Where does Bond go after Craig?

1421422424426427482

Comments

  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited December 2023 Posts: 7,965
    talos7 wrote: »
    Someone may have mentioned this, and I missed it, but one thing that has advanced through the years is fight choreography. So, to some degree, its a bit unfair to compare actors from different eras when it come to how their fights looked on screen. Without a doubt Daniel Craig benefitted greatly from outstanding fight choreography. Now, he had to have the athletic prowess to pull it off ,so it was very collaborative.

    To throw a spanner in the works here, I found a lot of Craig's fights to be over-choreographed after CR. They lost something for me from film to film. I think Brosnan's were the same. He peaked early and then fell off a bit. With that in mind, it almost makes the actor's abilities irrelevant.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited December 2023 Posts: 7,944
    @007ClassicBondFan you’re push-backing on my opinion; it’s not right and it’s not wrong.

    @talos7 , the Die Hard fight choreography stands the test of tim; it’s incredible, visceral and exciting. That was seven years before Goldeneye.

    And Bean’s execution also is as good as anything… I just found one dance partner in the Goldeneye fight, better than the other.
  • talos7 wrote: »
    Someone may have mentioned this, and I missed it, but one thing that has advanced through the years is fight choreography. So, to some degree, its a bit unfair to compare actors from different eras when it come to how their fights looked on screen. Without a doubt Daniel Craig benefitted greatly from outstanding fight choreography. Now, he had to have the athletic prowess to pull it off ,so it was very collaborative.

    To throw a spanner in the works here, I found a lot of Craig's fights to be over-choreographed after CR. They lost something for me from film to film. I think Brosnan's were the same. He peaked early and then fell off a bit. With that in mind, it almost makes the actor's abilities irrelevant.

    I agree. I wouldn’t say that I didn’t find some of the later Craig fights enjoyable, but there is a night and day difference for me between the Stairwell Fight in CR, and the Shanghai Skyscraper fight in SF. Same for Brosnan too; a huge night and day between the fights of GE and TND.
  • Benny wrote: »
    Found him...
    wndky0vgvefh.jpg

    Nope.

    Could not agree more. If he is cast as Bond, I'm out. And not because he is black. There are several black actors I would be fine with. He ain't one of them.
  • Posts: 2,543
    talos7 wrote: »
    Someone may have mentioned this, and I missed it, but one thing that has advanced through the years is fight choreography. So, to some degree, its a bit unfair to compare actors from different eras when it come to how their fights looked on screen. Without a doubt Daniel Craig benefitted greatly from outstanding fight choreography. Now, he had to have the athletic prowess to pull it off ,so it was very collaborative.

    To throw a spanner in the works here, I found a lot of Craig's fights to be over-choreographed after CR. They lost something for me from film to film. I think Brosnan's were the same. He peaked early and then fell off a bit. With that in mind, it almost makes the actor's abilities irrelevant.

    I think a big part of it is concept too. CR leant a bit more into the idea that Bond could actually get hurt and even struggled against certain opponents (there’s certainly some very ‘polished’ looking choreography in that film, but you also have things like the stairwell fight that showcases that idea). SP and NTTD on the other hand showed a Bond who was older/in his prime and had a good deal of training in his arsenal. It’s even a bit of a gag in SP that ordinary goons aren’t capable of restraining Bond.

    There’s also an element of how these fights are shot/edited. Some films in general make very poor choices in these areas which are then blamed on the fight choreography (ie. The Dark Knight Rises).

    I think the best Bond fights are the ones that look like actual scraps, where Bond even struggles a bit - the train fight in FRWL, the club scene in TMWTGG, the Travelyan brawl in GE, the stair fight in CR etc.
  • peter wrote: »
    @007ClassicBondFan you’re push-backing on my opinion; it’s not right and it’s not wrong.

