Is modern Bond action lacking?

2456

Comments

  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 23,267
    Focusing on SF and SP I don't think those film lack action, I just don't think the action is in those films was that good. Where as IMO the action in CR and QoS was excellent.
    Agree. An example I like to mention, is the car chases of QoS and SP. Although the camera work in the former might be a bit too fast for my liking, it really knocks the latter out of the park:



    I know there are things to consider - like in QoS Bond has multiple cars after him, while in SP it's "just" Hinx. As stylish at it may look, the SP car chase is the most boring car chase I've ever seen, and Bond never looks like he's in real danger.

    I think the action scenes in both of Craig's excellent first two outings are raw and full of energy, those two films get me excited when I watch them plus Arnold's music elevates the action even further.

    The car chase in Quantum makes you feel like you are with Bond in the Aston Martin, I love that pre title sequence.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,677
    People, I don't care one bit if the action is more pronounced in other movies, including the M:I series. There is more "action" in movies like "The Raid", "The Expendables" and whatever including their sequels. I just don't give a flying you-know-what. Bond movies have action as an ingredient, but no, they are not "action movies" in my book. The first two I ever bought on video (1996 - VHS at that time) were Goldfinger and GoldenEye, 31 years apart. Goldfinger proved downright sedate in comparison to GE, but still, for me, is a considerably better movie than the other. The Bond film that is closest to being a concoction of somewhat brainless action (like the ones I mentioned in the second sentence above) is TND. I like it (possibly more than others do), but due to that emphasis on "pure" action it simply is not a perfect Bond film, which has other ingredients more important for qualifying it as such.

    The M:I movies are OK. But no more, and they don't in the least rival Bond for my taste. I've seen all of them except the latest one, and I forgot all about them (couldn't remotely recall the plot right now) except for the first one which was preserved in my memory because I watched it twice - something I so far have not desired regarding the others. Quite unlike almost all of the Bond movies.
  • Posts: 17,272
    That QoS pre title sequence really sets the tone of the film, doesn't it. You mention 'energy', and that's a good point - that's completely gone. SP is auto pilot mode in the action sequences, and never impresses. It actually surprises me that they could sit in the editing room thinking, "That'll do!".
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 23,267
    That QoS pre title sequence really sets the tone of the film, doesn't it. You mention 'energy', and that's a good point - that's completely gone. SP is auto pilot mode in the action sequences, and never impresses. It actually surprises me that they could sit in the editing room thinking, "That'll do!".

    I remember when I watched both SF and SP at the cinema there were moments when I was willing those films to ramp it up and go for it, great action gets your heart racing whether it be the Ski and Toboggan chases in OHMSS, Lotus in TSWLM or the Bond and Trevelyan fight during the GE finale, I could go on though the key factor is every time I watch those scenes they feel fresh.
  • Posts: 17,272
    That QoS pre title sequence really sets the tone of the film, doesn't it. You mention 'energy', and that's a good point - that's completely gone. SP is auto pilot mode in the action sequences, and never impresses. It actually surprises me that they could sit in the editing room thinking, "That'll do!".

    I remember when I watched both SF and SP at the cinema there were moments when I was willing those films to ramp it up and go for it, great action gets your heart racing whether it be the Ski and Toboggan chases in OHMSS, Lotus in TSWLM or the Bond and Trevelyan fight during the GE finale, I could go on though the key factor is every time I watch those scenes they feel fresh.

    Those scenes certainly have that factor. I had that same feeling when watching SF and SP at the cinema as you did, and with SP it was the first time I've left the cinema after watching a Bond film, feeling annoyed.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    edited August 2018 Posts: 23,267
    That QoS pre title sequence really sets the tone of the film, doesn't it. You mention 'energy', and that's a good point - that's completely gone. SP is auto pilot mode in the action sequences, and never impresses. It actually surprises me that they could sit in the editing room thinking, "That'll do!".

