The James Bond Debate Thread - 217

TheWizardOfIce

SaintMark,

You make some good, if slightly flawed points.

A Bond fan is surely someone who likes Flemings creation and films such as DN, FRWL,TB and OHMSS? That I can enjoy films like MR, GE and even to a certain extent DAD because they still contain enough elements of Flemings creation to engage my interest does not mean I wouldn’t prefer a return to pure Fleming.
The way I see it a Bond fan can come and enjoy these films up to a point. Your argument that by merely enjoying such films in their own right automatically makes you a Bond fan is dubious because for example the 2nd half of DAD has nothing to do with what I understand as Bond at all.

What you are saying is that any old tosh that provides 2 hours of mindless entertainment as long as it features a character called James Bond can be classed as a Bond film and if you like it you are a Bond fan. Well I beg to differ on that.

I agree with you that DAD delivered on what it appears to have set out to do – produce low rent popcorn entertainment that is moderately diverting for 2 hours. That it succeeded at such lofty ambitions may be enough for some but not for me. DAD is an exceptionally lazy (from a script perspective here – the technical execution by the crew is of the highest quality – well CGI wave apart!) cliché ticking exercise in mediocrity. Its barely better than a computer game plot.

Don’t get me wrong I enjoy DAD a lot more than most of the other blockbuster rubbish out there such as Transformers and Spiderman because it has enough Bondian elements (the PTS, Cuba before Jinx spoils it, a fine performance by Pierce who deserved better and was callously binned for mistakes made by others) but I am measuring it by Bond standards established over 50 years and when up against FRWL, OHMSS, TLD and CR it is pitiful.

The most tragic thing about DAD is that it was made to look an anachronism literally minutes after it came out, due in part to Bourne but largely due to the laziness of EON in churning out a by the numbers effort instead of trying to stay ahead of the curve which Harry and Cubby always attempted to do. DN, FRWL and OHMSS are still fresh and exciting decades on but DAD will forever be trapped in a timewarp bubble of CGI naffness. For the general public it ticked all the boxes of what a Bond film should be (just look at how many glowing reviews it got at the time) but if I valued the retarded publics opinion I’d spend my evenings watching X factor and The Only Way is f***ing Essex.

It is obvious you hate QOS and while it is deeply flawed and I certainly agree with your remark that they should have waited until the script was sorted, its still light years ahead of DAD. Ultimately however, much as my constant slating of DAD is entirely irrelevant to the thesis so is your frequent argument that DAD is better than QOS. We’re not here to discuss QOS at all and nor are we here to really discuss DAD as a whole.

The thesis stated that the invisible car is a disgrace (I’m paraphrasing) and I agree wholeheartedly with that. The fact that either of us may think QOS or the CGI wave are better or worse is not relevant to the thesis. Its basically a yes/no question – was the invisible car good or bad?

I say it was abysmal.

Its been a good debate but then youre always guaranteed to get a rise out of me when it comes to people trying to defend DAD.

BAIN123

The thesis actually stated that the invisible car wasn't THAT bad. It's wasn't saying it was particularly good but was it "acceptable". Obviously Wizard disagrees.

I'm going to try and do the impossible, I'm going to try and defend DAD. After seeing a bit last night it does have some good - dare I say it - inspired scenes. Bond punching out the rude South African for instance then using his unconcious body to get onto the island before using it again to distract the doctors and quietly disabling the camera. Not a gaget in sight (other than the camera) This I can imagine in a more comperory Fleming-y novel.

NicNac

TheWizardOfIce said:
SaintMark,

The most tragic thing about DAD is that it was made to look an anachronism literally minutes after it came out, due in part to Bourne but largely due to the laziness of EON in churning out a by the numbers effort instead of trying to stay ahead of the curve which Harry and Cubby always attempted to do. DN, FRWL and OHMSS are still fresh and exciting decades on but DAD will forever be trapped in a timewarp bubble of CGI naffness.