    The issue isn’t with your opinions @peter, I’ve said at least twice now that you’re entitled to them. But you can’t expect to make biased claims about an actor/film you dislike without getting some kind of push back.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 7,944
    @007ClassicBondFan , of course it’s a bias. Based on my opinion.

    As you may’ve noted : I’m not pushing back on your love of Brosnan. You think he’s great. I don’t. I replied about athleticism, you don’t agree, the world still spins.
  • Well @peter, I guess in that case all I can say is I just fundamentally disagree, and I’ve listed my reasons, as you have also. This must be where we agree to disagree then. I hope I didn’t come across as rude, I certainly wasn’t trying to. I do hope you find enjoyment in Brosnan’s era at some point in the future, and I do mean that with sincerity because there’s plenty to love about his take on Bond, just like all the others.

    But mark my words, you WILL be converted…
    practically-how-r-jamesbond-sees-pierce-brosnan-v0-fpao7nhun3rb1.png?s=9d2e4fa994a19119ed7535d83e05a41912ddc101
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 7,944
    😂 @007ClassicBondFan , they’re just opinions and as I said above, they’re not right or wrong. So no, I didn’t take any offence.

    But I’m also on record that it’s my opinion that TND is Pierce’s best, and I thoroughly enjoyed the first half of the film. I didn’t like the second half at all, but that was more to do with direction and had nothing to do with Brozz.

    I’ve also been on record that although I’d rather have had Dalton back, or Fiennes or Neeson play Bond, it’s my belief that Pierce was the right man for the job in ‘95, and I don’t think that anyone would have put 007 back on the map, as he did. So although he’s not my cup of tea, and although I’d rather have had other actors fill the lead role, I can also see and I truly believe that it was only Brozz that could have delivered a mega hit and announce to the world that James Bond was indeed back!

    So my opinions on the man are a little more nuanced as I respect his place in 007’s film history…
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,860
    talos7 wrote: »
    Someone may have mentioned this, and I missed it, but one thing that has advanced through the years is fight choreography. So, to some degree, its a bit unfair to compare actors from different eras when it come to how their fights looked on screen. Without a doubt Daniel Craig benefitted greatly from outstanding fight choreography. Now, he had to have the athletic prowess to pull it off ,so it was very collaborative.

    To throw a spanner in the works here, I found a lot of Craig's fights to be over-choreographed after CR. They lost something for me from film to film. I think Brosnan's were the same. He peaked early and then fell off a bit. With that in mind, it almost makes the actor's abilities irrelevant.

    I agree. I wouldn’t say that I didn’t find some of the later Craig fights enjoyable, but there is a night and day difference for me between the Stairwell Fight in CR, and the Shanghai Skyscraper fight in SF. Same for Brosnan too; a huge night and day between the fights of GE and TND.

    I blame Mendes.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited December 2023 Posts: 7,709
    echo wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Someone may have mentioned this, and I missed it, but one thing that has advanced through the years is fight choreography. So, to some degree, its a bit unfair to compare actors from different eras when it come to how their fights looked on screen. Without a doubt Daniel Craig benefitted greatly from outstanding fight choreography. Now, he had to have the athletic prowess to pull it off ,so it was very collaborative.

    To throw a spanner in the works here, I found a lot of Craig's fights to be over-choreographed after CR. They lost something for me from film to film. I think Brosnan's were the same. He peaked early and then fell off a bit. With that in mind, it almost makes the actor's abilities irrelevant.

    I agree. I wouldn’t say that I didn’t find some of the later Craig fights enjoyable, but there is a night and day difference for me between the Stairwell Fight in CR, and the Shanghai Skyscraper fight in SF. Same for Brosnan too; a huge night and day between the fights of GE and TND.

    I blame Mendes.

    I can completely understand preferring one over the other but both are striving for two completely aesthetics; the stairwell is meant to be brutal and gritty while the skyscraper is stylish, cool and surreal. I love them both ; comparing them is like comparing apples to oranges.
  • echo wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Someone may have mentioned this, and I missed it, but one thing that has advanced through the years is fight choreography. So, to some degree, its a bit unfair to compare actors from different eras when it come to how their fights looked on screen. Without a doubt Daniel Craig benefitted greatly from outstanding fight choreography. Now, he had to have the athletic prowess to pull it off ,so it was very collaborative.

