PETITION: Give the fans a more influential say in the (uncertain) future of the James Bond franchise

12346

Comments

  • Posts: 4,619
    Dennison wrote: »
    Is this for real? LMAO
    Exactly my thoughts. I admire Gustav's passion, but this seems to be a rather pointless exercise.
  • Dennison wrote: »
    Is this for real? LMAO
    Exactly my thoughts. I admire Gustav's passion, but this seems to be a rather pointless exercise.

    Why is it pointless to channel criticism in alternative ways in here? To turn criticism in something more cosntructive and less black-and-white? There's also a great deal one could learn from the way I am approaching criticism instead of just painting this as pointless or 'ridiculous'. Hence I just posted this in 'the other topic':
    bondjames wrote: »
    HASEROT wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Personally, I'm hoping for more studio input on these new deals.

    i have to check you on this one - but why?... when has a studio ever been at the forefront of good ideas?... typically, whenever a studio interjects themselves into creative matters, it ends badly.. i will use the examples of X3: X-men United, The Amazing Spider-man 1 and 2, and the Ghostbusters reboot as prime examples..

    You probably want a tighter leash - checks and balances sort of issues.. but i think that needs to come from EON's end, and them having a clear concise plan of what they want to do, and maybe they need to take the Marvel approach from now on - and thats hire directors that have to execute their vision - instead of letting auteurs come in, and run rampant.?
    I didn't read the Sony hack leaks, but having visited the thread often I noticed that they came up with some good suggestions, and actually advised EON/Mendes that things were out of control with that debacle of a script for SP.

    Additionally, I'm increasingly uncomfortable with the control that directors (and actors) appear to be given with this franchise, as you noted. To me the best film from the Sony stable remains CR, which more or less followed the script (sure they shook up the tropes, but it was still less arty farty than what's come since imho, including SP). I think that's because it was a new start, and so everyone did their best to stay on message.

    Ultimately it's true that theoretically we have EON there to veto any rubbish ideas. However, they appear to be the ones who have let the auteurs (again including actor) run wild recently, and so I believe the studio 'bean counters' need to exercise more control and discipline. Hopefully that is what will happen for B25, and if not, then for B26.

    To a certain extend I agree with you @BondJames. Hence I actually wrote the letter and created the subsequent petition here. I remember vividly the negative, slightly depressed sentiment that got the better of me after the SonyLeaks went public. You could describe that sentiment as: "It would have been better if the SonyLeaks would never have happened. Because it turns the Bond fan community into a rather rogue, over-critical fan base and it makes EON Productions even more of a 'closed shop'". So I think in the long end the leaks didn't change a lot. On the contrary, it might have facilitated EON Productions in becoming a bit more fearful, less transparent and less open-minded to some initial good ideas that are floating around because of these SonyLeaks.

    Obviously the above should never be a reason to write a rather daft, incoherent, illogical screenplay. And I agree that a good Bond film falls or stands on the actions of the cinematic gatekeepers that screenplay writers are in my opinion. I sincerely hope Neal Purvis & Robert Wade do their uttermost best for Bond 25 and throw away their creative ineptness and numbness that got the better of them (as mentioned so clearly by them in March, please read my letter).

    But, everything's a matter of perspective in the end. And I sincerely believe that this......new 'production approach', in which cast and crew are getting more creative influence over the franchise, also created a lot of good. And I mean a lot of good. From my perspective good stories not always result in good movies, and some timeless classic films were actually not that dependent on tightly knitted storylines and screenplays. The quality of a film like Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey", one of my all-time favourites, is much more dependent on production design, cinematography and special effects, than it is on plot and character development. It's an Arthur C. Clarke-ian, almost Biblical piece of 'cinematic literature' that leaves a lot of themes open for your own interpretation. The same with a more recent film, like Alejandro G. Iñárritu's "The Revenant", which in essence was a feast of incredible cinematography, letting audiences indulge in the frigid, cold North-West of early USA.

    By that example, I still find "Skyfall" an impressive feature. Sam Mendes did something wonderful to the Bond franchise, by focusing more on characters and cinematography instead of easy-to-understand, 'pre-chewed', coherent stories. Does it make "Skyfall" less good than "Casino Royale"? Well, we know that answer within the confinements of this forum. But luckily outside this forum there is an overwhelming majority who can not choose easily between either "Casino Royale" and "Skyfall" (this: http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2017/11/09/skyfall-fifth-anniversary , and this: http://www.ladbible.com/entertainment/film-and-tv-casino-royale-has-been-voted-the-best-james-bond-film-20171111 ).

    So while I am now pretty critical towards the direction of the Bond franchise, I honestly don't think that the Craig-era went mostly downhill after "Casino Royale". The choices made by Barbara and Michael (and Craig) for the 23rd Bond film "Skyfall" worked wonderfully in my honest opinion. Mendes' choice to focus on characters, drama and cinematography created a film that's among the best of the bunch. I even want to admit that, with some self-conscious narrative repairs and screenplay improvements -if Barbara and Michael weren't so adament to keep certain expensive stage recreations, like the London bridge- "SPECTRE" could have been a shoe-in for TOP 10 of best Bond films as well.

    So while I agree with you @BondJames that EON needs to refocus heavily for Bond 25, I disagree with you that EON "lets the auteurs run wild" in the past 7 years. Their creative decisions for the most part paid off. And in all honestly, we haven't seen a straight downfall of quality that we experienced more clearly after "GoldenEye". Being critical is good. I have my sincere worries as well. Hence I tried to address them with constructive and positive-spirited criticism in my petition. But it's not really helpful, nor is it constructive to say EON is letting things run wild. I probably am a 'lonely voice' on this forum with this opinion.