Although history will always be kind to the dearly departed we mustn't put Cubby and Harry above criticism. They were very guilty of treading water and failing to judge the expectations of the public. TMWTGG was rushed and lazilly put together. The public recognised they were being short changed and when Harry left, Cubby took his time to strip and re-build Bond so that the money showed on the screen.

jetsetwilly

Sorry but DAD is impossible to defend. It was a parody of the series, borderline Austin Powers and should never have been made. Brozza deserved better for his swansong, and Bond fans deserved better.

This is the problem with EON. The fact that they can make DAD, then next time make the brilliant CR, then screw up again with QoS. There is no consistency. This is why I'm apprehensive with Skyfall, because if the producers are capable of finding DAD acceptable as a film, it means we are never too far from another potential travesty that would have Fleming spinning in his grave.

TheWizardOfIce

BAIN123 said:

I'm going to try and do the impossible, I'm going to try and defend DAD. After seeing a bit last night it does have some good - dare I say it - inspired scenes. Bond punching out the rude South African for instance then using his unconcious body to get onto the island before using it again to distract the doctors and quietly disabling the camera. Not a gaget in sight (other than the camera) This I can imagine in a more comperory Fleming-y novel.

Thin pickings Bain. Its more a fleeting moment than scene. The bit where he catches the gun off the MRI scanner is also inspired as is his use of the ejector seat. But these moments of inspiration add up to what? 5 minutes. How much screentime does Jinx alone monopolise to swing it back the other way?

NicNac said:

TheWizardOfIce said:
SaintMark,

The most tragic thing about DAD is that it was made to look an anachronism literally minutes after it came out, due in part to Bourne but largely due to the laziness of EON in churning out a by the numbers effort instead of trying to stay ahead of the curve which Harry and Cubby always attempted to do. DN, FRWL and OHMSS are still fresh and exciting decades on but DAD will forever be trapped in a timewarp bubble of CGI naffness.

Although history will always be kind to the dearly departed we mustn't put Cubby and Harry above criticism. They were very guilty of treading water and failing to judge the expectations of the public. TMWTGG was rushed and lazilly put together. The public recognised they were being short changed and when Harry left, Cubby took his time to strip and re-build Bond so that the money showed on the screen.

Fair point.

jetsetwilly said:
Sorry but DAD is impossible to defend. It was a parody of the series, borderline Austin Powers and should never have been made. Brozza deserved better for his swansong, and Bond fans deserved better.

This is the problem with EON. The fact that they can make DAD, then next time make the brilliant CR, then screw up again with QoS. There is no consistency. This is why I'm apprehensive with Skyfall, because if the producers are capable of finding DAD acceptable as a film, it means we are never too far from another potential travesty that would have Fleming spinning in his grave.

QFT Willy.

BAIN123

TheWizardOfIce said:

BAIN123 said:

I'm going to try and do the impossible, I'm going to try and defend DAD. After seeing a bit last night it does have some good - dare I say it - inspired scenes. Bond punching out the rude South African for instance then using his unconcious body to get onto the island before using it again to distract the doctors and quietly disabling the camera. Not a gaget in sight (other than the camera) This I can imagine in a more comperory Fleming-y novel.

Thin pickings Bain. Its more a fleeting moment than scene. The bit where he catches the gun off the MRI scanner is also inspired as is his use of the ejector seat. But these moments of inspiration add up to what? 5 minutes. How much screentime does Jinx alone monopolise to swing it back the other way?

I didn't say it was an easy task did I but I still like those moments. What about the scene with Bond and M in the tunnel or on the ship (I know the "I'm going after him" bit is overdone for the trailers but still, its a not a bad scene).

Also, the moment when Bond tries to kill Miranda is a nice touch along with Brozza's line "the coldest weapon of all".

NicNac

Strangely the invisible car didn't bother me too much. I had actually read about the technology before I saw the film so I knew it was something being developed. As it turned out they had clearly taken this technology and gone too far with it in the actual film, but the chase was well filmed so they were able to get away with it as far as the general public went (unlike the shite CGI). So no real damage was done to the series as a whole (unlike the shite CGI).