    To throw a spanner in the works here, I found a lot of Craig's fights to be over-choreographed after CR. They lost something for me from film to film. I think Brosnan's were the same. He peaked early and then fell off a bit. With that in mind, it almost makes the actor's abilities irrelevant.

    I agree. I wouldn’t say that I didn’t find some of the later Craig fights enjoyable, but there is a night and day difference for me between the Stairwell Fight in CR, and the Shanghai Skyscraper fight in SF. Same for Brosnan too; a huge night and day between the fights of GE and TND.

    I blame Mendes.

    Everyone blames Mendes.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited December 2023 Posts: 2,857
    The drop-off in the intensity of the hand-to-hand stuff was really noticeable between CR/QOS and SF. The Bond that killed Slate would've slapped Patrice off the top of that train well before they got to the bridge and wouldn't have just stood there in the komodo pit with his fists up in a 1940s 'who wants to fight me?' stance. I had a hard time believing that the Book of Mormon could fight CraigBond to a standstill on the trawler in NTTD too. I know he was older and had been out of the game for five years, but...nah.
  • Posts: 2,543
    I actually think QOS shows a rather big drop in quality in terms of the fight scenes seen previously in CR. I have a similar issue with the Bourne films, but handheld ‘documentary-like’ camerawork and highly choreographed fight scenes tend to come off as fake looking to me because there’s such a weird disconnect between the style and content.

    Even just on a basic level compare the chase scenes in CR and QOS - in the former we see Bond struggling, even taking shortcuts or brute force in order to keep up with the parkour expert. In QOS he gets banged around a bit, but even falling from great heights he just keeps going. I always felt it betrayed what CR was trying to do and robbed the film of a sense that Bond could legitimately get hurt or die (even in his fight with Green at the end there’s a strange lack of tension despite the fact the villain is wielding an axe - it just feels as though Bond is obviously going to come out on top). SF, for all its stylised sequences, lets the story/context do the work. We see Bond at his best getting injured during the PTS so we’re legitimately not sure how he’ll fare during his later fight with Patrice, and indeed any subsequent chases or stand offs.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,857
    Well, QOS isn't for everyone... ;)
  • 007HallY wrote: »
    I actually think QOS shows a rather big drop in quality in terms of the fight scenes seen previously in CR. I have a similar issue with the Bourne films, but handheld ‘documentary-like’ camerawork and highly choreographed fight scenes tend to come off as fake looking to me because there’s such a weird disconnect between the style and content.

    Agreed 100%. Bourne perhaps may have been too much of an influence on QOS in that regard. Ironically I think it’s the reason why of all the Bourne films, I still prefer Identity.
  • edited December 2023 Posts: 2,543
    Venutius wrote: »
    Well, QOS isn't for everyone... ;)

    Haha, true! For what it’s worth I think its high points are elsewhere rather than its action sequences.
    007HallY wrote: »
    I actually think QOS shows a rather big drop in quality in terms of the fight scenes seen previously in CR. I have a similar issue with the Bourne films, but handheld ‘documentary-like’ camerawork and highly choreographed fight scenes tend to come off as fake looking to me because there’s such a weird disconnect between the style and content.

    Agreed 100%. Bourne perhaps may have been too much of an influence on QOS in that regard. Ironically I think it’s the reason why of all the Bourne films, I still prefer Identity.

    There’s definitely a bit of Bourne in the Craig era in general. But yeah, it seems to come out most in QOS.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,857
    of all the Bourne films, I still prefer Identity.
    Indeed. In fact, no Liman, no Bourne - The Bourne Identity is a standalone in my house.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 664
    Venutius wrote: »
    of all the Bourne films, I still prefer Identity.
    Indeed. In fact, no Liman, no Bourne - The Bourne Identity is a standalone in my house.