    But look on the bright side: I don't mind another Sam Mendes-like Bond film in which character development and cinematography are still very important pillars of the good film. Just add a bit more pro-active and logical thinking when it comes to writing a good story treatment and screenplay, and in the process improve a bit on elements like humour and action a la Steven Soderbergh. And et voila.....Bond 25 might as well become another timeless classic. Just have a little faith, don't think to black-and-white (because there are more roads leading to Rome), and dare to channel constructive criticism in alternative ways instead of following just one 'grand dark force' that got the better of most people in this particular topic.

    Wouldn't you say @DarthDimi :-).

    So it's not just overblown passion from my side. I have given this a long thought. And frankly, certain forummembers in here could learn a bit from the more positive-spirited, more constructive approach I have towards criticism :-).
  • Posts: 1,031
    Dennison wrote: »
    Is this for real? LMAO
    Exactly my thoughts. I admire Gustav's passion, but this seems to be a rather pointless exercise.

    Why is it pointless to channel criticism in alternative ways in here? To turn criticism in something more cosntructive and less black-and-white? There's also a great deal one could learn from the way I am approaching criticism instead of just painting this as pointless or 'ridiculous'. Hence I just posted this in 'the other topic':
    bondjames wrote: »
    HASEROT wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Personally, I'm hoping for more studio input on these new deals.

    i have to check you on this one - but why?... when has a studio ever been at the forefront of good ideas?... typically, whenever a studio interjects themselves into creative matters, it ends badly.. i will use the examples of X3: X-men United, The Amazing Spider-man 1 and 2, and the Ghostbusters reboot as prime examples..

    You probably want a tighter leash - checks and balances sort of issues.. but i think that needs to come from EON's end, and them having a clear concise plan of what they want to do, and maybe they need to take the Marvel approach from now on - and thats hire directors that have to execute their vision - instead of letting auteurs come in, and run rampant.?
    I didn't read the Sony hack leaks, but having visited the thread often I noticed that they came up with some good suggestions, and actually advised EON/Mendes that things were out of control with that debacle of a script for SP.

    Additionally, I'm increasingly uncomfortable with the control that directors (and actors) appear to be given with this franchise, as you noted. To me the best film from the Sony stable remains CR, which more or less followed the script (sure they shook up the tropes, but it was still less arty farty than what's come since imho, including SP). I think that's because it was a new start, and so everyone did their best to stay on message.

    Ultimately it's true that theoretically we have EON there to veto any rubbish ideas. However, they appear to be the ones who have let the auteurs (again including actor) run wild recently, and so I believe the studio 'bean counters' need to exercise more control and discipline. Hopefully that is what will happen for B25, and if not, then for B26.

    To a certain extend I agree with you @BondJames. Hence I actually wrote the letter and created the subsequent petition here. I remember vividly the negative, slightly depressed sentiment that got the better of me after the SonyLeaks went public. You could describe that sentiment as: "It would have been better if the SonyLeaks would never have happened. Because it turns the Bond fan community into a rather rogue, over-critical fan base and it makes EON Productions even more of a 'closed shop'". So I think in the long end the leaks didn't change a lot. On the contrary, it might have facilitated EON Productions in becoming a bit more fearful, less transparent and less open-minded to some initial good ideas that are floating around because of these SonyLeaks.

    Obviously the above should never be a reason to write a rather daft, incoherent, illogical screenplay. And I agree that a good Bond film falls or stands on the actions of the cinematic gatekeepers that screenplay writers are in my opinion. I sincerely hope Neal Purvis & Robert Wade do their uttermost best for Bond 25 and throw away their creative ineptness and numbness that got the better of them (as mentioned so clearly by them in March, please read my letter).

    But, everything's a matter of perspective in the end. And I sincerely believe that this......new 'production approach', in which cast and crew are getting more creative influence over the franchise, also created a lot of good. And I mean a lot of good. From my perspective good stories not always result in good movies, and some timeless classic films were actually not that dependent on tightly knitted storylines and screenplays. The quality of a film like Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey", one of my all-time favourites, is much more dependent on production design, cinematography and special effects, than it is on plot and character development. It's an Arthur C. Clarke-ian, almost Biblical piece of 'cinematic literature' that leaves a lot of themes open for your own interpretation. The same with a more recent film, like Alejandro G. Iñárritu's "The Revenant", which in essence was a feast of incredible cinematography, letting audiences indulge in the frigid, cold North-West of early USA.

    By that example, I still find "Skyfall" an impressive feature. Sam Mendes did something wonderful to the Bond franchise, by focusing more on characters and cinematography instead of easy-to-understand, 'pre-chewed', coherent stories. Does it make "Skyfall" less good than "Casino Royale"? Well, we know that answer within the confinements of this forum. But luckily outside this forum there is an overwhelming majority who can not choose easily between either "Casino Royale" and "Skyfall" (this: http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2017/11/09/skyfall-fifth-anniversary , and this: http://www.ladbible.com/entertainment/film-and-tv-casino-royale-has-been-voted-the-best-james-bond-film-20171111 ).

    So while I am now pretty critical towards the direction of the Bond franchise, I honestly don't think that the Craig-era went mostly downhill after "Casino Royale". The choices made by Barbara and Michael (and Craig) for the 23rd Bond film "Skyfall" worked wonderfully in my honest opinion. Mendes' choice to focus on characters, drama and cinematography created a film that's among the best of the bunch. I even want to admit that, with some self-conscious narrative repairs and screenplay improvements -if Barbara and Michael weren't so adament to keep certain expensive stage recreations, like the London bridge- "SPECTRE" could have been a shoe-in for TOP 10 of best Bond films as well.

    So while I agree with you @BondJames that EON needs to refocus heavily for Bond 25, I disagree with you that EON "lets the auteurs run wild" in the past 7 years. Their creative decisions for the most part paid off. And in all honestly, we haven't seen a straight downfall of quality that we experienced more clearly after "GoldenEye". Being critical is good. I have my sincere worries as well. Hence I tried to address them with constructive and positive-spirited criticism in my petition. But it's not really helpful, nor is it constructive to say EON is letting things run wild. I probably am a 'lonely voice' on this forum with this opinion.

