Controversial opinions about Bond films

1714715716717718720»

Comments

  • edited 4:28pm Posts: 5,419
    I guess you can only be hypnotised if you want to

    ;)

    It's not a film I want to hate or have anything against necessarily. Actually on paper I like a lot of the ideas, and as I said in the past I've enjoyed it.

    It's just the last couple of times I watched it the experience was awful for me. The pace during the last third I found to be noticeably bad. That's what I mean by it being a deflating experience - there's absolutely no sense of tension to, say, them finding the Washington bomb and it seems to happen offscreen, or the climax in general. To give the EON films credit I've never experienced that same lack of engagement, even in my least favourite ones.
  • Posts: 2,118
    The climax is mediocre, but it's nothing new for the Bond series either. I think the climax of Casino Royale is quite mechanical, but it's the rest that makes the movie good.


    At least it doesn't have three endings like Octopussy. A movie that doesn't know when it has to end.

  • Posts: 5,419
    The climax is mediocre, but it's nothing new for the Bond series either. I think the climax of Casino Royale is quite mechanical, but it's the rest that makes the movie good.


    At least it doesn't have three endings like Octopussy. A movie that doesn't know when it has to end.

    I don't mind the third act of OP. I don't find it dissimilar to Bond films like FRWL or TLD which you can argue have that similar sense of 'three endings'. It's a film that deals with a lot of characters and loose threads to tie up by the third act at any rate. As I've said about CR I think the sinking house gave that film a much needed, effective climax, and the film would have suffered had it not been there.

    I definitely get a lot more out of OP on the whole. There's genuine suspense during the circus scene, and the assault on the palace feels consistent and exciting. With NSNA you get this weird sense that everything's off during that climax (ie. is there any reason Bond has to be transported by helicopter after the Tears of Allah exit crumbles only to just go in the water again? It's an obstacle for Bond, but it's the least exciting way they could have done it. Just kills any sense of momentum or excitement).

    It's a really bizarre film in my opinion. Much more poorly made than I think many people realise.
  • edited 5:08pm Posts: 2,118
    OP should have ended when Bond deactivates the bomb. Maybe it needed a Goldfinger-style epilogue and nothing more.

    The last 15 minutes are painful to watch.

    Climaxes are not the strong point of Bond films, anyway. LTK has a good one, but most of the time they are gunfire and explosions.

  • Posts: 5,419
    OP should have ended when Bond deactivates the bomb. Maybe it needed a Goldfinger-style epilogue and nothing more.

    The last 15 minutes are painful to watch.

    Climaxes are not the strong point of Bond films, anyway. LTK has a good one, but most of the time they are gunfire and explosions.

    I do think the final assault is needed. The bomb at the circus is great, but it's not an action sequence in itself, and I think it'd be difficult to have Bond defeat the villain in that scenario (it'd be a bit odd with him in his clown costume, and that's too good an idea to scrap!) So I can see why it was written that way. I don't find the last 15 minutes noticeably difficult to watch, but that's just me.

    Nothing wrong with gunfire and explosion climaxes. That's part of why we go to see these movies. They still have to maintain that sense of tension and deliver those satisfying moments. NSNA I feel doesn't even do that well, and I don't think this is the case with the EON Bond films. They completely flub Largo's death (to give TB credit they at least decided to have Largo be killed in the boat where we can actually see the expressions of the actors. Having it underwater is a terrible choice for a film).
  • Posts: 2,118
    NSNA climax is not great but I think it's the lack of music that hurts it.

    Something in the style of John Williams is missing.
  • edited 5:44pm Posts: 5,419
    NSNA climax is not great but I think it's the lack of music that hurts it.

    Something in the style of John Williams is missing.

    I don't think that's it. You can have very suspenseful scenes that don't have scores at all. It comes down to not being very well constructed and lacking proper tension. It comes down to bad filmmaking and storytelling.

    That said NSNA's score is another thing I don't like about it!
  • edited 5:49pm Posts: 2,118
    007HallY wrote: »
    NSNA climax is not great but I think it's the lack of music that hurts it.

    Something in the style of John Williams is missing.

