›

Goldeneye vs. Casino Royale

1…34689…12

Comments

  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    DaltonCraig007 wrote:
    I remember getting GE64 and a N64 for Christmas back in 1998 when I was 7... Fun times, played multiplayer with my brother and my dad... and then one day my uncle showed me GE the movie... I was instantly hook. He then proceeded to show me his older outings (FRWL, GF, TB, YOLT, DAF, OHMSS, TMWTGG, TSWLM, MR, OP, FYEO, TLD, LTK)... and within 2 weeks I was a Bond maniac !!

    Funny how you and I disagree on many things, yet our introductions into the Bond world are almost exactly the same.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    00Beast wrote:
    DaltonCraig007 wrote:
    I remember getting GE64 and a N64 for Christmas back in 1998 when I was 7... Fun times, played multiplayer with my brother and my dad... and then one day my uncle showed me GE the movie... I was instantly hook. He then proceeded to show me his older outings (FRWL, GF, TB, YOLT, DAF, OHMSS, TMWTGG, TSWLM, MR, OP, FYEO, TLD, LTK)... and within 2 weeks I was a Bond maniac !!

    Sounds like you and I both started with a video game! I rememebr playing FRWL and then hearing that it was based off a movie, so I rented it at my local Blockbuster and I was so amazed at how epic a Bond movie was! Then I just kept renting Bond movies at Blockbuster and then eventually started to buy them.

    I've logged countless hours into GE 64 and Nightfire. It's funny Im not that into videogames but if it has anything to do with Bond I'm sold.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Very interesting that a younger generation has come to the movies through video games. Does this partly explain why DUD embraced CGI so enthusiastically?
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited December 2011 Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote:
    Very interesting that a younger generation has come to the movies through video games. Does this partly explain why DUD embraced CGI so enthusiastically?

    Yes. That's not hard to figure out.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    Getafix wrote:
    Very interesting that a younger generation has come to the movies through video games. Does this partly explain why DUD embraced CGI so enthusiastically?

    Well I actually got into the Bond games after I watched the films. But I doubt the videogame sales were enough to influence EON. If anything DUD as you so accuractly put it was more influenced by the preasure put on by CGI fests like The Matrix and such to conform. What EON didn't understand was a spy with his gun, wits, and wild labido is what made Bond what he was in the first place. We don't need CGI.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Very interesting that a younger generation has come to the movies through video games. Does this partly explain why DUD embraced CGI so enthusiastically?

    Well I actually got into the Bond games after I watched the films. But I doubt the videogame sales were enough to influence EON. If anything DUD as you so accuractly put it was more influenced by the preasure put on by CGI fests like The Matrix and such to conform. What EON didn't understand was a spy with his gun, wits, and wild labido is what made Bond what he was in the first place. We don't need CGI.

    True but video games were still a big influence in the film. What about the VR sequence or THAT suit?
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    BAIN123 wrote:
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Very interesting that a younger generation has come to the movies through video games. Does this partly explain why DUD embraced CGI so enthusiastically?

    Well I actually got into the Bond games after I watched the films. But I doubt the videogame sales were enough to influence EON. If anything DUD as you so accuractly put it was more influenced by the preasure put on by CGI fests like The Matrix and such to conform. What EON didn't understand was a spy with his gun, wits, and wild labido is what made Bond what he was in the first place. We don't need CGI.

    True but video games were still a big influence in the film. What about the VR sequence or THAT suit?

    Those are small instances in the movie. At that time in 2002 the Bond games were selling as well. 007 racing and Agent Under Fire were the last 2 at the time and niether did too well. Nightfire and Everything or Nothing turned the tide but they were released after DAD.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Yes less CGI the better. Zero preferably. Didn't like the admitedly well done scenes in QoS either. In Bond stunts should be 'real' and special effects models and genuine explosions. On a side issue, Bond should NEVER use a machinegun.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    Getafix wrote:
    Yes less CGI the better. Zero preferably. Didn't like the admitedly well done scenes in QoS either. In Bond stunts should be 'real' and special effects models and genuine explosions. On a side issue, Bond should NEVER use a machinegun.

    I've no problem with him occassionaly using a machine gun if it helps him but the Brosnan era turned him into a GQ Rambo. Never again please.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Yes less CGI the better. Zero preferably. Didn't like the admitedly well done scenes in QoS either. In Bond stunts should be 'real' and special effects models and genuine explosions. On a side issue, Bond should NEVER use a machinegun.

