Revolution Against Bourne! Who wants classic Bond back?!!

1234568

Comments

  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,548
    doubleoego wrote: »
    That's because DAD foolishly tried to compete with the xXx movie, hence all that wave-surfing rubbish. Bond shouldn't have lowered it's standards to compete with Vin Diesel.

    However, yes, Bourne 1 and 2 embarrassed and I dare say immasculated what Bond had become at the time, forcing EoN to be influenced by and take cues from Bourne (there's no shame in that) and regain credibility haemorrhage from the Brosnan era. By the 3rd film, Bourne had unquestionably cemented itself as an authentic and legitimate spy thriller that maintained a level of excellent consistency which Bond unfortunately wasn't able to sustainable after CR; but in any case Bond never should have degraded itself to be competing with xXx in the first place.

    Actually, you might have it backwards. XXX was always in response to Bond.

    The Bond franchise, as much as anything else, has always pushed the envelope in terms of extreme sports. From scuba diving to hang gliding to ski-base jumping to bungee jumping to snowboarding to a barrel-roll stunt in a car.

    The surf/ski scene in DAD, despite the poor execution and sfx, is actually rooted in extreme sports:



  • Totally agree with the criticism of the SP train sequence. Who brings a tuxedo on a mission from where you think you might not come back? Why do you wait out in the open o be picked up when you are on said 'secret mission'? Love the glamor stuff when it makes sense as part of the story, and I'll restrict my comments to just the Craig era here. Glamor works so well in CR, QOS as well as SF, but man, why not get into a gritty train to the desert, sneak across the desert art night wearing something like the Live and Let Die gear (which was in the poster but not in the movie) and tell a more convincing story? You could have still had the Hinx attack, but wearing reasonable clothes, not glamor stuff that needs to be pressed in the middle of a mission. Love Craig era, but criticism is due where it's due, and that was pretty silly.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    In retrospect, perhaps it could have been more interesting if Madeline and Bond disguised themselves as locals and mingled among the plebes in the cheap seats on the train on their way to Blofeld's hideout.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,265
    I also think the fight with Hinx could have had much more tension leading into it. Don't get me wrong, i love the fight. However, Hinx comes out of nowhere.

    What if we had brief scenes of Hinx shadowing Bond and Madeline to L'American, and then again when they board the train. The characters have no idea they're being followed, but the audience does, ratcheting the tension for the expected confrontation.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2016 Posts: 23,883
    peter wrote: »
    I also think the fight with Hinx could have had much more tension leading into it. Don't get me wrong, i love the fight. However, Hinx comes out of nowhere.

    What if we had brief scenes of Hinx shadowing Bond and Madeline to L'American, and then again when they board the train. The characters have no idea they're being followed, but the audience does, ratcheting the tension for the expected confrontation.
    Yes, I agree. That certainly helped to make the latter part of FRWL so interesting. Knowing that Grant was shadowing Bond on the Orient Express. Also, I would have liked to have seen a facial reaction from Madeline as she saw Hinx approaching. A look of fear would have helped to 'up the tension' prior to the actual confrontation.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,981
    bondjames wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I also think the fight with Hinx could have had much more tension leading into it. Don't get me wrong, i love the fight. However, Hinx comes out of nowhere.

    What if we had brief scenes of Hinx shadowing Bond and Madeline to L'American, and then again when they board the train. The characters have no idea they're being followed, but the audience does, ratcheting the tension for the expected confrontation.
    Yes, I agree. That certainly helped to make the latter part of FRWL so interesting. Knowing that Grant was shadowing Bond on the Orient Express. Also, I would have liked to have seen a facial reaction from Madeline as she saw Hinx approaching. A look of fear would have helped to 'up the tension' prior to the actual confrontation.

    To be fair, Jaws appears out of nowhere too. The precedent was set.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I also think the fight with Hinx could have had much more tension leading into it. Don't get me wrong, i love the fight. However, Hinx comes out of nowhere.

    What if we had brief scenes of Hinx shadowing Bond and Madeline to L'American, and then again when they board the train. The characters have no idea they're being followed, but the audience does, ratcheting the tension for the expected confrontation.
    Yes, I agree. That certainly helped to make the latter part of FRWL so interesting. Knowing that Grant was shadowing Bond on the Orient Express. Also, I would have liked to have seen a facial reaction from Madeline as she saw Hinx approaching. A look of fear would have helped to 'up the tension' prior to the actual confrontation.

