to. But he was very charming and very nice.
When you’re flipping the channel and the movie comes on, what goes through your mind?
I pick on my choice for the character every time. As long as no one else walks in the room, I’ll sit and analyze it. I try not to watch a lot of things that I’ve done because I don’t want to spend that much time wishing I had made a different choice. But the more time that passes and the more people that I speak with and the fans who seem to identify with Plenty more so than the other Bond girls, I think that perhaps I did make the right choice in making her simpler and without guile. I get mail constantly and fans tell me that Plenty O’Toole is their favorite Bond girl. That’s nice to hear. In terms of the performance, I’m tough on myself, but I guess you never get any better if you’re not.
I hope someday you could look at your performance through other people’s eyes; it seems like you’re just beginning to.
I think I do. I don’t know to what extent I do, but I think I do and it’s really lovely. The fans are amazingly kind and so happy to say hello. It’s been terrific.
LISA FUNNELL
In order to understand Bond’s character, it’s necessary to understand the role that Bond women play in the franchise. That’s the task Dr. Lisa Funnell undertook when she envisioned and edited For His Eyes Only: The Women of James Bond (2015), a collection of essays examining the different ways women are depicted in the films and novels. Funnell, who also contributed an essay, contends that “Bond has been historically defined by his relationships with women.” Sabine Planka, one of the book’s contributors, similarly argues that “James Bond, as a character, is virtually inconceivable without women. Women serve as his enemies, allies, and lovers, and their characters are defined almost exclusively by their relationships with him.”
Dr. Funnell is an assistant professor in the Women’s and Gender Studies program at the University of Oklahoma. She examines gender in the Bond series, as well as in Hong Kong martial arts movies and Hollywood blockbusters. She also wrote The Geographies, Genders, and Geopolitics of James Bond (2017) with Dr. Klaus Dodds. Dr. Funnell responded in writing to my questions about Bond women.
You explore the function and range of women in the Bond franchise in your book For His Eyes Only: The Women of James Bond. What are some of the types of women who appear throughout the series of films?
One common type is the damsel in distress who requires saving by Bond. She functions as a mediator of threat—that is, a threat to her is a threat to Bond—and her capture/targeting by the villain compels Bond into action. As a hero, Bond has his roots in the British lover literary tradition and is presented as a man of action who risks everything for a higher cause: to secure the physical safety and geopolitical interests of Britain and its allies and for the women he loves.1 As a result, Bond’s ability to safeguard and sexually satisfy beautiful women confirms his libido-based masculinity.2 Solitaire in Live and Let Die and Stacey Sutton in A View to a Kill are good examples of Bond Girls who function as damsels in distress. Additionally, Madeleine Swann from Spectre qualifies, as she is kidnapped by Ernst Stavro Blofeld and imprisoned in the derelict MI6 building. The film ends with a “rescue the princess” scenario in which Bond is framed as her knight in shining armor.
Another common type is the kept woman who serves as a (sexual) companion to the wealthy villain often in return for money or a lavish lifestyle. Over time, some of these women feel imprisoned and look for an opportunity to break free. And so Bond steps in to seduce the kept woman and save her from the villain. A good example is Domino Derval in Thunderball, who initially agrees to be the kept woman of the much-older Emilio Largo, only to be imprisoned and tortured by him after she discovers that he killed her brother. In a similar way, Andrea Anders becomes imprisoned by Francisco Scaramanga in The Man with the Golden Gun and tries to have him killed by Bond. Finally, in Tomorrow Never Dies, Paris Carver marries Elliot but still pines for Bond and even sneaks away to warn him of her husband’s plans. She returns home knowing that she will be punished for this betrayal.
A third figure is the sexy siren whose role in the film is to sexually distract, tempt, and/or seduce Bond, rendering him vulnerable for attack. Both primary and secondary characters have functioned as sexy sirens. For example, Miss Taro in Dr. No invites Bond over to her home for a rendezvous and he is attacked by a group of men on his drive over. In The Spy Who Loved Me, Bond is distracted by Karl Stromberg’s assistant Naomi, who wears a brown bikini and flirts with him. She later attacks Bond while flying a helicopter, only to be shot down by Bond’s Lotus Esprit. Finally, in Die Another Day, Bond sleeps with Miranda Frost, who [seems to have] literally disarmed him by taking the clip out of his gun as they have sex on a bed of ice.
What is a “Bond Girl?” And is that an accurate descriptor?