    I remember when I watched both SF and SP at the cinema there were moments when I was willing those films to ramp it up and go for it, great action gets your heart racing whether it be the Ski and Toboggan chases in OHMSS, Lotus in TSWLM or the Bond and Trevelyan fight during the GE finale, I could go on though the key factor is every time I watch those scenes they feel fresh.

    Those scenes certainly have that factor. I had that same feeling when watching SF and SP at the cinema as you did, and with SP it was the first time I've left the cinema after watching a Bond film, feeling annoyed.

    SP visually looks good like say viewing a painting though the film has so many bad decisions and the script is very weak.

    Lea Seydoux is a microcosm of the film, I find her low key which borders on dull and boring.

    SP did have a good start in Mexico though it's all down hill as soon as that abysmal title song kicks in.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    SP did have a good start in Mexico though it's all down hill as soon as that abysmal title song kicks in.

    It's actually quite a good song, it's the singer that turns me off.
    Check this:
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 23,267
    chrisisall wrote: »
    SP did have a good start in Mexico though it's all down hill as soon as that abysmal title song kicks in.

    It's actually quite a good song, it's the singer that turns me off.
    Check this:

    That young ladies vocal is considerably better, SP is the only Bond film that I fast forward the title sequence.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,533
    Focusing on SF and SP I don't think those film lack action, I just don't think the action is in those films was that good. Where as IMO the action in CR and QoS was excellent.
    Agree. An example I like to mention, is the car chases of QoS and SP. Although the camera work in the former might be a bit too fast for my liking, it really knocks the latter out of the park:



    I know there are things to consider - like in QoS Bond has multiple cars after him, while in SP it's "just" Hinx. As stylish at it may look, the SP car chase is the most boring car chase I've ever seen, and Bond never looks like he's in real danger.

    I think the action scenes in both of Craig's excellent first two outings are raw and full of energy, those two films get me excited when I watch them plus Arnold's music elevates the action even further.

    The car chase in Quantum makes you feel like you are with Bond in the Aston Martin, I love that pre title sequence.

    This.
  • edited August 2018 Posts: 17,272
    That QoS pre title sequence really sets the tone of the film, doesn't it. You mention 'energy', and that's a good point - that's completely gone. SP is auto pilot mode in the action sequences, and never impresses. It actually surprises me that they could sit in the editing room thinking, "That'll do!".

    I remember when I watched both SF and SP at the cinema there were moments when I was willing those films to ramp it up and go for it, great action gets your heart racing whether it be the Ski and Toboggan chases in OHMSS, Lotus in TSWLM or the Bond and Trevelyan fight during the GE finale, I could go on though the key factor is every time I watch those scenes they feel fresh.

    Those scenes certainly have that factor. I had that same feeling when watching SF and SP at the cinema as you did, and with SP it was the first time I've left the cinema after watching a Bond film, feeling annoyed.

    SP visually looks good like say viewing a painting though the film has so many bad decisions and the script is very weak.
    The cinematography is the only good thing about that film, IMO. It's like a fine wrapping around the (very) weak content.
    Lea Seydoux is a microcosm of the film, I find her low key which borders on dull and boring.
    This one is rather strange I think. I know I've seen her in a French film (can't remember the title), where she was quite good. Makes you wonder what happened with the direction in her scenes. It's like it wasn't much direction at all.
    SP did have a good start in Mexico though it's all down hill as soon as that abysmal title song kicks in.
    For me it's when Bond lands on that sofa. It's such a lame joke, I think. Better suited for an advertisement (or a Johnny English film)!
  • Posts: 1,882
    The Bond series was dominant for nearly the first 20 years of its existence and then Raiders of the Lost Ark came along and since then it has had competition for best action, often ending up behind. FYEO may have more physical action than previous Bond films, but I can't be persuaded that its action is better than ROLT.

    There does need to be a good balance between the spying and the action. For all its action, some of the most satisfying scenes in TND for me were when Bond broke into Carver's Hamburg HQ. Same with Craig Bond's shadowing in CR and other moments of just being a spy.

