Controversial opinions about Bond films

1614615617619620705

Comments

  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    edited February 2021 Posts: 737
    Hellraiser: Revelations is a film made to retain the rights to the franchise. Apparently it was shot in three weeks and released in cinemas just for the crew so that it counted as a theatrical release.

    And yes, SP aside I love all Bond films. I don't critique them in the same way I do other films. They sort of stand aside on their own.
  • Posts: 7,500
    echo wrote: »
    Controversial opinion: TMWTGG is the laziest of all the Bond films, followed by DAF.

    Not sure how controversial that is...
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,518
    Hellraiser: Revelations is a film made to retain the rights to the franchise. Apparently it was shot in three weeks and released in cinemas just for the crew so that it counted as a theatrical release.

    And yes, SP aside I love all Bond films. I don't critique them in the same way I do other films. They sort of stand aside on their own.

    Spectre aside, though? Well, whatever.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited February 2021 Posts: 17,728
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    No Bond film is without merit and there's something to enjoy in all of them.

    This. People should watch Hellraiser: Revelations, the 9th Hellraiser film and one of the two worst films I have ever seen, to calibrate their quality standards before they start condemning an entire Bond film.

    You've made me curious. I know The Room has become a joke / cult classic, but it's also a textbook example of how to make a film poorly. To say any Bond film is truly bad when films like this exist, is crazy!

    True. I suppose you have to take it all in context too. The Bond films are one of the most successful series of the films in the history of cinema. A Bond film can be seen as bad in the context of the other Bond films that it's compared and contrasted against. I think that is what people here mean when they rate or rank the Bond films.

    Certainly. I thought the comment I quoted was referencing people who think some Bond films are bad in the context of all filmmaking. Which is still a valid opinion, but it wouldn’t hurt to take a wider view of bad films.

    Yes, you're right. I just wanted to clarify what I said above in case people thought I was being too harsh about Die Another Day or any other Bond film. Context is key in all criticism of films or other areas of the Arts.
  • ThunderballThunderball playing Chemin de Fer in a casino, downing Vespers
    Posts: 776
    jobo wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Controversial opinion: TMWTGG is the laziest of all the Bond films, followed by DAF.

    Not sure how controversial that is...

    Not at all controversial. There are Bond films I dislike more than it (specifically DAD and AVTAK) but at least they’re not as lazy and uneventful as TMWTGG.

    DAF is lazy, but fairly enjoyable. Sorta.
  • Posts: 631
    Hellraiser: Revelations is a film made to retain the rights to the franchise. Apparently it was shot in three weeks and released in cinemas just for the crew so that it counted as a theatrical release.

    True of a few films, I believe. Which leads to a question: does anyone know if Eon’s rights to Bond expire if they do not release a film within a given time period?
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited February 2021 Posts: 12,914
    I don't have a quick or definitive answer, but I recall suggestions the James Bond Jr cartoon was floated to keep EON'S film rights exercised.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    Hellraiser: Revelations is a film made to retain the rights to the franchise. Apparently it was shot in three weeks and released in cinemas just for the crew so that it counted as a theatrical release.

    And yes, SP aside I love all Bond films. I don't critique them in the same way I do other films. They sort of stand aside on their own.

    Spectre aside, though? Well, whatever.

    Yes, I hate the film.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,518
    Hellraiser: Revelations is a film made to retain the rights to the franchise. Apparently it was shot in three weeks and released in cinemas just for the crew so that it counted as a theatrical release.

    And yes, SP aside I love all Bond films. I don't critique them in the same way I do other films. They sort of stand aside on their own.

    Spectre aside, though? Well, whatever.

    Yes, I hate the film.

    Yes, and it’s one thing to compare it to other Bond films, which is fair, but to compare it to properly bad films outside of the franchise? Insane.
  • Posts: 14,799
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    DaltonFan wrote: »
    @Dragonpol: Fun fact: His father was also a Bond fan until Die Another Day because for some nutty reason he got upset that the bad guys were North Korean.

    Yes, I've read that the film didn't go down well in North Korea. I suppose that's an understandable reaction from a Communist dictatorship heavily reliant on censorship though.

    I've also read that the current North Korean leader's father, Kim Jong-il, learned to speak English from watching Star Trek episodes. Oh, and Klingon as well. ;)

    My bet is thar he was also insulted to have the Bond villain be a petulant child.

    Maybe it hit a little too close to home?

    I just wished the film hadn't been that bad.

    Me too. It's my least favourite film in the series. Instead of focusing on one or two specific areas it tries to be all things to all people and fails miserably.