    I've no problem with him occassionaly using a machine gun if it helps him but the Brosnan era turned him into a GQ Rambo. Never again please.

    If it's not a Walther or it isn't made of knuckle and bone then Bond shouldn't use it.

  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited December 2011 Posts: 11,189
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Very interesting that a younger generation has come to the movies through video games. Does this partly explain why DUD embraced CGI so enthusiastically?

    Well I actually got into the Bond games after I watched the films. But I doubt the videogame sales were enough to influence EON. If anything DUD as you so accuractly put it was more influenced by the preasure put on by CGI fests like The Matrix and such to conform. What EON didn't understand was a spy with his gun, wits, and wild labido is what made Bond what he was in the first place. We don't need CGI.

    True but video games were still a big influence in the film. What about the VR sequence or THAT suit?

    Those are small instances in the movie. At that time in 2002 the Bond games were selling as well. 007 racing and Agent Under Fire were the last 2 at the time and niether did too well. Nightfire and Everything or Nothing turned the tide but they were released after DAD.

    and yet everyone remembers them. What about the surfing sequence?

    I suppose machine guns were all the craze at the time.


    The GE shootout was exciting and well filmed but after that they just went too far.

    Craig has used a machine gun but only a quick short burst.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Craig's recourse to machineguns in the opening scene of CR was disappointing in an otherwise enjoyably physical sequence.
  • OHMSS69OHMSS69
    Posts: 2,341
    CR by a mile. GE is the best of the Brosnan years but I have to agree when they stick to fleming they (EON) strike gold. (FRWL, OHMSS ) Anyway, GE had some great ideas and great premises and some colorful villians but a sub par performance by Pierce and the reliance on set pieces (the tank chase through St Petersburg, overkill on the machine guns in the PTS and the horrid blue screen sequence) and CR trumps it.

  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote:
    Craig's recourse to machineguns in the opening scene of CR was disappointing in an otherwise enjoyably physical sequence.

    It was actually QoS.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Craig's recourse to machineguns in the opening scene of CR was disappointing in an otherwise enjoyably physical sequence.

    It was actually QoS.

    Very funny.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Craig's recourse to machineguns in the opening scene of CR was disappointing in an otherwise enjoyably physical sequence.

    It was actually QoS.

    Very funny.

    But it was ;)

  • actonsteveactonsteve
    Posts: 1,492
    Getafix wrote:
    Very interesting that a younger generation has come to the movies through video games. Does this partly explain why DUD embraced CGI so enthusiastically?

    It is. It also explains why Goldeneye is so beloved of them. Myself? Saw LALD as a kid at the pictures and until the Connery Bonds appeared on TV in the seventies read all Flemings books.

    Then had the luxury of having a film appear every two years until 1989.

  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    I guess the films have to respond to a changeing demographic. It's not hard to imagine how those raised on Connery must have despised the innovations of the Moore era. Coming from the Dalton days myself, I have an appreciation for all the actors apart from Brozza, who for me totally sucked.
  • actonsteveactonsteve
    Posts: 1,492
    Getafix wrote:
    I guess the films have to respond to a changeing demographic. It's not hard to imagine how those raised on Connery must have despised the innovations of the Moore era. Coming from the Dalton days myself, I have an appreciation for all the actors apart from Brozza, who for me totally sucked.

    I pretty much agree with you. I thought Brozza and his films were a step backwards after the Dalton era. It was a case of biting my tongue and hoping for somethng better comes along.

  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Yes, fortunately DC has brought a bit of toughness back in and a little charm. Would be nice to see some humour now. Not 'jokes' necessarily but a lightness of touch. I think Mendes has shown great range across his films but for Bond he needs to bring all his cards to the table at the same time - drama, suspense, humour and light and dark. i am hopeful.

    Personally I don't think any of them have felt like proper Bond movies since Dalton left. Up until then we evolution and since then it's been either devolution or revolution, if u know what I mean.
  • actonsteveactonsteve
    Posts: 1,492
    Getafix wrote:

    Personally I don't think any of them have felt like proper Bond movies since Dalton left. Up until then we evolution and since then it's been either devolution or revolution, if u know what I mean.

    ummm...I thought CR was very classic. And QoS felt very Daltonesque. Maybe thats why I like it.

