› ›

Things you never want to see in a Bond film again

SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
in Bond 26 & Beyond Posts: 1,138
I didn't find a similar thread in search, but please delete if it exists.

Premise of the thread is quite simple. I'll start off.

Bond surfing

Bullet-time effects

The gunbarrel anywhere but the start
«134567…29

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2014 Posts: 23,883
    Bond crying

    A female M

    The Aston DB5 (ever again)

    A famous American actress in the lead (or in a supporting role for that matter)

    Moneypenny in the field

    lousy special effects
  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    Good ideas. I'm a bit surprised by the DB5 being included.
  • ChangChang
    edited December 2014 Posts: 107
    Pierce Brosnan era lameness.

    M out in the field.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Sark wrote: »
    Good ideas. I'm a bit surprised by the DB5 being included.

    I just think they're reducing its iconic status everytime they include it. The first time was GE, then again in CR, and then played to death in SF.

    I'd much rather they bring back the Lotus. Just as iconic and it hasn't made an appearance in decades.

  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,554
    1. Invisible car
    2. X-ray glasses
    3. lame jokes
    4. the Bond theme or film theme song being played in another instance within the film (e.g., "Live and Let Die" in the jazz club; "A View to a Kill" playing on board the cruise; Bond theme being played by tennis player Vijay Armitraj in Octopussy...ugh).
  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146
    I never want to see a non-tough Bond. We've had enough of those already.
  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    A reboot. Good the first time, dont need it again.

    Bond in clown makeup.
  • OHMSS69OHMSS69
    Posts: 2,341
    1. outrageous gadgets
    2. over reliance on CGI for breathtaking stunts.
    3. Cartoonish henchmen
    Corny dialogue
  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    Depending on what you mean by "cartoonish henchmen" you may be getting on in SPECTRE.
  • OHMSS69OHMSS69
    Posts: 2,341
    Sark wrote: »
    Depending on what you mean by "cartoonish henchmen" you may be getting on in SPECTRE.

    Jaws in MR and to a certain degree in TSWLM

    I don't think Babs or MGW will stoop to that in SP

  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146
    OHMSS69 wrote: »
    1. outrageous gadgets
    2. over reliance on CGI for breathtaking stunts.
    3. Cartoonish henchmen
    Corny dialogue

    yes, yes, and yes.
  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    Id like to never see the Idiot Plot make an appearance again: that characters have to behave like idiots in order for the plot to advance. SF is the worst in this regard.

    If Moneypenny takes her perfectly clear 2nd shot, she prevents the bad guy from getting away with the agent list, and the entire movie doesn't happen.

    If Q doesn't plug a potentially (almost certainly) infected computer into MI6's main network (an act of breathtaking stupidity) then Silva never gains that access.

    Etc.

  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited December 2014 Posts: 7,526
    Sark wrote: »
    If Moneypenny takes her perfectly clear 2nd shot, she prevents the bad guy from getting away with the agent list, and the entire movie doesn't happen.

    I don't mind this. You're taking the assumption people think and act rationally 100% of the time, even when an ally of James Bond murders James Bond at a very, very inopportune time.

    The biggest problem with that whole scenario is M. "It was the possibility of losing you versus the certainty of losing all those other agents". She didn't trust Bond to get the list from Patrice, and she lost them all!

    Sometimes in film, as in real life, somebody happens to do something dumb, and it happens to advance the plot.

  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    No, I'm not making that assumption. I'm making the assumption that at least in the Bond universe MI6 is minimally competent.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    Sark wrote: »
    No, I'm not making that assumption. I'm making the assumption that at least in the Bond universe MI6 is minimally competent.

    Fair enough, I suppose we just see it differently. Also, isn't it implied that she's a bit green, inexperienced? I can't remember if it was at all mentioned in the movie, but if so, it could help account for her poor decision making.