    The first half is good, though, right? It's only when he goes to Iceland that it falls to pieces. Or do you hate it all?

    In my case I hate it all.
  • edited February 2021 Posts: 7,500
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    DaltonFan wrote: »
    @Dragonpol: Fun fact: His father was also a Bond fan until Die Another Day because for some nutty reason he got upset that the bad guys were North Korean.

    Yes, I've read that the film didn't go down well in North Korea. I suppose that's an understandable reaction from a Communist dictatorship heavily reliant on censorship though.

    I've also read that the current North Korean leader's father, Kim Jong-il, learned to speak English from watching Star Trek episodes. Oh, and Klingon as well. ;)

    My bet is thar he was also insulted to have the Bond villain be a petulant child.

    Maybe it hit a little too close to home?

    I just wished the film hadn't been that bad.

    Me too. It's my least favourite film in the series. Instead of focusing on one or two specific areas it tries to be all things to all people and fails miserably.

    The first half is good, though, right? It's only when he goes to Iceland that it falls to pieces. Or do you hate it all?

    In my case I hate it all.

    Yeah, the somewhat fashionable "the first half of DAD is actually good" notion does not resonate with me. The PTS action is boring (can we please aim higher than generic machine gun action in mud?), Madonna's theme song is still horrible, Bond's escspe is utterly bizarre (more at home in a Harry Potter movie), the product placement galore scene in the hotel is pastiche, the dialogue and acting performances between Brosnan and Berry are embarrassing beyond words, the slow mo action edits are bad taste, Jinx' CGI jump is obnoxious and silly, Madonna's cameo is a travesty, the sexual innuendos are childish, the invicible car is ridiculous... :-&

    Rant over... but I could go on...
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,009
    jobo wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    DaltonFan wrote: »
    @Dragonpol: Fun fact: His father was also a Bond fan until Die Another Day because for some nutty reason he got upset that the bad guys were North Korean.

    Yes, I've read that the film didn't go down well in North Korea. I suppose that's an understandable reaction from a Communist dictatorship heavily reliant on censorship though.

    I've also read that the current North Korean leader's father, Kim Jong-il, learned to speak English from watching Star Trek episodes. Oh, and Klingon as well. ;)

    My bet is thar he was also insulted to have the Bond villain be a petulant child.

    Maybe it hit a little too close to home?

    I just wished the film hadn't been that bad.

    Me too. It's my least favourite film in the series. Instead of focusing on one or two specific areas it tries to be all things to all people and fails miserably.

    The first half is good, though, right? It's only when he goes to Iceland that it falls to pieces. Or do you hate it all?

    In my case I hate it all.

    Yeah, the somewhat fasionable "the first half of DAD is actually good" notion does not resonate with me. The PTS action is boring (can we please aim higher than generic machine gun action in mud?), Madonna's theme song is still horrible, Bond's escspe is utterly bizarre (more at home in a Harry Potter movie), the product placement galore scene in the hotel is pastiche, the dialogue and acting performances between Brosnan and Berry are embarrassing beyond words, the slow mo action edits are bad taste, Jinx' CGI jump is obnoxious and silly, Madonna's cameo is a travesty, the sexual innuendos are childish, the invicible car is ridiculous... :-&

    Rant over... but I could go on...

    It's not really fashionable. It's always been around. That being said, you're not entirely wrong in your criticisms bar one or two which I like. I'm struggling to remember the product placement in the hotel sequence though; it's been a while since I've seen it. I remember Bolinger in the ice bucket, at least - what others are there?
  • Posts: 7,500
    jobo wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    DaltonFan wrote: »
    @Dragonpol: Fun fact: His father was also a Bond fan until Die Another Day because for some nutty reason he got upset that the bad guys were North Korean.

    Yes, I've read that the film didn't go down well in North Korea. I suppose that's an understandable reaction from a Communist dictatorship heavily reliant on censorship though.

    I've also read that the current North Korean leader's father, Kim Jong-il, learned to speak English from watching Star Trek episodes. Oh, and Klingon as well. ;)

    My bet is thar he was also insulted to have the Bond villain be a petulant child.

    Maybe it hit a little too close to home?

    I just wished the film hadn't been that bad.

    Me too. It's my least favourite film in the series. Instead of focusing on one or two specific areas it tries to be all things to all people and fails miserably.

    The first half is good, though, right? It's only when he goes to Iceland that it falls to pieces. Or do you hate it all?

    In my case I hate it all.