The term “Bond Girl” is problematic because it is frequently used to describe nearly all of the women who appear in the series (with the exception of M and Money-penny). This works to collapse very different women into a single category regardless of their role, narrative agency, time onscreen, or allegiance to Bond. Since all of the men in the franchise—from villains like Goldfinger to henchmen like Jaws to allies like Felix Leiter—are not referred to as “Bond Boys,” why is the term “Bond Girl” used to describe the vast majority of women in the series? There is a difference between a primary character and a secondary/supportive figure. In Goldfinger, for instance, Pussy Galore plays a pivotal role in the narrative and helps Bond thwart the evil plot of the villain. In comparison, Dink appears onscreen for only ten seconds, merely to say “hello,” before Bond smacks her butt and shoos her away to have “man talk” with Leiter. The general descriptor “Bond Girl” does not allow for a distinction to be made between these women. Additionally, there is a difference between protagonists and antagonists in the Bond franchise, as heroic women are represented differently from villainous women. In Thunderball, there is a difference in the narrative treatment of Domino Derval, who is depicted as a kept woman and damsel in distress, and Fiona Volpe, who is presented as a sexy siren and black widow assassin. There are different gendered and sexual terms for “good” and “bad” women, and these distinctions also need to be drawn out.
In my essay “From English Partner to American Action Hero” (2008), I theorize that the term Bond Girl refers to a particular female character type of the Bond film. She is a nonrecurring character and lead female protagonist, central to the plot of the film, and instrumental to the mission of James Bond. However, the defining feature of the Bond Girl is the strong, intimate, and intense relationship she builds with Bond.3
One goal of For His Eyes Only is to untangle the “web of women” in the series and draw attention to the range and diversity in female characterization. Various scholars in the book define, differentiate, and theorize about the variety of women who appear in the films. These include “Bond Girls,”4 “Bond Girl Villains” (or Bad Girls),5 Secondary Women/Girls,6 Miss Moneypenny,7 and Judi Dench’s M.8
Another issue is with the term “Bond Girl” itself. In his novels, Ian Fleming frequently refers to Bond’s love interest as “the girl.” His lexicon is carried forward into the films as well as into the subsequent discussion of female characters in academic, critical, and social discourses. Language reflects and relays cultural views and values. Women are often described through terms that objectify and diminish their capabilities, such as being discussed in relation to food (e.g., sugar, sweetie, and cupcake) and animals (e.g., chick, catty, and bitch). In addition, women are often depicted as being immature or juvenile through the use of terms like “girl,” “babe,” and “baby.”9 Just as the term “boy” can be used to put down a man, the term “girl” operates in the same way to put down a woman.
In the Bond franchise, James Bond interacts with women. The rare exception is Bibi Dahl, in For Your Eyes Only, whose infatuation with Bond is rejected by the hero, who finds her to be too young (i.e., not yet a woman) and thus deems sexual interaction with her to be inappropri
ate. But otherwise, Bond interacts with many women over the course of the novels and films. So the persistence of the term “girl” to describe these professional women is troubling as it reduces their social importance and arguably relays a condescending view of them. Given the cultural pervasiveness of the Bond franchise, it will be difficult to move away from using the term “Bond Girl” altogether. But it is important that if/when it is used, we remain mindful of the messages being relayed through it and strive to use other descriptors like “Bond Women” when discussing female characterization in a broader sense.
There is one additional problem with naming in the franchise. In the novels, Fleming refers to male characters by their full names upon the first mention and afterward by their last names. This is a common practice in literature as well as literary and film criticism. However, when Fleming refers to female characters, he introduces them with their full names and then afterward refers to them only by their first names. This has been carried over into academic, critical, and popular discourse. If you refer to James Bond as Bond then you have to refer to Vesper Lynd as Lynd. Otherwise, just as the descriptor “girl” infantilizes women, this gendered naming convention diminishes the importance and capacity of women. Though the first names Honeychile/Honey, Gala, and Domino certainly have a ring to them, these figures should be referred to as Rider/Ryder, Brand, and Derval respectively. [Note: Honeychile Rider and Honey Ryder are the names of the character in the novel and film, respectively.]
How have the “Bond Girls” changed over the years?
The “Bond Girls” have developed across four key phases of representation. Initially, the Bond Girl is positioned in the role of English Partner (1962–1969). Her relationship with Bond mirrors the male-female partnership made famous in the British television series The Avengers (1961–1969). In fact, two women who starred on the television show were cast as “Bond Girls” during this era: Honor Blackman as Pussy Galore in Goldfinger and Diana Rigg as Tracy di Vicenzo in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. The other Bond of this era (with the exception of Tatiana Romanova in From Russia with Love) have been cinematically Anglicized and speak with a British accent regardless of the nationality of the character or actor who plays them. The voices of Honey Ryder, Domino Derval, and Kissy Suzuki were dubbed in postproduction and replaced with that of Monica van der Zyl. [Note: Monica “Nikki” van der Zyl is a voice-actor of German decent who was trained at the Royal Academy of Dramatic Arts in England.10] Thus, the initial “Bond Girls” are aligned with British culture and positioned as British/Anglicized partners who work alongside Bond.11