The amusing thing about Bond being 5 minutes in the future and all that, one of the gadgets that has never been developed to actual practical use is the breathing device from TB. It appears to be something you imagine could find a way of becoming a real useable gadget, but no, apprantly not. And what does DAD manage to do? Re-introduce the one tiny Bond gadget that never became a realistic, practical gadget.

TheWizardOfIce

I forgot the TB mini breather. And the Pikelet. Shit - when you analyse it DAD is jam packed full of great moments.

Actually when you break it down the only gripes I've got with it are Jinx, the car, the CGI crapfest and robocop suit. Take all that out and it would be a middling Bond film.

Could the Wizard be turned to the dark side?

jetsetwilly

TheWizardOfIce said:
I forgot the TB mini breather. And the Pikelet. Shit - when you analyse it DAD is jam packed full of great moments.

Actually when you break it down the only gripes I've got with it are Jinx, the car, the CGI crapfest and robocop suit. Take all that out and it would be a middling Bond film.

Could the Wizard be turned to the dark side?

Just think about Brozza springing to life on his deathbed in hospital, beating every guy in the room, after a 15 month torture ordeal, and faking his heart stopping, and this is just the beginning of the film, which is the strongest part of the movie.

If you dare, just stop and think about the last 30 minutes of the film, and I'm sure you'll be running to the toilet to vomit, in utter disgust at what the producers did to Fleming's creation.

Getafix

Have just re-watched the Tosca scenes from QoS and think it is fair to say that this is one of the most authentically (screen) Bondian sequences in a Bond film for a couple of decades. Although overall the film may not be a huge success, I think Forster shows a better understanding of what makes a Bond movie in those 5 minutes than Cambell, Spottiswood, Tamahori and co managed in all their accumulated hours prior to that.

Baltimore_007

Obviously what we saw in Die Another Day was not an actual invisible car so to speak, there is no such thing, even Q branch and David Copperfield could not manage such a stunt, it was merely camouflaged it such a way it was invisible to the naked eye by way of some fancy illusions or tampering, actually if you look at it that way it doesn't appear as blatantly stupid as some perceive it, but I won't change my opinion now in that it was a poor idea and whenever on screen Yes it did look and appear absurd, I've always had some degree of trouble with watching the car bits, Bond has always had a certain element of ridiculous nonsense or shake head moments but with the Invisible car concept perhaps they went too far that time, all they needed after that was to have something equally preposterous such as Bond surfing giant CGI waves, it was a poor film all told

DarthDimi

THESIS 036

Skyfall is a poor title for a Bond film, one reason being it's actually a Transformer.

Getafix

It's not great, but preferable to them feeling they have to include die/dies in every title.

RogueAgent

Not really? I was disappointed that a remaining Fleming title was not used. But as time has gone by? It has grown on me and i have now got used to it. Be interesting to see how it fits into the story of the film?

Baltimore_007

I wasn't that keen about it when I got the news but realize we could well have ended up with something far worse. It would really be of some benefit if we actually knew what the darn title referred to

Samuel001

It doesn't matter. It's a not very well known Transformer and I don't think the two points of this arguement relate anyway.

It's a neat title and far better than the other two none Fleming attempts.

SaintMark

I still call it Bond23, care to guess what I think about the title.

Samuel001

After many others films are released in the future, will you still call it Bond 23? That would a bit stupid, the 'lone' film if you will... suit yourself. :)

Baltimore_007

I don't see what's stupid about it Samuel, a little unorthodox maybe but it does make a certain amount of sense, i.e. Skyfall is, or will be, Bond 23, It will be the 23rd James Bond release, like er Thunderball was the fourth and Moonraker was the 11th. I think Mark means he would rather it was called Bond XXIII than Skyfall, I can understand that, but obviously if every Bond outing since 1962 was titled in release numbers, that wouldn't be very fun

thelivingroyale

036- I never really bothered with transformers so I had no idea skyfall was one. Anyway I don't mind it, it sounds alot more classic bond style than say "quantum of solace" (worst title, worst film). And since we're being told that we're getting a classic, 60s style bond film, then I think its actually pretty good.