    Yeah, the somewhat fasionable "the first half of DAD is actually good" notion does not resonate with me. The PTS action is boring (can we please aim higher than generic machine gun action in mud?), Madonna's theme song is still horrible, Bond's escspe is utterly bizarre (more at home in a Harry Potter movie), the product placement galore scene in the hotel is pastiche, the dialogue and acting performances between Brosnan and Berry are embarrassing beyond words, the slow mo action edits are bad taste, Jinx' CGI jump is obnoxious and silly, Madonna's cameo is a travesty, the sexual innuendos are childish, the invicible car is ridiculous... :-&

    Rant over... but I could go on...

    It's not really fashionable. It's always been around. That being said, you're not entirely wrong in your criticisms bar one or two which I like. I'm struggling to remember the product placement in the hotel sequence though; it's been a while since I've seen it. I remember Bolinger in the ice bucket, at least - what others are there?

    I might have exaggerated a bit. The obvious one is the Bollinger bottle which is one of the most glaring pieces of product placement ever seen in the series. Whether there are more I can't remember at the top of my head. Been a while since last time I saw the film.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    He just drinks Bollinger. He is having a good time. Nothing wrong with that.

    The worst product placement in the whole series is surely in CR where we get an advert for a Mondeo interrupting the film for 30 seconds.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    He just drinks Bollinger. He is having a good time. Nothing wrong with that.

    The worst product placement in the whole series is surely in CR where we get an advert for a Mondeo interrupting the film for 30 seconds.

    There is also the idiotic watch commercial.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    edited February 2021 Posts: 13,879
    Philips/Norelco shaver in the DAD hotel room.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,728
    I think the billboard scene in Moonraker with the ambulance racing past them must take the biscuit for the most advertising in one scene in a Bond film. Perhaps not actual product placement but it's very close to being the same thing in my book.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    jobo wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    DaltonFan wrote: »
    @Dragonpol: Fun fact: His father was also a Bond fan until Die Another Day because for some nutty reason he got upset that the bad guys were North Korean.

    Yes, I've read that the film didn't go down well in North Korea. I suppose that's an understandable reaction from a Communist dictatorship heavily reliant on censorship though.

    I've also read that the current North Korean leader's father, Kim Jong-il, learned to speak English from watching Star Trek episodes. Oh, and Klingon as well. ;)

    My bet is thar he was also insulted to have the Bond villain be a petulant child.

    Maybe it hit a little too close to home?

    I just wished the film hadn't been that bad.

    Me too. It's my least favourite film in the series. Instead of focusing on one or two specific areas it tries to be all things to all people and fails miserably.

    The first half is good, though, right? It's only when he goes to Iceland that it falls to pieces. Or do you hate it all?

    In my case I hate it all.

    Yeah, the somewhat fasionable "the first half of DAD is actually good" notion does not resonate with me. The PTS action is boring (can we please aim higher than generic machine gun action in mud?), Madonna's theme song is still horrible, Bond's escspe is utterly bizarre (more at home in a Harry Potter movie), the product placement galore scene in the hotel is pastiche, the dialogue and acting performances between Brosnan and Berry are embarrassing beyond words, the slow mo action edits are bad taste, Jinx' CGI jump is obnoxious and silly, Madonna's cameo is a travesty, the sexual innuendos are childish, the invicible car is ridiculous... :-&

    Rant over... but I could go on...

    It's not really fashionable. It's always been around. That being said, you're not entirely wrong in your criticisms bar one or two which I like. I'm struggling to remember the product placement in the hotel sequence though; it's been a while since I've seen it. I remember Bolinger in the ice bucket, at least - what others are there?

    I might have exaggerated a bit. The obvious one is the Bollinger bottle which is one of the most glaring pieces of product placement ever seen in the series. Whether there are more I can't remember at the top of my head. Been a while since last time I saw the film.

    The champagne is the big one. Using an electric razor in what seems like a carpeted bedroom while already clean shaven is a pretty odd choice I would say. And those shirts are placed very unnaturally, too. It isn't made super obvious but the ones that can be seen close up (on the table with the Bollinger and the packaging of the razor) are of course Brioni as I would assume are the suits. Generally, if you stop the above video at 0:57 it's like a specifically designed product placement still - which it arguably is.

    I however think there are worse product placements in the series. I personally hate the use of the Olympus camera in the LTK title sequence (eventhough the camera itself is quite nice). And everything car related is much more blatant in my estimation, with some of those hero car shots being 75% of the way towards a car ad already.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,518
    I enjoy DAD because in my own mind he is so badly poisoned in NK that he has hallucinations about ice palaces and Madonna before succumbing to death. Ergo the best part of DAD is the only part that’s real. ;)
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    I think the difference is that Bond naturally uses most of these products anyway. The shaver for example, if you didn't know you could buy it in Boots, you wouldn't know it was product placement.