  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    I don't know if it was said she was inexperienced, but it was the reason she was reassigned. Regardless, in films we're accustomed to a probably unrealistic level of competence, so it's pretty jarring when someone does something so stupid. Bond was former SBS or SAS in the Craig movies, and I can't imagine that someone having gone through special forces training would make that mistake. This is Mary Goodnight level of incompetence.
  • KerimKerim Istanbul Not Constantinople
    Posts: 2,629
    Anything related to DAD.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    Lasers.
    Satellites of doom.
    Vehicles that eat other vehicles.
    Villains in Nehru Jackets.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,454
    CGI animals. Enough said.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited December 2014 Posts: 15,690
    Male characters in drags. And pink ties.
  • AnonAnon
    Posts: 246
    embarrassingly obvious and/or inappropriate product placement
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2014 Posts: 23,883
    Anon wrote: »
    embarrassingly obvious and/or inappropriate product placement

    Not even the latest Omega, proudly CGI'd onto Bond's wrist as he rides a BMW bike or his new Aston?

    I'm being facetious.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    bondjames wrote: »
    Not even the latest Omega, proudly CGI'd onto Bond's wrist as he rides a BMW bike or his new Aston?

    I'm being facetious.

    Hopefully not, as the latest Omega (Seamaster) looks decidedly worse than the Planet Ocean from Skyfall (the one they made into the Skyfall LE). IMO of course :)

    Aside from that, as long as you don't mind seeing Sony electronics everywhere, I wouldn't worry too much about it.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    It could be argued that we have already shamefully seen the biggest use of product placement in a Bond film for SPECTRE. The new Aston actually shared top billing with the actors this time around.....can't think of that happening before.

    I just read that Heineken is getting major promotion in the movie and that this will reduce the budget somewhat (as a contra cost) and also that Mexico is paying the producers to have Bond film there.

    Looks like overt product placement is here to stay sadly.

    I agree, the latest Seamaster is not that great. Frankly, I've always wanted Bond to go back to Rolex, particularly the Submariner. There is such iconic status with that watch even today and it is a toolwatch first and foremost, and a yuppy add-on second.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2014 Posts: 23,883
    repost
  • AnonAnon
    Posts: 246
    bondjames wrote: »
    Not even the latest Omega, proudly CGI'd onto Bond's wrist as he rides a BMW bike or his new Aston?

    I'm being facetious.

    Ha ha. But in serious vein, I have no problem with Bond wearing an Omega and it being visible if you want to look out for it. But it's criminal the way they dwell over full-screen pack shots of the stuff they're being a shill for. I'm sure subtle placements are more effective in the long run (in my case at least - I feel negatively about those brands that insist on such in-your-face presences)
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    bondjames wrote: »
    It could be argued that we have already shamefully seen the biggest use of product placement in a Bond film for SPECTRE. The new Aston actually shared top billing with the actors this time around.....can't think of that happening before.

    I just read that Heineken is getting major promotion in the movie and that this will reduce the budget somewhat (as a contra cost) and also that Mexico is paying the producers to have Bond film there.

    Looks like overt product placement is here to stay sadly.

    I agree, the latest Seamaster is not that great. Frankly, I've always wanted Bond to go back to Rolex, particularly the Submariner. There is such iconic status with that watch even today and it is a toolwatch first and foremost, and a yuppy add-on second.

    I believe Omega actually supplies watches to the SBS/SAS, so it would make sense for the Bond character to wear an Omega. I prefer them aesthetically to Rolex, as well, so I'd be sad to see them use a different brand.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    Daniel-Craig-wearing-a-Submariner.jpg

    Rolex Submariner; there ya go :D

    A little hard to see in that photo, but it is an attractive watch. Still prefer this though:

    Daniel-Craig-montre-Seamaster-Planet-Ocean-600-M1.jpeg
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2014 Posts: 23,883
    Thanks. I didn't realize he ever wore a submariner for a Bond photoshoot (that's the new maxi-dial as well). I know he wears Rolex personally though. He's been spotted with the Milgauss and the Daytona.

    The Planet Ocean is a bit thick for me. Personally, I'm craving an Aqua Terra 8500 like the one he wears in some other scenes in SF.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,786
    CSI Surfing.
Sign In or Register to comment.