    But look on the bright side: I don't mind another Sam Mendes-like Bond film in which character development and cinematography are still very important pillars of the good film. Just add a bit more pro-active and logical thinking when it comes to writing a good story treatment and screenplay, and in the process improve a bit on elements like humour and action a la Steven Soderbergh. And et voila.....Bond 25 might as well become another timeless classic. Just have a little faith, don't think to black-and-white (because there are more roads leading to Rome), and dare to channel constructive criticism in alternative ways instead of following just one 'grand dark force' that got the better of most people in this particular topic.

    Wouldn't you say @DarthDimi :-).

    So it's not just overblown passion from my side. I have given this a long thought. And frankly, certain forummembers in here could learn a bit from the more positive-spirited, more constructive approach I have towards criticism :-).

    Bravo!
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Dennison wrote: »
    Is this for real? LMAO
    Exactly my thoughts. I admire Gustav's passion, but this seems to be a rather pointless exercise.

    Why is it pointless to channel criticism in alternative ways in here? To turn criticism in something more cosntructive and less black-and-white? There's also a great deal one could learn from the way I am approaching criticism instead of just painting this as pointless or 'ridiculous'. Hence I just posted this in 'the other topic':
    bondjames wrote: »
    HASEROT wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Personally, I'm hoping for more studio input on these new deals.

    i have to check you on this one - but why?... when has a studio ever been at the forefront of good ideas?... typically, whenever a studio interjects themselves into creative matters, it ends badly.. i will use the examples of X3: X-men United, The Amazing Spider-man 1 and 2, and the Ghostbusters reboot as prime examples..

    You probably want a tighter leash - checks and balances sort of issues.. but i think that needs to come from EON's end, and them having a clear concise plan of what they want to do, and maybe they need to take the Marvel approach from now on - and thats hire directors that have to execute their vision - instead of letting auteurs come in, and run rampant.?
    I didn't read the Sony hack leaks, but having visited the thread often I noticed that they came up with some good suggestions, and actually advised EON/Mendes that things were out of control with that debacle of a script for SP.

    Additionally, I'm increasingly uncomfortable with the control that directors (and actors) appear to be given with this franchise, as you noted. To me the best film from the Sony stable remains CR, which more or less followed the script (sure they shook up the tropes, but it was still less arty farty than what's come since imho, including SP). I think that's because it was a new start, and so everyone did their best to stay on message.

    Ultimately it's true that theoretically we have EON there to veto any rubbish ideas. However, they appear to be the ones who have let the auteurs (again including actor) run wild recently, and so I believe the studio 'bean counters' need to exercise more control and discipline. Hopefully that is what will happen for B25, and if not, then for B26.

    To a certain extend I agree with you @BondJames. Hence I actually wrote the letter and created the subsequent petition here. I remember vividly the negative, slightly depressed sentiment that got the better of me after the SonyLeaks went public. You could describe that sentiment as: "It would have been better if the SonyLeaks would never have happened. Because it turns the Bond fan community into a rather rogue, over-critical fan base and it makes EON Productions even more of a 'closed shop'". So I think in the long end the leaks didn't change a lot. On the contrary, it might have facilitated EON Productions in becoming a bit more fearful, less transparent and less open-minded to some initial good ideas that are floating around because of these SonyLeaks.

    Obviously the above should never be a reason to write a rather daft, incoherent, illogical screenplay. And I agree that a good Bond film falls or stands on the actions of the cinematic gatekeepers that screenplay writers are in my opinion. I sincerely hope Neal Purvis & Robert Wade do their uttermost best for Bond 25 and throw away their creative ineptness and numbness that got the better of them (as mentioned so clearly by them in March, please read my letter).

    But, everything's a matter of perspective in the end. And I sincerely believe that this......new 'production approach', in which cast and crew are getting more creative influence over the franchise, also created a lot of good. And I mean a lot of good. From my perspective good stories not always result in good movies, and some timeless classic films were actually not that dependent on tightly knitted storylines and screenplays. The quality of a film like Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey", one of my all-time favourites, is much more dependent on production design, cinematography and special effects, than it is on plot and character development. It's an Arthur C. Clarke-ian, almost Biblical piece of 'cinematic literature' that leaves a lot of themes open for your own interpretation. The same with a more recent film, like Alejandro G. Iñárritu's "The Revenant", which in essence was a feast of incredible cinematography, letting audiences indulge in the frigid, cold North-West of early USA.

    By that example, I still find "Skyfall" an impressive feature. Sam Mendes did something wonderful to the Bond franchise, by focusing more on characters and cinematography instead of easy-to-understand, 'pre-chewed', coherent stories. Does it make "Skyfall" less good than "Casino Royale"? Well, we know that answer within the confinements of this forum. But luckily outside this forum there is an overwhelming majority who can not choose easily between either "Casino Royale" and "Skyfall" (this: http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2017/11/09/skyfall-fifth-anniversary , and this: http://www.ladbible.com/entertainment/film-and-tv-casino-royale-has-been-voted-the-best-james-bond-film-20171111 ).

    So while I am now pretty critical towards the direction of the Bond franchise, I honestly don't think that the Craig-era went mostly downhill after "Casino Royale". The choices made by Barbara and Michael (and Craig) for the 23rd Bond film "Skyfall" worked wonderfully in my honest opinion. Mendes' choice to focus on characters, drama and cinematography created a film that's among the best of the bunch. I even want to admit that, with some self-conscious narrative repairs and screenplay improvements -if Barbara and Michael weren't so adament to keep certain expensive stage recreations, like the London bridge- "SPECTRE" could have been a shoe-in for TOP 10 of best Bond films as well.

    So while I agree with you @BondJames that EON needs to refocus heavily for Bond 25, I disagree with you that EON "lets the auteurs run wild" in the past 7 years. Their creative decisions for the most part paid off. And in all honestly, we haven't seen a straight downfall of quality that we experienced more clearly after "GoldenEye". Being critical is good. I have my sincere worries as well. Hence I tried to address them with constructive and positive-spirited criticism in my petition. But it's not really helpful, nor is it constructive to say EON is letting things run wild. I probably am a 'lonely voice' on this forum with this opinion.