  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Don't get me wrong I like DC and for me both films are a huge improvement on Brozza's sad efforts, but for me the films were a little too dour. I want some levity alongside the seriuosness.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Craig's recourse to machineguns in the opening scene of CR was disappointing in an otherwise enjoyably physical sequence.

    It was actually QoS.

    Very funny.

    But it was ;)

    Bain's right. It was QoS, not CR. Bond punches and shoots in CR's PTS, and then never has a machine gun at any time during the film.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited December 2011 Posts: 11,425
    That's the PTS I was thinking of - at the start of CR. Bond breaks into some foreign embassy compound and sprays the place with machinegun fire before blowing everything up. All a bit Brosnanesque if u ask me. I seem to remember QoS being relatively free of machinegun offences. The PTS of QoS is of course a direct continuation of the final scene of CR, so you could argue that the weaponry was emposed by the earlier film.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    That's not the PTS, it's after the PTS, Bond never has a machine gun, he has a handgun that he steals from the guys in the room, he in fact enters and just punches. He shoots a few rounds when he's got Mollaka the bomber in tow, and then he shoots a gas canister with his own P99. At no point in the movie (the end sequence notwithstanding), does Bond carry a machine gun (or like object), and he never just "sprays the place with machine gun fire".
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    edited December 2011 Posts: 1,778
    actonsteve wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    I guess the films have to respond to a changeing demographic. It's not hard to imagine how those raised on Connery must have despised the innovations of the Moore era. Coming from the Dalton days myself, I have an appreciation for all the actors apart from Brozza, who for me totally sucked.

    I pretty much agree with you. I thought Brozza and his films were a step backwards after the Dalton era. It was a case of biting my tongue and hoping for somethng better comes along.

    I second that. But honestly after the Moore era EON always wanted to do a serious Bond and leave Moore's style permanantly in the past. They started it with Dalton but after the 6 year hiatus they needed to bring back a style of Bond that was familiar to the main stream. And after they dumped Brosnan they went right back to a serious Bond with Craig. Had Dalton been a success I don't think they ever would've went back to an overly tounge and cheek Bond. But the audience expected it. Remember EON was never to keen on Brosnan and only hired him becasue the studio wanted a safe choice. First EON wanted Dalton to return and then they wanted James Purefoy. Brosnan was United Artist's call. And then after Brosnan's contract was up and EON had re-established the Bond series they dumped him as soon as they could. That never happened with a Bond actor before. EON fought to keep Connery, Lazenby, Dalton, and even Moore for as long as they possibly could. And now it seems they have very long-term plans for Craig.

    All-in-all I felt the 90s and DAD were a huge regression in the Bond series. That funny style should've stayed in the 70s/early 80s. By the mid 80s it felt tired. Bond had become a tired old caricature instead of a character. Now's he's a character again.
  • 00Beast00Beast
    Posts: 4,762
    actonsteve wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    I guess the films have to respond to a changeing demographic. It's not hard to imagine how those raised on Connery must have despised the innovations of the Moore era. Coming from the Dalton days myself, I have an appreciation for all the actors apart from Brozza, who for me totally sucked.

    I pretty much agree with you. I thought Brozza and his films were a step backwards after the Dalton era. It was a case of biting my tongue and hoping for somethng better comes along.

    A step backwards? I for one really enjoy the Brosnan era, not only because I started out my Bond-ing with Nightfire, but because they are very exciting movies that never fail to thrill. Also, this whole machine-gunning thing, is it that hated? I for one absolutely love the machine gun sequences, and welcome them into any Bond movie. That's one thing that the Brosnan era did right: plenty of machine gun fire! Only DAD ruined the Brosnan era. GE, TND, and TWINE are near flawless movies that should be considered Bond classics!
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    You've got a lot of points there, DoubleOhhSeven, and I, too, applaud the serious Bonds. I don't, however, want Craig to stay on so long that he gets tired, however. That was Moore's problem, and it would have been Brosnan's had he stayed on maybe one more film.

    And, sorry, 00Beast, TWINE is not a near flawless movie. Christmas Jones alone is a flaw I wish would be struck from the Bond legacy.
  • 00Beast00Beast
    Posts: 4,762
    @Agent007391: Well, I do understand that Christmas Jones is the bad part of TWINE, but that's why I said near flawless. Yes, there is room for improvement on TWINE because of Christmas Jones, but the rest is really good!
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    Renard wasn't exactly a highlight of that film, either. And I just found Elektra to be annoying.
Sign In or Register to comment.