    I feel the same way - Identity is the only Bourne film for me.

    Actually, having said that, I like the Renner-led Legacy, but I'm very much in the minority there.
  • Posts: 1,419
    The scenes in Bond films I don't look forward to are fight scenes. They are long, repetitive, and predictable. I am not suggesting the Bond films do away with fights, but the super-hero style of fighting that goes on and on and inflicts punishment no actual body could withstand is cliched and often boring. Fights in some Bond films have worked quite well, but in recent years they've been become spectacles without much believability.
  • Venutius wrote: »
    of all the Bourne films, I still prefer Identity.
    Indeed. In fact, no Liman, no Bourne - The Bourne Identity is a standalone in my house.

    It’s the only film in the series that works on its own two feet. I actually remember reading somewhere that Matt Damon felt there didn’t need to be any sequels after Identity at one time.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 3,959
    https://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/artsandculture/arid-40763217.html

    Some fun viewpoints on where Bond should go next.
  • Posts: 1,419
    Nothing offered by these writers that fans of this site haven't already suggested and more.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,851
    I still think Christopher Nolan isn't out of the picture yet. He was playing coy in that interview, he wouldn't announce anything about his next project until after the oscars regardless of what it was. It reminds me of how Craig swore down that he hadn't signed on for another Bond film.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,857
    Although he hadn't, tbf - Craig was out of contract after SP, wasn't he?
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,851
    Venutius wrote: »
    Although he hadn't, tbf - Craig was out of contract after SP, wasn't he?

    But he denied it literally on the same day that he later went on Colbert show and confessed to having a part in bond 25. These are the kind of Hollywood games that are played all the time, I remember Cillian Murphy being interviewed by Simon Mayo and Mark Kermode before the release of The Dark Knight Rises and watching him squirm as the hosts tried to get him to admit he was playing the scarecrow again.

    I'm not saying Nolan is definitely doing Bond 26, but I think his comment about the rumours "not being true" doesn't rule him out of eventually being the man they go with. It looks like EON aren't even at the stage of thinking about directors yet, we aren't likely to see the next film until the late 2020's.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited December 2023 Posts: 2,857
    Ah, yes, that time. Didn't Dan say that it had been a deliberate tactic, so that the announcement could be made on the tv show? Yes, EON have no qualms about spinning yarns until they're ready to go public - Mendes was only a 'consultant' for the follow-up to QOS; Naomi Harris wasn't playing Moneypenny, she was playing a character called Eve; Waltz wasn't playing Blofeld, he was playing a character called Franz Oberhauser, etc. So, yes, it's not implausible that Nolan just came out with a cover story when asked about Bond 26.
  • edited December 2023 Posts: 365
    More Mescal rumours. According to this new article, Mescal and ATJ are the two frontrunners: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-12846345/paul-mescal-james-bond-007.html

    I loooove ATJ, but dislike Mescal probably more than anyone here. I don't think I would be able to muster up any excitement for Bond 26 if he is cast.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,709
    More Mescal rumours. According to this new article, Mescal and ATJ are the two frontrunners: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-12846345/paul-mescal-james-bond-007.html

    I loooove ATJ, but dislike Mescal probably more than anyone here. I don't think I would be able to muster up any excitement for Bond 26 if he is cast.

    Either would be a tremendous disappointment for me.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 3,959
    talos7 wrote: »
    More Mescal rumours. According to this new article, Mescal and ATJ are the two frontrunners: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-12846345/paul-mescal-james-bond-007.html

    I loooove ATJ, but dislike Mescal probably more than anyone here. I don't think I would be able to muster up any excitement for Bond 26 if he is cast.

    Either would be a tremendous disappointment for me.

    I just don't know who they could cast. Casting a Bond movie (in any role) is one of the hardest things for me.
Sign In or Register to comment.