    But look on the bright side: I don't mind another Sam Mendes-like Bond film in which character development and cinematography are still very important pillars of the good film. Just add a bit more pro-active and logical thinking when it comes to writing a good story treatment and screenplay, and in the process improve a bit on elements like humour and action a la Steven Soderbergh. And et voila.....Bond 25 might as well become another timeless classic. Just have a little faith, don't think to black-and-white (because there are more roads leading to Rome), and dare to channel constructive criticism in alternative ways instead of following just one 'grand dark force' that got the better of most people in this particular topic.

    Wouldn't you say @DarthDimi :-).

    So it's not just overblown passion from my side. I have given this a long thought. And frankly, certain forummembers in here could learn a bit from the more positive-spirited, more constructive approach I have towards criticism :-).

    You make some excellent points here that a lot of us could get behind but unfortunately I don't remember any of that making it into the petition, just some fawning over Annette Bening and bemoaning the fact that EON don't read unsolicited scripts.

    If, in your letter, you had addressed the letting auteurs run wild situation, the dereliction of duty laid bare by the Sony leaks (when it seemed like only the studio who realised what a shambles the script was), the staggeringly misguided decision to green light brothergate, the increasing apathy in getting a new Bond film off the ground etc then a lot of us might well have signed - even though it wouldn't change the essential pointlessness of the exercise because EON really don't care what we think as long as the box office is healthy.

    But in your quest for respectfulness and constructive criticism you seemed to sugar the pill so much it ended up all sugar and no pill - and crucially practically zero actual criticism.
  • edited November 2017 Posts: 4,619
    @Gustav_Graves It's pointless because what you want to achieve (EON listening to fans more than they have until now) will never happen. Which by the way I believe is a good thing! I have said before that I believe that a large percentage of MI6-community members would be better at producing Bond movies than EON. I also happen to believe if Bond fans as a community had total control over the Bond franchise then the franchise would be destroyed very quickly.

    I really don't want EON to listen to people who believe David Arnold is a good composer, who think Skyfall had a bad screenplay and who are obsessed with Blofeld.
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    „If I would have asked the customers what they wanted they would have said: Faster horses“
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited November 2017 Posts: 16,340
    I really don't want EON to listen to people who believe David Arnold is a good composer, who think Skyfall had a bad screenplay and who are obsessed with Blofeld.

    With pompous statements like this, nobody should listen to you. Now I don't care what you think of Arnold but there is no sense in this kind of childish attitude. You want to disagree with people that's fine but you're out of line.
  • Posts: 4,619
    @Murdock How is that a childish attitude? I want the best for the franchise, and I sincerely believe the quality of the movies would be worse if EON started to listen to the fans more than they have done until now.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,340
    @Murdock How is that a childish attitude? I want the best for the franchise, and I sincerely believe the quality of the movies would be worse if EON started to listen to the fans more than they have done until now.

    Funny because You claim you want what's best for the franchise then take a dump on others who happen to want things you don't. Is it starting to come to you now?
  • Dennison wrote: »
    Is this for real? LMAO
    Exactly my thoughts. I admire Gustav's passion, but this seems to be a rather pointless exercise.

    Why is it pointless to channel criticism in alternative ways in here? To turn criticism in something more cosntructive and less black-and-white? There's also a great deal one could learn from the way I am approaching criticism instead of just painting this as pointless or 'ridiculous'. Hence I just posted this in 'the other topic':
    bondjames wrote: »
    HASEROT wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Personally, I'm hoping for more studio input on these new deals.

    i have to check you on this one - but why?... when has a studio ever been at the forefront of good ideas?... typically, whenever a studio interjects themselves into creative matters, it ends badly.. i will use the examples of X3: X-men United, The Amazing Spider-man 1 and 2, and the Ghostbusters reboot as prime examples..

    You probably want a tighter leash - checks and balances sort of issues.. but i think that needs to come from EON's end, and them having a clear concise plan of what they want to do, and maybe they need to take the Marvel approach from now on - and thats hire directors that have to execute their vision - instead of letting auteurs come in, and run rampant.?
    I didn't read the Sony hack leaks, but having visited the thread often I noticed that they came up with some good suggestions, and actually advised EON/Mendes that things were out of control with that debacle of a script for SP.

    Additionally, I'm increasingly uncomfortable with the control that directors (and actors) appear to be given with this franchise, as you noted. To me the best film from the Sony stable remains CR, which more or less followed the script (sure they shook up the tropes, but it was still less arty farty than what's come since imho, including SP). I think that's because it was a new start, and so everyone did their best to stay on message.

    Ultimately it's true that theoretically we have EON there to veto any rubbish ideas. However, they appear to be the ones who have let the auteurs (again including actor) run wild recently, and so I believe the studio 'bean counters' need to exercise more control and discipline. Hopefully that is what will happen for B25, and if not, then for B26.

    To a certain extend I agree with you @BondJames. Hence I actually wrote the letter and created the subsequent petition here. I remember vividly the negative, slightly depressed sentiment that got the better of me after the SonyLeaks went public. You could describe that sentiment as: "It would have been better if the SonyLeaks would never have happened. Because it turns the Bond fan community into a rather rogue, over-critical fan base and it makes EON Productions even more of a 'closed shop'". So I think in the long end the leaks didn't change a lot. On the contrary, it might have facilitated EON Productions in becoming a bit more fearful, less transparent and less open-minded to some initial good ideas that are floating around because of these SonyLeaks.

    Obviously the above should never be a reason to write a rather daft, incoherent, illogical screenplay. And I agree that a good Bond film falls or stands on the actions of the cinematic gatekeepers that screenplay writers are in my opinion. I sincerely hope Neal Purvis & Robert Wade do their uttermost best for Bond 25 and throw away their creative ineptness and numbness that got the better of them (as mentioned so clearly by them in March, please read my letter).