    But it seems the action isn't nearly as memorable in the last 2 Bonds. In particular I can't figure why so many are keen on SF's teaser. I've seen chases like the beginning on television series. The motorcycle chase didn't even seem as good as the one in TND and the fight on the train was just okay.

    Please don't tell me these aren't action films as many people will recall stunts like the TSWLM parachute jump and numerous others when they think of this series. It's what the trailers are all about. Add them to the tropes like the tuxedos, girls and other things that make a Bond film unique and it's the perfect combination when done right. And when there's a lack of anything memorable in the action department it makes for less thank thrilling times for me, at least, which is why the past two have been relative disappointments for me.

    People don't go to the MI films talking about the undercover parts of it, they go for the action, but I'll be if the scene with Cruise in tux at the opera with its perfect blend of suspense and creative action doesn't make me think it was something that should've been in a Bond movie. The plane stunt at the beginning was hardly the only good stunt, such as the Bond films are in a rut with these days.
  • RC7RC7
    edited August 2018 Posts: 10,512
    CR

    Parkour - Classic. Superb on every level.

    Miami - Excellent. Brilliantly paced.

    Venice - Underrated. Brilliantly choreographed sequence that in the hands of a lesser director would be a right royal mess. The cinematography (particularly lighting) is superb.

    Overall: As good as it gets.

    QoS

    Aston - Excellent. Kinetic and brutal. Highlight - Craig looking cool as f*** when he dispatches the final goon.

    Boat - A straight Bourne rip-off, ill-conceived and sloppily choreographed.

    DC-9 - Pointless. Action for the sake of it. The free fall is a travesty.

    Perla de las Dunas - Good. Great location, nicely covered and choreographed. Find the whole thing gives off a DN vibe - which is a huge positive.

    Overall: Must do better.

    SF

    Istanbul - Outstanding. Brilliantly conceived, shot and paced. Highlight - Bond leaping from the JCB.

    London Chase - Decent. The pursuit aspect works and at times excels, but the tube set piece is a let down. Climactic shoot-out = excellent.

    Skyfall - Brilliant. A unique finale with some of the most phenomenal cinematography seen in any Bond film - ever.

    Overall: Considered with moments of brilliance.

    SP

    Mexico City - Decent. Moments of excellence (Dan swaggering along the roof top) marred by poor CGI. A classic example of trying to out do yourself, when perhaps the better option is to strip it back.

    Rome Chase - Decent. I’ve no real issue with this. It’s evocative of some of the more frivolous moments in the earlier films.

    Austria - Not for me. I don’t understand what they were trying to achieve with this sequence. Every beat is telegraphed. No surprises, no changes of pace and no invention.,

    Morocco - Passable. The shoot out is akin to a video game, but Craig looks great and I can buy it. I also have no problem with the gargantuan explosion, in isolation.

    London - Bizarre. I’m quite fascinated by this sequence. It manages to be simultaneously hackneyed, yet bizarrely intriguing. It feels like a nightmarish dreamscape, which to me in appropriately Bondian. It’s in the plotting and stakes that it’s left wanting.

    Overall: Hit and Miss.

    Going forward: Keep the action to a minimum. One unique, inventive set piece, plus one thrilling, seat of your pants sequence. Pepper the rest with combat akin to the CR stairwell fight.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited August 2018 Posts: 8,077
    I don't think all the action in CR was necessary, in that it wasn't all needed to tell the story. The ending in Venice inparticular. It might well be a nicely film sequence, but what must be considered is how it impacts the film at large. There was no need for such a explosive climax when the rest of the film had plenty of action in scenes which actually moved the plot forward. The scene in the book was much better and I wish they had stuck to their guns like they did with the ending of OHMSS, which felt more impactful inspite of it's smaller scale. No long drawn out car chase needed to get the point across that Bond has lost the love of his life.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited August 2018 Posts: 12,988
    The Casino Royale book is my favorite Fleming Bond novel, but I immediately felt the film improved on the ending.