    I don't think that's it. You can have very suspenseful scenes that don't have scores at all. It comes down to not being very well constructed and lacking proper tension. It comes down to bad filmmaking and storytelling.

    That said NSNA's score is another thing I don't like about it!

    The lack of music works in the chase scene, but not here in the climax. I don't think it's a problem with the direction; those scenes just needed music.

    Soundtracks are used for a reason.
  • Posts: 5,419
    007HallY wrote: »
    NSNA climax is not great but I think it's the lack of music that hurts it.

    Something in the style of John Williams is missing.

    I don't think that's it. You can have very suspenseful scenes that don't have scores at all. It comes down to not being very well constructed and lacking proper tension. It comes down to bad filmmaking and storytelling.

    That said NSNA's score is another thing I don't like about it!

    The lack of music works in the chase scene, but not here in the climax. I don't think it's a problem with the direction; those scenes just needed music.

    Soundtracks are used for a reason.

    I think even with a half decent score (assuming the score/music beats were written to accommodate the scene and not vice versa) the pacing would still be off and you'd still still have the issues I mentioned. It's a bit like trying to put a band aid on cut that requires stitches.
  • edited 6:04pm Posts: 2,118
    007HallY wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    NSNA climax is not great but I think it's the lack of music that hurts it.

    Something in the style of John Williams is missing.

    I don't think that's it. You can have very suspenseful scenes that don't have scores at all. It comes down to not being very well constructed and lacking proper tension. It comes down to bad filmmaking and storytelling.

    That said NSNA's score is another thing I don't like about it!

    The lack of music works in the chase scene, but not here in the climax. I don't think it's a problem with the direction; those scenes just needed music.

    Soundtracks are used for a reason.

    I think even with a half decent score (assuming the score/music beats were written to accommodate the scene and not vice versa) the pacing would still be off and you'd still still have the issues I mentioned. It's a bit like trying to put a band aid on cut that requires stitches.

    The pace would improve. And I don't think the rest would really be a problem. The jet pack and the underwater fight seem fine to me.



  • edited 6:10pm Posts: 5,419
    007HallY wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    NSNA climax is not great but I think it's the lack of music that hurts it.

    Something in the style of John Williams is missing.

    I don't think that's it. You can have very suspenseful scenes that don't have scores at all. It comes down to not being very well constructed and lacking proper tension. It comes down to bad filmmaking and storytelling.

    That said NSNA's score is another thing I don't like about it!

    The lack of music works in the chase scene, but not here in the climax. I don't think it's a problem with the direction; those scenes just needed music.

    Soundtracks are used for a reason.

    I think even with a half decent score (assuming the score/music beats were written to accommodate the scene and not vice versa) the pacing would still be off and you'd still still have the issues I mentioned. It's a bit like trying to put a band aid on cut that requires stitches.

    The pace would improve. And I don't think the rest would really be a problem. The jet pack and the underwater fight seem fine to me.



    Only if they re-edited it to play better with this hypothetical score and perhaps tighten things up (maybe). But otherwise it's not just a case of slapping on different music and suddenly all your filmmaking problems are fixed (trust me, I've had these issues in my own editing).

    Underwater fights aren't my thing personally. I think they can be too slow at the best of times. The jet packs look like they're from a B movie Sci Fi flick from the 50s and a but stupid. I think having Bond and Leiter go from water, to being airborne, and into the water again just drags the pace. That said both those things were issues with TB and not great in that either.
  • edited 6:18pm Posts: 2,118
    The thing is, I don't see the same problems you do. It's a mediocre but harmless climax.

    A good soundtrack would improve the slight pacing issues.

    In fact, I think the pace of the film is very good for its length.
  • Posts: 5,419
    Oh well, agree to disagree then.
  • AnotherZorinStoogeAnotherZorinStooge Bramhall (Irish)
    Posts: 591
    OP should have ended when Bond deactivates the bomb. Maybe it needed a Goldfinger-style epilogue and nothing more.

    The last 15 minutes are painful to watch.

    Climaxes are not the strong point of Bond films, anyway. LTK has a good one, but most of the time they are gunfire and explosions.
    007HallY wrote: »
    NSNA climax is not great but I think it's the lack of music that hurts it.