    But, everything's a matter of perspective in the end. And I sincerely believe that this......new 'production approach', in which cast and crew are getting more creative influence over the franchise, also created a lot of good. And I mean a lot of good. From my perspective good stories not always result in good movies, and some timeless classic films were actually not that dependent on tightly knitted storylines and screenplays. The quality of a film like Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey", one of my all-time favourites, is much more dependent on production design, cinematography and special effects, than it is on plot and character development. It's an Arthur C. Clarke-ian, almost Biblical piece of 'cinematic literature' that leaves a lot of themes open for your own interpretation. The same with a more recent film, like Alejandro G. Iñárritu's "The Revenant", which in essence was a feast of incredible cinematography, letting audiences indulge in the frigid, cold North-West of early USA.

    By that example, I still find "Skyfall" an impressive feature. Sam Mendes did something wonderful to the Bond franchise, by focusing more on characters and cinematography instead of easy-to-understand, 'pre-chewed', coherent stories. Does it make "Skyfall" less good than "Casino Royale"? Well, we know that answer within the confinements of this forum. But luckily outside this forum there is an overwhelming majority who can not choose easily between either "Casino Royale" and "Skyfall" (this: http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2017/11/09/skyfall-fifth-anniversary , and this: http://www.ladbible.com/entertainment/film-and-tv-casino-royale-has-been-voted-the-best-james-bond-film-20171111 ).

    So while I am now pretty critical towards the direction of the Bond franchise, I honestly don't think that the Craig-era went mostly downhill after "Casino Royale". The choices made by Barbara and Michael (and Craig) for the 23rd Bond film "Skyfall" worked wonderfully in my honest opinion. Mendes' choice to focus on characters, drama and cinematography created a film that's among the best of the bunch. I even want to admit that, with some self-conscious narrative repairs and screenplay improvements -if Barbara and Michael weren't so adament to keep certain expensive stage recreations, like the London bridge- "SPECTRE" could have been a shoe-in for TOP 10 of best Bond films as well.

    So while I agree with you @BondJames that EON needs to refocus heavily for Bond 25, I disagree with you that EON "lets the auteurs run wild" in the past 7 years. Their creative decisions for the most part paid off. And in all honestly, we haven't seen a straight downfall of quality that we experienced more clearly after "GoldenEye". Being critical is good. I have my sincere worries as well. Hence I tried to address them with constructive and positive-spirited criticism in my petition. But it's not really helpful, nor is it constructive to say EON is letting things run wild. I probably am a 'lonely voice' on this forum with this opinion.

    But look on the bright side: I don't mind another Sam Mendes-like Bond film in which character development and cinematography are still very important pillars of the good film. Just add a bit more pro-active and logical thinking when it comes to writing a good story treatment and screenplay, and in the process improve a bit on elements like humour and action a la Steven Soderbergh. And et voila.....Bond 25 might as well become another timeless classic. Just have a little faith, don't think to black-and-white (because there are more roads leading to Rome), and dare to channel constructive criticism in alternative ways instead of following just one 'grand dark force' that got the better of most people in this particular topic.

    Wouldn't you say @DarthDimi :-).

    So it's not just overblown passion from my side. I have given this a long thought. And frankly, certain forummembers in here could learn a bit from the more positive-spirited, more constructive approach I have towards criticism :-).

    You make some excellent points here that a lot of us could get behind but unfortunately I don't remember any of that making it into the petition, just some fawning over Annette Bening and bemoaning the fact that EON don't read unsolicited scripts.

    If, in your letter, you had addressed the letting auteurs run wild situation, the dereliction of duty laid bare by the Sony leaks (when it seemed like only the studio who realised what a shambles the script was), the staggeringly misguided decision to green light brothergate, the increasing apathy in getting a new Bond film off the ground etc then a lot of us might well have signed - even though it wouldn't change the essential pointlessness of the exercise because EON really don't care what we think as long as the box office is healthy.

    But in your quest for respectfulness and constructive criticism you seemed to sugar the pill so much it ended up all sugar and no pill - and crucially practically zero actual criticism.

    If you would be sitting in a room where Barbara Broccoli, Michael Wilson, Daniel Craig, the new Bond director where brainstorming about the upcoming Bond film, you would be fired without a doubt. Not just that, you would be banned.

    It's kind of a trend these days to be 'political incorrect'. And I see that when I read your comments. But I find it rather dangerous at times. Your foul language perhaps works on a forum like this, but outside this "closed online fraternity" you would sound like a most irritating child.

    And I refuse to behave differently in here compared to my real life. I think it's even healthier if people apply a bit more constructive diplomacy in their comments at times.....if they try to be their real self at times (and I know that can be the case, because I have been whatsapping with you a couple of times, and then you already sound soo much differently). What's wrong being being myself on here?

    So, please look into this a bit. Because only then discussions can stay civilized, and can actually make better impact. And it can keep the 'soul' in discussions, and not the cold-hearted political incorrectness of so many other people in here.

    Perhaps I give "zero actual criticism" as well. Aaah well, so be it.
  • Posts: 1,031
    Murdock wrote: »
    @Murdock How is that a childish attitude? I want the best for the franchise, and I sincerely believe the quality of the movies would be worse if EON started to listen to the fans more than they have done until now.

    Funny because You claim you want what's best for the franchise then take a dump on others who happen to want things you don't. Is it starting to come to you now?

    And this is why I'm happy to leave making the Bond films to the professionals ...
  • Posts: 4,619
    @Murdock I'm not saying EON should listen to me instead of the other Bond fans. I'm saying EON shouldn't listen to Bond fans INCLUDING me.
  • Posts: 19,339
    @Gustav_Graves It's pointless because what you want to achieve (EON listening to fans more than they have until now) will never happen. Which by the way I believe is a good thing! I have said before that I believe that a large percentage of MI6-community members would be better at producing Bond movies than EON. I also happen to believe if Bond fans as a community had total control over the Bond franchise then the franchise would be destroyed very quickly.