    To be fair, Jaws appears out of nowhere too. The precedent was set.
    True enough. However, Anya's shocked expression when she sees him in the closet is sort of what I was hoping for here - especially when he arrives suddenly like that.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    peter wrote: »
    I also think the fight with Hinx could have had much more tension leading into it. Don't get me wrong, i love the fight. However, Hinx comes out of nowhere.

    What if we had brief scenes of Hinx shadowing Bond and Madeline to L'American, and then again when they board the train. The characters have no idea they're being followed, but the audience does, ratcheting the tension for the expected confrontation.

    I agree with this.

    So much was lacking in SP; but that's what happens when you squander 3 years scripting a crappy story and then trying to fix things at the 11th hour. However, the film could have been more tolerable if we the audience were allowed to be fully immersed and invested with what was going on.

    Throughout FRWL Bond was being tailed by Grant which built up to the superbly suspenseful showdown, heck even in CR, seeing Gettler with his one eye standing on the peer watching Bond and Vesper added a little something but SP, this film just decided to have Hinx bulldoze his way into screen out of nowhere with more build up, no tension, no nothing. Your suggestion of Hinx shadowing Bond and Madeline after the tedious snowplane chase would have been a noticable improvement.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,548
    Totally agree with the criticism of the SP train sequence. Who brings a tuxedo on a mission from where you think you might not come back? Why do you wait out in the open o be picked up when you are on said 'secret mission'? Love the glamor stuff when it makes sense as part of the story, and I'll restrict my comments to just the Craig era here. Glamor works so well in CR, QOS as well as SF, but man, why not get into a gritty train to the desert, sneak across the desert art night wearing something like the Live and Let Die gear (which was in the poster but not in the movie) and tell a more convincing story? You could have still had the Hinx attack, but wearing reasonable clothes, not glamor stuff that needs to be pressed in the middle of a mission. Love Craig era, but criticism is due where it's due, and that was pretty silly.

    Indeed. In fact, from that point forward, little made sense. DC admitted that the tuxedo was used simply because "it's a Bond film," emphasizing that sometimes we have to accept bends in reality. And we do.

    The Hinx attack was what bothered me more. Blofeld was obviously awaiting Bond's arrival (had even prepped for it) and yet Hinx is still trying to kill him? Makes no sense, unless Hinx had gone rogue, which was possible but NOT handled. All of these little peeves of mine in regards to SP could have been so easily taken care of with a line of dialogue here and there.

    On a separate note, I was glancing back through the released shooting schedule from the email hack, and I must say: I like the original plot a lot more. Bond and Madeleine were supposed to have dinner with Blofeld. There was no torture scene. Bond uses the watch here, enabling his escape. They should have stuck to this.
  • Posts: 1,548
    We have classic Bond already.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    I think when they reach back and snatch imagery from the original films, that's what contributes to the pastiche feeling. I like the idea of Craig in a white dinner jacket, and Bond and a train, and Bond versus a silent henchman, but throw them all into the same scene and it just seems lazy and uninspired.

    I also think they have slightly lost the knack of writing that is suitably over the top, but still believable enough that it could feasible occur in some heightened reality. That's the sweet spot that I think Fleming and many of the older films resided in. And that is what I think is missing at the moment. It's maintaining that tightrope act for a full 2hrs plus. Scaramangas island, the golden gun, NicNac are all fine. The flying car and the ninja schoolgirl twins aren't.

    Agreed.
  • edited January 2017 Posts: 489
    Comparing the new Bourne film to Spectre, I think the Bond film really suffers in comparison, especially how the tone of the Bourne film never stoops to some of the really silly stuff, like the mouse gag. That was definitely a turn for the worst, pun intended.