    Confronting Bond with Vesper's death firsthand (and isolating them underwater after he's eliminated the competition--he's won the battle but must still lose) is epic and important. Modern, smart, adult, it crystallizes the character in the spirit of Fleming.

    The alternative was to show Bond's anger at her betrayal as he reads her letter, spurring him on to go after the bad guys. Great in prose, but the film medium isn't set up for that.

    On Her Majesty's Secret Service is a great contrast--keeping Fleming there I agree is essential, the events and what's on screen says it all.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,077
    The Casino Royale book is my favorite Fleming Bond novel, but I immediately felt the film improved on the ending.

    Confronting Bond with Vesper's death firsthand (and isolating them underwater after he's eliminated the competition--he's won the battle but must still lose) is epic and important. Modern, smart, adult, it crystallizes the character in the spirit of Fleming.

    The alternative was to show Bond's anger at her betrayal as he reads her letter, spurring him on to go after the bad guys. Great in prose, but the film medium isn't set up for that.

    On Her Majesty's Secret Service is a great contrast--keeping Fleming there I agree is essential, the events and what's on screen says it all.

    And the CR ending would've said it all also, but they didn't have the strength of their convictions in that case sadly, and instead opted for the safe Hollywood spectacle finale. Very brave of the producers there.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 12,988
    My point would be how to present Bond reading the letter and showing anger.

    The letter on screen for the audience to read--static camera, or it pans down timed for reading. Or Vesper's voice-over. Bond's voice-over. Or no reveal of the content at all. Strings on the soundtrack, or alternately no music. Does Bond show Dalton-level venting of frustration. Or the angered cool of Connery. Is an eyebrow raised. Tie straightened.

    Again, to me the producers and filmmakers were bold many times over. From the reboot itself and casting Craig. And not least to the changes for Bond's torture and later Vesper's death. They improved from book to film.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    The Casino Royale book is my favorite Fleming Bond novel, but I immediately felt the film improved on the ending.

    Confronting Bond with Vesper's death firsthand (and isolating them underwater after he's eliminated the competition--he's won the battle but must still lose) is epic and important. Modern, smart, adult, it crystallizes the character in the spirit of Fleming.

    The alternative was to show Bond's anger at her betrayal as he reads her letter, spurring him on to go after the bad guys. Great in prose, but the film medium isn't set up for that.

    You, Sir, have my utmost respect. Succinctly and excellently put.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited August 2018 Posts: 8,077
    My point would be how to present Bond reading the letter and showing anger.

    The letter on screen for the audience to read--static camera, or it pans down timed for reading. Or Vesper's voice-over. Bond's voice-over. Or no reveal of the content at all. Strings on the soundtrack, or alternately no music. Does Bond show Dalton-level venting of frustration. Or the angered cool of Connery. Is an eyebrow raised. Tie straightened.

    Again, to me the producers and filmmakers were bold many times over. From the reboot itself and casting Craig. And not least to the changes for Bond's torture and later Vesper's death. They improved from book to film.

    With regards to how do they portray it, that's where they have the freedom to be creative. There are almost infinite possibilities of how to film that ending, dependant on what effect they are going for. But even if they did want to break from how the book ended, it still could and should have been neater. There was no need to Micheal bay it. That was the most lazy, safe option possible.
  • RC7RC7
    edited August 2018 Posts: 10,512
    My point would be how to present Bond reading the letter and showing anger.

    The letter on screen for the audience to read--static camera, or it pans down timed for reading. Or Vesper's voice-over. Bond's voice-over. Or no reveal of the content at all. Strings on the soundtrack, or alternately no music. Does Bond show Dalton-level venting of frustration. Or the angered cool of Connery. Is an eyebrow raised. Tie straightened.

    Again, to me the producers and filmmakers were bold many times over. From the reboot itself and casting Craig. And not least to the changes for Bond's torture and later Vesper's death. They improved from book to film.