    I really don't want EON to listen to people who believe David Arnold is a good composer, who think Skyfall had a bad screenplay and who are obsessed with Blofeld.

    Well I happen to think that David Arnold IS a good composer,so there.
  • @Murdock How is that a childish attitude? I want the best for the franchise, and I sincerely believe the quality of the movies would be worse if EON started to listen to the fans more than they have done until now.

    You simplify everything in such a grotesque way, that you make me feel very sad. As if that's the only thing I am asking for. For God sake........ff-ing read. My basic point of my petition is to let us fans share in our, sometimes sincere, worries about the Bond franchise. What's wrong with sharing those with EON Productions? You make it sound like a bunch of Erdogans and Putins want to take over EON Productions. That wasn't even my style and tone. Just stop simplifying this thing.

    There are other solutions as well. More comic-cons with James Bond for instance? In which journalists and fans alike finally ask some goddamn good, critical questions to EON Productions. Producer Kathleen Kennedy IS actually doing this...
  • Posts: 1,031
    barryt007 wrote: »
    @Gustav_Graves It's pointless because what you want to achieve (EON listening to fans more than they have until now) will never happen. Which by the way I believe is a good thing! I have said before that I believe that a large percentage of MI6-community members would be better at producing Bond movies than EON. I also happen to believe if Bond fans as a community had total control over the Bond franchise then the franchise would be destroyed very quickly.

    I really don't want EON to listen to people who believe David Arnold is a good composer, who think Skyfall had a bad screenplay and who are obsessed with Blofeld.

    Well I happen to think that David Arnold IS a good composer,so there.

    He's a southerner, afraid I have that against him.
  • edited November 2017 Posts: 4,619
    let us fans share in our, sometimes sincere, worries about the Bond franchise. What's wrong with sharing those with EON Productions?
    Nothing, but you can already do that: you can write to Eon Productions Ltd, 138 Piccadilly, Mayfair, London W1J 7NR, UK or call +44 20 7493 7953.
  • Posts: 1,031
    @Murdock How is that a childish attitude? I want the best for the franchise, and I sincerely believe the quality of the movies would be worse if EON started to listen to the fans more than they have done until now.

    You simplify everything in such a grotesque way, that you make me feel very sad. As if that's the only thing I am asking for. For God sake........ff-ing read. My basic point of my petition is to let us fans share in our, sometimes sincere, worries about the Bond franchise. What's wrong with sharing those with EON Productions? You make it sound like a bunch of Erdogans and Putins want to take over EON Productions. That wasn't even my style and tone. Just stop simplifying this thing.

    There are other solutions as well. More comic-cons with James Bond for instance? In which journalists and fans alike finally ask some goddamn good, critical questions to EON Productions. Producer Kathleen Kennedy IS actually doing this...

    You know what a petition like that would work well for Walkers Crisps. They just don't fill them bags up enough, I feel like I'm buying air ...
  • Posts: 19,339
    Dennison wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    @Gustav_Graves It's pointless because what you want to achieve (EON listening to fans more than they have until now) will never happen. Which by the way I believe is a good thing! I have said before that I believe that a large percentage of MI6-community members would be better at producing Bond movies than EON. I also happen to believe if Bond fans as a community had total control over the Bond franchise then the franchise would be destroyed very quickly.

    I really don't want EON to listen to people who believe David Arnold is a good composer, who think Skyfall had a bad screenplay and who are obsessed with Blofeld.

    Well I happen to think that David Arnold IS a good composer,so there.

    He's a southerner, afraid I have that against him.

    Same as me you cheeky git ;)

  • Posts: 19,339
    Dennison wrote: »
    @Murdock How is that a childish attitude? I want the best for the franchise, and I sincerely believe the quality of the movies would be worse if EON started to listen to the fans more than they have done until now.

    You simplify everything in such a grotesque way, that you make me feel very sad. As if that's the only thing I am asking for. For God sake........ff-ing read. My basic point of my petition is to let us fans share in our, sometimes sincere, worries about the Bond franchise. What's wrong with sharing those with EON Productions? You make it sound like a bunch of Erdogans and Putins want to take over EON Productions. That wasn't even my style and tone. Just stop simplifying this thing.

    There are other solutions as well. More comic-cons with James Bond for instance? In which journalists and fans alike finally ask some goddamn good, critical questions to EON Productions. Producer Kathleen Kennedy IS actually doing this...

    You know what a petition like that would work well for Walkers Crisps. They just don't fill them bags up enough, I feel like I'm buying air ...

    Aaah but don't forget that has now been explained ,it's to keep the crisps fresh for longer .

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Dennison wrote: »
    Is this for real? LMAO
    Exactly my thoughts. I admire Gustav's passion, but this seems to be a rather pointless exercise.

    Why is it pointless to channel criticism in alternative ways in here? To turn criticism in something more cosntructive and less black-and-white? There's also a great deal one could learn from the way I am approaching criticism instead of just painting this as pointless or 'ridiculous'. Hence I just posted this in 'the other topic':
    bondjames wrote: »
    HASEROT wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Personally, I'm hoping for more studio input on these new deals.

    i have to check you on this one - but why?... when has a studio ever been at the forefront of good ideas?... typically, whenever a studio interjects themselves into creative matters, it ends badly.. i will use the examples of X3: X-men United, The Amazing Spider-man 1 and 2, and the Ghostbusters reboot as prime examples..

    You probably want a tighter leash - checks and balances sort of issues.. but i think that needs to come from EON's end, and them having a clear concise plan of what they want to do, and maybe they need to take the Marvel approach from now on - and thats hire directors that have to execute their vision - instead of letting auteurs come in, and run rampant.?
    I didn't read the Sony hack leaks, but having visited the thread often I noticed that they came up with some good suggestions, and actually advised EON/Mendes that things were out of control with that debacle of a script for SP.