    That stated, the new Bourne film is for me the lesser of the three previous, not counting the Jeremy Renner picture.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Luckily we got classic Bond back with Spectre, the only film of the Craig era that oozes Bond from start to finish without abandoning what has made the films so successful for four decades.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited January 2017 Posts: 7,891
    They made two SPECTREs? ;)
  • edited January 2017 Posts: 4,622
    bondjames wrote: »
    I have taken the train through the Moroccan desert myself. The train was very, very old and there was only one other tourist besides myself.
    Ah, so that explains the emptiness of the posh dining car in the film then. Now it makes sense.
    This makes sense of course, but I also do think the sparsely populated dining car is consistent with the thematic imagery that Mendes designed for the film.
    The film has a dreamlike quality -the principal characters existing in a spectral like environment.
    Background characters do populate the film here and there, but still there is sense of them barely being there.
    We only catch fleeting glimpses of the few others on the train.
    The mountain clinic is sparsely populated, I think by design.
    When Bond and Swann arrive at L'americain, Mendes makes effort to keep the receptionist in shadow.
    When Bond and Swann arrive in Tangier, they do seem somewhat eerily separate from the others on the street.
    The night time streets of Rome are not surprisingly almost devoid of life.
    Mendes touch is deft enough to allow that all these scenes easily co-exist in a non spectral reality as well, but the pattern is there.
    Mendes sets the spectral tone right from the start with his opening statement - The Dead Live or whatever he actually said, and then right into extended Day of the Dead.
    Others have mentioned the film does seem to lack extras populating scenes or just the bare minimum.
    I do think it is by design.What background we do get seems suppressed. Blofeld's tech staff at the crater seem like zombies.
    The Spectre meeting in Rome. Spooky.
    Spectre. The iconic history associated with the acronym is obvious, but Mendes seems to be working with the ghostly connotations inspired by the word as well.
    As if the evil pall of Spectre has cast a spectral dimension over Bond's world, at least for this film.



  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    @timmer

    you are one of the few ones that seem to understand how Mendes ticks. Mendes also loves symmetry and Spectre is full of it.

    Because it's a Bond film most overlook the unbelievable work that was put in the sets for instance, the cinematography and sparsely populated locations, all is by design and serves a purpose.

    The dream like quality is another very good point.
    Spectre is an incredible achievement technically and from an artists point of view. As it happens to be a Bond film, it is also for a mainstream audience, of which most won't see past the tuxedo of Bond and the hand-to-hand fights and helicopter/plane/car action.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,328
    The whole Spectre Lair sequence is very dream like. It's eerie how it's empty in some places and completely full of people in others. That and the whole head drilling bit was like a creepy horror movie. The atmosphere of Spectre was probably the greatest thing about it. Spectre for me was pretty much how I envisioned Fleming's world when reading his Bond novels.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Spectre. The iconic history associated with the acronym is obvious, but Mendes seems to be working with the ghostly connotations inspired by the word as well.
    As if the evil pall of Spectre has cast a spectral dimension over Bond's world, at least for this film.
    Yes, I definitely noticed that during my last watch of the film during the holidays. There is also a very cold aesthetic that permeates the entire film, even in the yellow filtered scenes. The characters are also a bit aloof for the most part, at least in comparison to those in SF.

    Mendes was operating on multiple levels with this film, as you note. What we finally got was indeed deliberate, at least visually.

    I didn't like it all that much, but knowing that it was intentional gives me hope for the future in case he returns, because he has the potential to give us something different yet again - this time more to my liking.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    @bondjames

    I am torn about Mendes returning. One day yes, the other no.
    Probably because SF firmly sits at the bottom of my ranking while SP may well take the top spot forever.

    But I believe actually, should he return that his third wouldn't be like SF nor SP. It would be something different.
    For me it seems SF was his trial and error run, something about SF just isn't right from a directional point of view. With SP he probably made his strongest film since American Beauty.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2017 Posts: 23,883
    @BondJasonBond006, I agree with you that B25, if it indeed is to be Mendes helmed, will be quite different creatively from both SF & SP. With these last two films, he has created two distinctive and quite dissimilar entries. It's quite an artistic achievement. I personally much prefer SF, but I realize that others, like yourself, like SP. Perhaps the third one will be the best yet? SF to me is all passion whereas SP is distinctly chillier, at least emotionally.