    Something in the style of John Williams is missing.

    I don't think that's it. You can have very suspenseful scenes that don't have scores at all. It comes down to not being very well constructed and lacking proper tension. It comes down to bad filmmaking and storytelling.

    That said NSNA's score is another thing I don't like about it!

    NSNA is an inferior remake. It rehashes jokes from Porridge.

    It's just shit.

    Hate when terrible films are given too much airtime and later favourably re-evaluated.

    So bad it's good?

    No, it's just shit.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited 8:01pm Posts: 18,267
    007HallY wrote: »
    The climax is mediocre, but it's nothing new for the Bond series either. I think the climax of Casino Royale is quite mechanical, but it's the rest that makes the movie good.


    At least it doesn't have three endings like Octopussy. A movie that doesn't know when it has to end.

    I don't mind the third act of OP. I don't find it dissimilar to Bond films like FRWL or TLD which you can argue have that similar sense of 'three endings'. It's a film that deals with a lot of characters and loose threads to tie up by the third act at any rate. As I've said about CR I think the sinking house gave that film a much needed, effective climax, and the film would have suffered had it not been there.

    I definitely get a lot more out of OP on the whole. There's genuine suspense during the circus scene, and the assault on the palace feels consistent and exciting. With NSNA you get this weird sense that everything's off during that climax (ie. is there any reason Bond has to be transported by helicopter after the Tears of Allah exit crumbles only to just go in the water again? It's an obstacle for Bond, but it's the least exciting way they could have done it. Just kills any sense of momentum or excitement).

    It's a really bizarre film in my opinion. Much more poorly made than I think many people realise.

    I think that's fair. I think there's plenty to like in it, but I find it quite telling to compare with Octopussy (which cost less to make!), a much slicker and more expensive-looking film: Broccoli knew what he was going.
    Funnily enough I almost wish McClory had made another one, as I reckon there's surely a really good Bond film to be made from Thunderball, and I don't think they quite managed it either time.
    OP should have ended when Bond deactivates the bomb. Maybe it needed a Goldfinger-style epilogue and nothing more.

    The last 15 minutes are painful to watch.

    Climaxes are not the strong point of Bond films, anyway. LTK has a good one, but most of the time they are gunfire and explosions.
    007HallY wrote: »
    NSNA climax is not great but I think it's the lack of music that hurts it.

    Something in the style of John Williams is missing.

    I don't think that's it. You can have very suspenseful scenes that don't have scores at all. It comes down to not being very well constructed and lacking proper tension. It comes down to bad filmmaking and storytelling.

    That said NSNA's score is another thing I don't like about it!

    NSNA is an inferior remake. It rehashes jokes from Porridge.

    It's a good joke! :)
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,588
    OP should have ended when Bond deactivates the bomb. Maybe it needed a Goldfinger-style epilogue and nothing more.

    The last 15 minutes are painful to watch.

    Climaxes are not the strong point of Bond films, anyway. LTK has a good one, but most of the time they are gunfire and explosions.
    007HallY wrote: »
    NSNA climax is not great but I think it's the lack of music that hurts it.

    Something in the style of John Williams is missing.

    I don't think that's it. You can have very suspenseful scenes that don't have scores at all. It comes down to not being very well constructed and lacking proper tension. It comes down to bad filmmaking and storytelling.

    That said NSNA's score is another thing I don't like about it!

    NSNA is an inferior remake. It rehashes jokes from Porridge.

    It's just shit.

    Hate when terrible films are given too much airtime and later favourably re-evaluated.

    So bad it's good?

    No, it's just shit.

    As much as I love TB, I don't think NSNA is "just shit".

    I think Sean delivers a fine performance as Bond, better than in, say, YOLT. Also, the dialogue is really good, the villain duo Brandauer-Carrera is superb and Bernie Casey is my very favourite Felix. Moreover the French Riviera scenes are appropriately atmopheric, the motorcycle chase is excellent and I quite like the climax too.

    So no, I don't think it's "just shit".
Sign In or Register to comment.