It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
What I mean is the brosnan films add more to the series than the craig films. Quantum of solace adds nothing to the overall canon, or barely anything as a whole besides being the few times bond doesn't "get with" the main bond girl. Die Another Day, inspite of its flaws as a film, is inherently more bondian. Bond with a full beard and pj's swaggering into the lobby soaking wet in inherently bondian, so is zhao's appearance with the diamond incrusted features, the sword fight is completely in line with what is considered bondian, and the stunt of Bond righting the car using the ejector seat as the missle is flies through its path is both genuis in its conception, and its execution. David Arnold's score is suitably techno for the early 2000's, just as Moores films flaunted their 70's swagger. Also while "saved by the Bell" was a bit on the nose, bond using the accelerator to pin the villain to the back of a hover vehicle and then grappling hos way to safety is completely bondian, and something I could easily see Dalton doing in a third film, had it come to that. Say what you like about DAD, there is a lot of material, even for a film that is considered bad, that is 100% true to the series, and would fit into any other bond film seamlessly and work.
To take another perspective re: your post above (that Brosnan’s films added to the series in comparison to Craig’s films), I quite honestly don’t know what you mean by that.
One could see some of these Brosnan films as trying to, say, create a new Oddjob and failing; having terrible dialogue, that is the antithesis of Bondian (Halle Berry’s “quips”); personally I hated the sword fight (love the idea, hated the execution. To me, it felt like too brats having tantrums— sorry if I’m offending anyone with that one. But I didn’t like it in the least).
I don’t know how Bond in beard and pyjamas, whilst humorous, “added to the series”. I liked it more when Bond pulls Fields out of a crummy hotel and, instead, books into a swanky one, using her “cover-line” to show the audience how absolutely cool he is, and how green she is….
I think the Craig films add great value to the series, as all Bond films do, to one degree or another.
Your obsession with trying to knock Craig down a few pegs is getting a little predictable.
But I certainly get it: you don’t like the Craig era. It has little or no value to you— especially the last two or three films. You’ve been very clear on this. Repeatedly.
However, Craig is gone.
When are you going to let him go yourself?
While I get your point, QOS is probably a bad film to go after. This is the film with teachers on sabbatical who won the lottery, "I'm sure they do" after Greene says his friends call him Dominic, and "I missed" when questioned on the survival of Camille. The car chase, while frantic and poorly edited, is also tense and key Bond element. Bog-standard PTS action, and Craig looks physically his best as Bond (and it is his best performance).
QOS has its share of unique moments for the Bond series too, a lot of which has its roots in Fleming's novels. We see a Bond who has to reconcile with the death of Vesper, a Bond who admits that the dead 'don't care about vengeance'. Usually with films like LTK revenge had been treated as a goal for Bond, or at least something to give him a bit of extra character motivation. That realisation at the end of QOS, matter of fact as it is, is more Fleming esque to me.
If anything I think it's in that Bondian 'heightened reality'/escapism where DAD actually fails and adds little, if anything. The satellite/diamond subplot is taken from DAF (same for the gene therapy stuff really). You also get moments such as the chase between Bond and Zao where Bond flips his car by pushing the ejector seat button. While there's always an element of outlandishness in these films - ie. why would Bond be able to commandeer a tank/car/whatever when there'd be no key in the ignition - this makes no sense even in the moment. He'd just smash his head through the ice. It shows a fundamental lack of understanding of how to craft these scenes. Same for the wave riding scene really.
OHMSS is extremely bondian, a fight in the waves at sunrise is inherently bondian. As is skiing down a slope chased by a dozen men with machine guns, throwing people over cliffs, a car chase on a rally track, a toboggan chase, the whole attack on piz Gloria, evading scientists throwing potions, gliding on the ice while firing, spiking people on wall ornaments, basically everything in OHMSS is bondian by its nature. QoS on the other hand has none of that invention, none of the imagination.
Your question wasn't for me, but I would say all of CR's action is indeed quite generic, with the possible exception of the parkour sequence, which feels unBondian to me for reasons of characterization. The GE fight is a great generic fight, but in a very Bondian location.
Yep.
Somethings are just uniquely bondian, and to the extent they could be swapped out for another action star its only because that action star was copying bond to begin with.
I love the slap Paris gives and then Bond with the "was it something I said?" "I'll be right back." Punchy and fun dialogue.
TWINE we see a female baddie in the main role. Sure it's a bit of soap opera but I admire the filmmakers for taking the chance. We see Bond hurt, course it's never really developed out of the first act.
Even DAD has some new territory of Bond being captured and tortured. Again the execution is lacking but it is there.
With Craig they got a great deal right. Where Craig's films fall flat for me is the almost obsession that Bond seems to have with Vesper. The callbacks, the mentions of her right up to NTTD all seem a bit, well soap opera to me. Have him visiting the grave of Vesper, like Moore's Bond did with Tracy, but not in Italy with his current girlfriend. Lets not have Blofeld calling out Vesper in his monologue in SP or somehow having pictures of her, and M and Greene and Silva.
One hopes that the producers return to the continuity of the early Connery films. Have mentions of previous adventures but lets not spend lots of narrative time exploring the feelings of Bond. Lets focus on the development of his character.