    As I've said on the Production thread, I'm firmly of the belief that if it's to be Craig again, then it will be Mendes. I just don't see it playing out any other way.
  • edited January 2017 Posts: 4,622
    I am absolutely not a fan of either Mendes films. Just not what I want from the Bond series.
    That said, I do find the films interesting, especially thematically. They are quite watchable, but not what I want.
    But, I now would like to see Mendes return for one last film.
    I say this because it does appear that B25 will be Craig's goodbye.
    It's not realistic to think that Babs is going to oversee a major change in tone for his final film.
    The Craig oeuvre is what it is. It's got drama and personal stuff going on. Guys like Forster and Mendes have combined to do the last three films.
    So, I say, what the hell, let them indulge one last time. See what the Babs-Craig-Mendes trio can do with a Spectre follow-up.
    See what thematics Mendes conjures up for this film.
    Agreed, he'll do something different.
    That way the three of them are happy. They might throw together something real good.
    Craig's Bond persona I thought was quite convincing in SP, so I am looking forward to more of that.
    Do bring back Waltz as Ernst. Write out Swann though, but don't kill her. We still need a break from dead Bond girls. The bodies were really piling up for a while.
    And I do think Babs is patiently waiting for Craig and quite possibly Mendes to be available.
    Craig, I think is a given. Mendes will take some coaxing, but I think it's doable.
    The other two just have to sell him on it.
  • Posts: 7,653
    A third Mendes/ Craig is a 007 dealbreaker for me, pisspoor movies that are hailed for its atmosphere and yet are so poorly made as thriller or actioner. Because lets face it James Bond never was any art, sheer pulp but well written.

    For me Mendes and Forster both have taken the franchise in a direction that is boring, somebody ought to take this franchise away from EON. It seems that Disney is the only one who really knows what to do with a decent franchise perhaps time to change the watch. With Cubby away perhaps Wilson & Barbara are way out of their depth. Being saved by the occasional Martin Campbell who still knows how to do a decent 007 movie. Too bad it has been close to a decade I was a happy 007 fan.

    But I always have the books and the classics before QoB to enjoy.
  • edited January 2017 Posts: 4,622
    @saintmark
    I can't disagree with any of the above.
    I'm just saying, what the hell, one more from Craig-Mendes, and then hopefully it's over and we can get back to as you put it, well written pulp.
    That's a close enough description, or more to the point, I know what you're getting at.
    Babs doesn't have the same vision for the franchise as Cubby did.
    I also think Michael's influence has been reduced, quite possibly due to natural attrition.
    He was of the Cubby school, but Babs has emerged as the Eon power.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,265
    Why is Cubby seen through rose coloured glasses while his daughter is raked across the coals.

    Cubby is as great and as flawed as his daughter, and his daughter has some of his talents and flaws as well- like most established producers.

    Cubby made MOONRAKER, he cast Brolin as Bond before Moore came back for OP. He spoke to Burt Reynolds and Adam West to play 007.

    The man made his own errors and plenty of them, but, like Babs, he, and she, successfully have kept the franchise alive and healthy.

    In fact, I would think Babs has more of a challenging time than her father: the genre is saturated with Bourne and Kingsmen and MI and TMFU.

    Yet her Bond films not only come out on top (flaws and all, like any film), but substantially more when it comes
    to worldwide revenue.

    Like her father, Babs has made great bond films (CR, QOS, SF, GE) and not so good (DAD) and middle of the roads (TWINE, SP) with a film somewhere in between (TND).

    Filmmaking is not an exact science. No one goes out of their way to piss "you" off personally when they're making a film. There are hundreds of thousands of decisions to be made during a production. Sometimes MOST of the decisions made are correct , generally. Sometimes, with all good intentions, the accumulative
    Decisions didn't lead to a finely concluded execution.

    That's the gamble of the film industry. If it was easy, everyone would be
    Making their "passion piece".
  • Posts: 533
    No. I don't want a return to the 1960s Bond. I'm not interested in watching EON Productions regress the franchise. I liked the movies from the 60s, but I'm just not into this "nostalgia" nonsense. It's bad enough that Disney is trying to take this route with the STAR WARS franchise.

    In SP they really tried to make a "classic" Bond film. Therefore they brought back the gadgets, the glamour, the henchman, the globe trotting and a certain 60s style.

    I didn't see that in SPECTRE. I saw this attempt in SKYFALL, which is why I didn't like it very much. Especially the misogyny.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Misogyny in Skyfall? Must've been the one I haven't seen.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,891
    Misogyny in Skyfall? Must've been the one I haven't seen.
    I was thinking the same.

  • Posts: 533
    There were so many articles about the misogyny found in "SKYFALL" that I couldn't keep count. And I still agree with those articles.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,328
    It would help to post some of them.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,891
    Examples please.
Sign In or Register to comment.