It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
the gun barrel was always going to be a big concirn for me. its what i wanted, regardless to how good film is.
What annoys me the most, and will for many, is that qos ended with the gun barrel to close the book on casino and quantum. Now that looks to have been pointless when they put it at the end again.
i dont think there is any great exuse to not have it. watching a gun barrel a the begining seperates bond films from other action films. It makes it feel more thrilling as it opens. Oh well, no point going on, whats done is done.
The espionage, style, sophistication, action, wit, villains, breathtaking sets and action are amongst some of the things that make a Bond film different, and that's why I love James Bond.
I understand that the lack of a gun barrel at the beginning may leave some fans a bit flat and disappointed, but IMO having the gun barrel at the end will leave many people on an incredible high!
I don't think so. People said with QOS, it showed that he'd become Bond, etc.
I don't think moving it to the end "means" anything.
had they gone back to tradition, and put it back at the beginning of Skyfall - then IMO, the symbolism of the gun barrel at the end QOS still remains... now with them having it at the end of SF as well - well, it more or less throws that symbolism in the garbage...
the thing that i dont understand, and it leaves me scratching my head... is why go through all the trouble of marketing the gun barrel so heavily leading into Skyfall if not to put it back where it belongs?... it's on the very first Skyfall poster - the Adele adverts for her theme song, and it's part of the 50th Anniversary logo..... now granted, it's still in the film, just at the end - but I myself (and a lot of others) took all this reference to the gun barrel in various adverts as they fully want to make sure to fans that is going back to "classic Bond" and the gun barrel placement, a hot topic of debate for QOS, will be put back where it belongs.....
while it does not and will not ruin the movie in the slightest - it does kind of make you feel slightly 'lead on' - if u catch my drift..
exactly - even HapHazard has said the same thing.. that he couldn't picture the gun barrel being anywhere but at the beginning of SF considering the trouble they are going through to have it everywhere associated with the film and 50th Anniversary........... but, his statement was made before the news of it being at the end was revealed..
Not the biggest possible problem, but you get my point...
if it's not at the start of Skyfall (considering it's a stand alone story, not associated with either CR or QOS) then i highly doubt, nor do i expect it to be back at the beginning of Bond 24 or 25...... this was as good a time as any to throw it back where it belongs - but if they aren't doing it now, then they never will........ no sense in getting your hopes up...
So, who knows? :\"> :)>-
I can see your point, but from what I gathered:
Yeah if they don't put it at the start now (with it being the 50th anniversary, people complaining after it was at the end of QOS, etc), they might never put it at the start again.
It was there for 40 years, 20 films, so yeah I think it is kind of an unwritten rule. There's just no need to change it, it seems like a chang for the sake of change. At least in CR and QOS they sort of had an excuse.
Purrfect intro do DC's Bond.
Blanket statements of change for the sake of change and the like kind of makes arguments redundant since you haven't yet seen the film to make that determination. Sorry but I can't take seriously these comments based on knee jerk condemnation.
i have no problem with where the GB is at at all in the film frankly, though i would prefer it at the start.....
i'll echo @thelivingroyale 's comment about it being "change for the sake of change".... it really is when you look at it.... changing the look and placement of it adds really nothing to the plot or film itself, so why move it? - it was alright for CR, and i can understand the symbolism of having it at the end of QOS.... but as i've stated before myself, it's a cosmetic change that wasn't and isn't necessary...
There's just no reason to move it.
It's like the opening crawl of Star Wars, the trumpet in the Godfather or the title sequence of Rocky with scenes of the previous movie...