SaintMark

Samuel001 said:
After many others films are released in the future, will you still call it Bond 23? That would a bit stupid, the 'lone' film if you will... suit yourself. :)

There is always the possibility that I actually enjoy bond23 and accept its title. ;)

After QoS my hopes aren't that high at the moment, and I do not dare to anticipate the movie.

thelivingroyale

jetsetwilly said:
Sorry but DAD is impossible to defend. It was a parody of the series, borderline Austin Powers and should never have been made. Brozza deserved better for his swansong, and Bond fans deserved better.

This is the problem with EON. The fact that they can make DAD, then next time make the brilliant CR, then screw up again with QoS. There is no consistency. This is why I'm apprehensive with Skyfall, because if the producers are capable of finding DAD acceptable as a film, it means we are never too far from another potential travesty that would have Fleming spinning in his grave.

The thing about DAD is, at least it was a bond film. It was a very bad, terrible bond film, but you could still tell it was a bond film. QOS was worse because it took the dark, serious side way too far and the result was nothing like a bond film, it was more like bourne. Thats why I think QOS is worse, it would've been fine if it wasn't a bond film, but it is, and it should act like it. LTK had it right, it was dark and gritty but it was still a bond film.

"This is why I'm apprehensive with Skyfall, because if the producers are capable of finding DAD acceptable as a film, it means we are never too far from another potential travesty that would have Fleming spinning in his grave"

This is basically what I've been saying for months, about how it could be terrible and we shouldn't make up our minds until we've actually seen it this time. And I get attacked for it, people say I'm being "too negative". Well I had high hopes for QOS, and look how that turned out. But I also had high hopes for CR, and that turned out great. Like you said, there's no telling what could happen, so this time I'm not setting my hopes up.

jetsetwilly

Skyfall isn't a bad title. It is certainly one I could imagine Fleming using.
In fact, had Fleming wrote a Bond novel called Skyfall, do you think the producers would have rejected it as a poor title for a film? Of course not. It would probably have been used as one of the first films in the 60's.

MajorDSmythe

I disliked it when it was announced. I thought that it sounded like a knock off of Drop Zone and Terminal Velocity. Now i've have time to think about it, I actually still dislike it

Thesis #36: Agree (but not for the Transformmers connnection

jetsetwilly

MajorDSmythe said:
I disliked it when it was announced. I thought that it sounded like a knock off of Drop Zone and Terminal Velocity. Now i've have time to think about it, I actually still dislike it

Thesis #36: Agree (but not for the Transformmers connnection

If it was a Fleming title, would you still dislike it?

Samuel001

SaintMark said:

Samuel001 said:
After many others films are released in the future, will you still call it Bond 23? That would a bit stupid, the 'lone' film if you will... suit yourself. :)

There is always the possibility that I actually enjoy bond23 and accept its title. ;)

After QoS my hopes aren't that high at the moment, and I do not dare to anticipate the movie.

Well, in that case, there's hope for you liking this film @SaintMark. I think it may well be more than alright. My fingers are crossed, let's just see what happens...

MajorDSmythe

jetsetwilly said:

MajorDSmythe said:
I disliked it when it was announced. I thought that it sounded like a knock off of Drop Zone and Terminal Velocity. Now i've have time to think about it, I actually still dislike it

Thesis #36: Agree (but not for the Transformmers connnection

If it was a Fleming title, would you still dislike it?

If SF had come from the mind of Fleming, then yes, I would still dislike it.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

I would've liked Risico or Property of a Lady, but I must say Skyfall is growing on me, and that must mean something! And who cares if Skyfall is a Transformer? Skyfall will do something Transformers(2&3)couldn't, that being a good film.

SJK91

It's not the best title, but, like @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, Skyfall as a title has grown on me.

bondbat007

At first it sounded like a video game (Bloodstone, Nightfire) but it has grown on me. I'm very interested to see the context of title in the film

Categories

In this Discussion

Announcements