    Additionally, I'm increasingly uncomfortable with the control that directors (and actors) appear to be given with this franchise, as you noted. To me the best film from the Sony stable remains CR, which more or less followed the script (sure they shook up the tropes, but it was still less arty farty than what's come since imho, including SP). I think that's because it was a new start, and so everyone did their best to stay on message.

    Ultimately it's true that theoretically we have EON there to veto any rubbish ideas. However, they appear to be the ones who have let the auteurs (again including actor) run wild recently, and so I believe the studio 'bean counters' need to exercise more control and discipline. Hopefully that is what will happen for B25, and if not, then for B26.

    To a certain extend I agree with you @BondJames. Hence I actually wrote the letter and created the subsequent petition here. I remember vividly the negative, slightly depressed sentiment that got the better of me after the SonyLeaks went public. You could describe that sentiment as: "It would have been better if the SonyLeaks would never have happened. Because it turns the Bond fan community into a rather rogue, over-critical fan base and it makes EON Productions even more of a 'closed shop'". So I think in the long end the leaks didn't change a lot. On the contrary, it might have facilitated EON Productions in becoming a bit more fearful, less transparent and less open-minded to some initial good ideas that are floating around because of these SonyLeaks.

    Obviously the above should never be a reason to write a rather daft, incoherent, illogical screenplay. And I agree that a good Bond film falls or stands on the actions of the cinematic gatekeepers that screenplay writers are in my opinion. I sincerely hope Neal Purvis & Robert Wade do their uttermost best for Bond 25 and throw away their creative ineptness and numbness that got the better of them (as mentioned so clearly by them in March, please read my letter).

    But, everything's a matter of perspective in the end. And I sincerely believe that this......new 'production approach', in which cast and crew are getting more creative influence over the franchise, also created a lot of good. And I mean a lot of good. From my perspective good stories not always result in good movies, and some timeless classic films were actually not that dependent on tightly knitted storylines and screenplays. The quality of a film like Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey", one of my all-time favourites, is much more dependent on production design, cinematography and special effects, than it is on plot and character development. It's an Arthur C. Clarke-ian, almost Biblical piece of 'cinematic literature' that leaves a lot of themes open for your own interpretation. The same with a more recent film, like Alejandro G. Iñárritu's "The Revenant", which in essence was a feast of incredible cinematography, letting audiences indulge in the frigid, cold North-West of early USA.

    By that example, I still find "Skyfall" an impressive feature. Sam Mendes did something wonderful to the Bond franchise, by focusing more on characters and cinematography instead of easy-to-understand, 'pre-chewed', coherent stories. Does it make "Skyfall" less good than "Casino Royale"? Well, we know that answer within the confinements of this forum. But luckily outside this forum there is an overwhelming majority who can not choose easily between either "Casino Royale" and "Skyfall" (this: http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2017/11/09/skyfall-fifth-anniversary , and this: http://www.ladbible.com/entertainment/film-and-tv-casino-royale-has-been-voted-the-best-james-bond-film-20171111 ).

    So while I am now pretty critical towards the direction of the Bond franchise, I honestly don't think that the Craig-era went mostly downhill after "Casino Royale". The choices made by Barbara and Michael (and Craig) for the 23rd Bond film "Skyfall" worked wonderfully in my honest opinion. Mendes' choice to focus on characters, drama and cinematography created a film that's among the best of the bunch. I even want to admit that, with some self-conscious narrative repairs and screenplay improvements -if Barbara and Michael weren't so adament to keep certain expensive stage recreations, like the London bridge- "SPECTRE" could have been a shoe-in for TOP 10 of best Bond films as well.

    So while I agree with you @BondJames that EON needs to refocus heavily for Bond 25, I disagree with you that EON "lets the auteurs run wild" in the past 7 years. Their creative decisions for the most part paid off. And in all honestly, we haven't seen a straight downfall of quality that we experienced more clearly after "GoldenEye". Being critical is good. I have my sincere worries as well. Hence I tried to address them with constructive and positive-spirited criticism in my petition. But it's not really helpful, nor is it constructive to say EON is letting things run wild. I probably am a 'lonely voice' on this forum with this opinion.

    But look on the bright side: I don't mind another Sam Mendes-like Bond film in which character development and cinematography are still very important pillars of the good film. Just add a bit more pro-active and logical thinking when it comes to writing a good story treatment and screenplay, and in the process improve a bit on elements like humour and action a la Steven Soderbergh. And et voila.....Bond 25 might as well become another timeless classic. Just have a little faith, don't think to black-and-white (because there are more roads leading to Rome), and dare to channel constructive criticism in alternative ways instead of following just one 'grand dark force' that got the better of most people in this particular topic.

    Wouldn't you say @DarthDimi :-).

    So it's not just overblown passion from my side. I have given this a long thought. And frankly, certain forummembers in here could learn a bit from the more positive-spirited, more constructive approach I have towards criticism :-).

    You make some excellent points here that a lot of us could get behind but unfortunately I don't remember any of that making it into the petition, just some fawning over Annette Bening and bemoaning the fact that EON don't read unsolicited scripts.

    If, in your letter, you had addressed the letting auteurs run wild situation, the dereliction of duty laid bare by the Sony leaks (when it seemed like only the studio who realised what a shambles the script was), the staggeringly misguided decision to green light brothergate, the increasing apathy in getting a new Bond film off the ground etc then a lot of us might well have signed - even though it wouldn't change the essential pointlessness of the exercise because EON really don't care what we think as long as the box office is healthy.

    But in your quest for respectfulness and constructive criticism you seemed to sugar the pill so much it ended up all sugar and no pill - and crucially practically zero actual criticism.

    If you would be sitting in a room where Barbara Broccoli, Michael Wilson, Daniel Craig, the new Bond director where brainstorming about the upcoming Bond film, you would be fired without a doubt. Not just that, you would be banned.