    With regards to how do they portray it, that's where they have the freedom to be creative. There are almost infinite possibilities of how to film that ending, dependant on what effect they are going for. But even if they did want to break from how the book ended, it still could and should have been neater. There was no need to Micheal bay it. That was the most lazy, safe option possible.

    Michael Bay? The moment he holds her lifeless body is one of the greatest moments in Bond - ever. I’d argue it’s the single greatest scene in any Bond film. It’s incredible.
  • Posts: 1,882
    If you really want to use OHMSS as an example, wouldn't you say the producers gave in and weren't exactly bold when they chose to have a blaring version of the Bond theme play out the credits rather than play out with the We Have All the Time in World instrumental?
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,077
    BT3366 wrote: »
    If you really want to use OHMSS as an example, wouldn't you say the producers gave in and weren't exactly bold when they chose to have a blaring version of the Bond theme play out the credits rather than play out with the We Have All the Time in World instrumental?

    Yes I would, but that is a much smaller offense when compared with the needless inclusion of another grand set piece in a film already ampily supplied with them. This was just pointless excess that didn't serve any story function and made the film much longer than necessary.
  • Posts: 19,339
    I must admit that i find the falling house in Venice scene doesnt belong in the film,its just noise.
    I can see they wanted Vesper to die,and the actual death and aftermath are excellent,but im sure they could have found a better way to do it.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 12,988
    house-made-from-playing-cards-color-layered-also-available-in-whats-illustration-id88344085?s=170x170
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited August 2018 Posts: 8,077
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I must admit that i find the falling house in Venice scene doesnt belong in the film,its just noise.
    I can see they wanted Vesper to die,and the actual death and aftermath are excellent,but im sure they could have found a better way to do it.

    Yes, as soon as Le Chiffre falls over dead, really the only remaining plot point to get to is the final reveal, and yet there's still about half an hour of actual movie left to sit through. It's just too long and elaborate for the story they have left to tell, and I felt the same way the first time I watched it in the cinema in 2006.
  • Posts: 17,272
    The Venice part is where I start looking at my watch, usually. I remember when watching CR at the cinema that people around me began to lose interest at that point, as well.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,103
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I must admit that i find the falling house in Venice scene doesnt belong in the film,its just noise.
    I can see they wanted Vesper to die,and the actual death and aftermath are excellent,but im sure they could have found a better way to do it.

    Yes, as soon as Le Chiffre falls over dead, really the only remaining plot point to get to is the final reveal, and yet there's still about half an hour of actual movie left to sit through. It's just too long and elaborate for the story they have left to tell, and I felt the same way the first time I watched it in the cinema in 2006.

    It was character development for Bond. It's also meant to feel like a actual romance. Something that hasn't happened before or since much. It's a unique fact that makes CR a better Bond adventure.
  • Posts: 15,801
    I felt Vesper's action packed death scene had nowhere near the impact of the novel. It just a way to shoehorn an obligatory action sequence for the climax where the novel had none.
    I never really cared for it, and it's about as close to the novel's ending as the Frank Langella DRACULA climax is to Stoker.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    The Venice part is where I start looking at my watch, usually. I remember when watching CR at the cinema that people around me began to lose interest at that point, as well.

    Boring people.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited August 2018 Posts: 8,077
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I felt Vesper's action packed death scene had nowhere near the impact of the novel. It just a way to shoehorn an obligatory action sequence for the climax where the novel had none.
    I never really cared for it, and it's about as close to the novel's ending as the Frank Langella DRACULA climax is to Stoker.

    Well said.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I felt Vesper's action packed death scene had nowhere near the impact of the novel. It just a way to shoehorn an obligatory action sequence for the climax where the novel had none.
    I never really cared for it, and it's about as close to the novel's ending as the Frank Langella DRACULA climax is to Stoker.

    Wasn t he the one who got green in his face from sucking blood from a girl who wasn t a virgin?
Sign In or Register to comment.