    I can't envisage a scenario whereby I am on the EON payroll but obviously if I were I would behave completely differently as I'd want to keep my cushy job.

    But as a mere paying customer I'm entitled to call out stuff that is shit and in the event that I were round a table with EON in that capacity (who knows maybe they will react to your petition and I will be voted as the fans representative - makes sense as I'm the only one of us who is consistently 100% right) I probably wouldn't use the word 'shit' but I would explain that in the eyes of the fans stuff like brothergate was utterly unacceptable. That can be said 'respectfully' without dodging the issue.

    But you really need to lighten up a bit mate. The internet is all just a branch of the entertainment business. No one takes all this shit seriously do they? People don't really want to come here and read 'respectful' and 'nuanced' constructive criticism. They want to have a rant and a rave, let off steam and enjoy a bit of sparring (as evidenced by Panchito and Murdock's little spat above).

    EON couldn't care less about our opinion and they broadly know what they're doing so why so serious? We've had bad Bond films before and we'll have them again but we've also had good ones and some wonderful ones and we'll have those again too.
    you would sound like a most irritating child.
    Praise indeed from the master.
  • Posts: 1,031
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Dennison wrote: »
    @Murdock How is that a childish attitude? I want the best for the franchise, and I sincerely believe the quality of the movies would be worse if EON started to listen to the fans more than they have done until now.

    You simplify everything in such a grotesque way, that you make me feel very sad. As if that's the only thing I am asking for. For God sake........ff-ing read. My basic point of my petition is to let us fans share in our, sometimes sincere, worries about the Bond franchise. What's wrong with sharing those with EON Productions? You make it sound like a bunch of Erdogans and Putins want to take over EON Productions. That wasn't even my style and tone. Just stop simplifying this thing.

    There are other solutions as well. More comic-cons with James Bond for instance? In which journalists and fans alike finally ask some goddamn good, critical questions to EON Productions. Producer Kathleen Kennedy IS actually doing this...

    You know what a petition like that would work well for Walkers Crisps. They just don't fill them bags up enough, I feel like I'm buying air ...

    Aaah but don't forget that has now been explained ,it's to keep the crisps fresh for longer .

    And increase the profit margin ...
  • Posts: 19,339
    Dennison wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Dennison wrote: »
    @Murdock How is that a childish attitude? I want the best for the franchise, and I sincerely believe the quality of the movies would be worse if EON started to listen to the fans more than they have done until now.

    You simplify everything in such a grotesque way, that you make me feel very sad. As if that's the only thing I am asking for. For God sake........ff-ing read. My basic point of my petition is to let us fans share in our, sometimes sincere, worries about the Bond franchise. What's wrong with sharing those with EON Productions? You make it sound like a bunch of Erdogans and Putins want to take over EON Productions. That wasn't even my style and tone. Just stop simplifying this thing.

    There are other solutions as well. More comic-cons with James Bond for instance? In which journalists and fans alike finally ask some goddamn good, critical questions to EON Productions. Producer Kathleen Kennedy IS actually doing this...

    You know what a petition like that would work well for Walkers Crisps. They just don't fill them bags up enough, I feel like I'm buying air ...

    Aaah but don't forget that has now been explained ,it's to keep the crisps fresh for longer .

    And increase the profit margin ...

    That goes without saying.

  • HASEROT wrote: »
    HASEROT wrote: »
    I don't particularly see any more bickering than any other threads but it has largely run its course to be fair.

    All the best to Gustav on getting a call from EON sometime soon.

    And let's be fair he really couldn't do a worse job than SP could he?

    there is always DAD @TheWizardOfIce

    Which I take any day of the week and twice on Sunday over Spectre ( even if I probably switch it off right after it leaves London. Still over one hour more Bondian stuff and feel than I get from both of Mendes' efforts combined.

    my condolences. ;)

    Thank you.
  • edited November 2017 Posts: 1,162
    I really don't want EON to listen to people who believe David Arnold is a good composer, who think Skyfall had a bad screenplay and who are obsessed with Blofeld.

    So what you actually saying is that it's your taste and intellectual capacities that should set the frame standards for Bond movies. Interesting concept, I give you that.
  • Posts: 4,619
    @noSolaceleft Read the comments between the comment you quoted and your most recent comment. You're in for a big surprise, son!
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    I would never habe chosen Daniel Craig before CR - I wanted Brosnan to come back. So ... I am happy they don‘t listen to fans. IMHO this would result in another SP ... simple box ticking does not result in a good movie
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    @Murdock I'm not saying EON should listen to me instead of the other Bond fans. I'm saying EON shouldn't listen to Bond fans INCLUDING me.

    Should they listen to that?
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 24,265
    barryt007 wrote: »
    @Gustav_Graves It's pointless because what you want to achieve (EON listening to fans more than they have until now) will never happen. Which by the way I believe is a good thing! I have said before that I believe that a large percentage of MI6-community members would be better at producing Bond movies than EON. I also happen to believe if Bond fans as a community had total control over the Bond franchise then the franchise would be destroyed very quickly.

    I really don't want EON to listen to people who believe David Arnold is a good composer, who think Skyfall had a bad screenplay and who are obsessed with Blofeld.

    Well I happen to think that David Arnold IS a good composer,so there.

    I do also and felt Arnold scores were getting better with each film, Arnold injects panic and excitement with his scores which is something that's been lacking since he left the series.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,682
    @Murdock I'm not saying EON should listen to me instead of the other Bond fans. I'm saying EON shouldn't listen to Bond fans INCLUDING me.

    Should they listen to that?

    "Listen to me: don't listen to me. Got it?"
  • Posts: 684
    @Murdock I'm not saying EON should listen to me instead of the other Bond fans. I'm saying EON shouldn't listen to Bond fans INCLUDING me.

    Should they listen to that?
    groucho.jpg
    "I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member."
This discussion has been closed.