    At least in MR the billboards are funny and are integrated into the sequence.

    The Mondeo in CR (a f**king Mondeo!!!!!! Of all the cars...) is embarrassing because it doesn't add anything. He's not driving a cool car. It's not even his car, it's a hire car. It has no purpose being there.

    At least the others are nice shirts, cameras, drinks etc. Bond might choose them anyway.
  • Posts: 7,500
    jobo wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    DaltonFan wrote: »
    @Dragonpol: Fun fact: His father was also a Bond fan until Die Another Day because for some nutty reason he got upset that the bad guys were North Korean.

    Yes, I've read that the film didn't go down well in North Korea. I suppose that's an understandable reaction from a Communist dictatorship heavily reliant on censorship though.

    I've also read that the current North Korean leader's father, Kim Jong-il, learned to speak English from watching Star Trek episodes. Oh, and Klingon as well. ;)

    My bet is thar he was also insulted to have the Bond villain be a petulant child.

    Maybe it hit a little too close to home?

    I just wished the film hadn't been that bad.

    Me too. It's my least favourite film in the series. Instead of focusing on one or two specific areas it tries to be all things to all people and fails miserably.

    The first half is good, though, right? It's only when he goes to Iceland that it falls to pieces. Or do you hate it all?

    In my case I hate it all.

    Yeah, the somewhat fasionable "the first half of DAD is actually good" notion does not resonate with me. The PTS action is boring (can we please aim higher than generic machine gun action in mud?), Madonna's theme song is still horrible, Bond's escspe is utterly bizarre (more at home in a Harry Potter movie), the product placement galore scene in the hotel is pastiche, the dialogue and acting performances between Brosnan and Berry are embarrassing beyond words, the slow mo action edits are bad taste, Jinx' CGI jump is obnoxious and silly, Madonna's cameo is a travesty, the sexual innuendos are childish, the invicible car is ridiculous... :-&

    Rant over... but I could go on...

    It's not really fashionable. It's always been around. That being said, you're not entirely wrong in your criticisms bar one or two which I like. I'm struggling to remember the product placement in the hotel sequence though; it's been a while since I've seen it. I remember Bolinger in the ice bucket, at least - what others are there?

    I might have exaggerated a bit. The obvious one is the Bollinger bottle which is one of the most glaring pieces of product placement ever seen in the series. Whether there are more I can't remember at the top of my head. Been a while since last time I saw the film.

    The champagne is the big one. Using an electric razor in what seems like a carpeted bedroom while already clean shaven is a pretty odd choice I would say. And those shirts are placed very unnaturally, too. It isn't made super obvious but the ones that can be seen close up (on the table with the Bollinger and the packaging of the razor) are of course Brioni as I would assume are the suits. Generally, if you stop the above video at 0:57 it's like a specifically designed product placement still - which it arguably is.

    I however think there are worse product placements in the series. I personally hate the use of the Olympus camera in the LTK title sequence (eventhough the camera itself is quite nice). And everything car related is much more blatant in my estimation, with some of those hero car shots being 75% of the way towards a car ad already.

    I suppose what annoys me so much about the Bollinger bottle is that this particular shot serves no real other purpose than to hammer home that Bond drinks Bollinger. Cars at least serve a purpose in the films.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    I think the difference is that Bond naturally uses most of these products anyway. The shaver for example, if you didn't know you could buy it in Boots, you wouldn't know it was product placement.

    At least in MR the billboards are funny and are integrated into the sequence.

    The Mondeo in CR (a f**king Mondeo!!!!!! Of all the cars...) is embarrassing because it doesn't add anything. He's not driving a cool car. It's not even his car, it's a hire car. It has no purpose being there.

    At least the others are nice shirts, cameras, drinks etc. Bond might choose them anyway.

    You are right. I was actually surprised how low-key the razor placement is. A small print on the packaging that is barely readable due to the movement. The way he uses the razor is weird, but it makes sense that he has one and then it just disappears during a cut. I would have assumed there would be a lingering shot of the razor after he puts it in it's base with the logo very visible (like in an ad). In the end I only know that it is a Philips Philishave Sensotec HQ8894 because I am a weirdo who looks these things up and there are other weirdos who put that information on the internet.

    What are people's opinions on the tongue-in-cheek mentions of VW Beetles and the Omega in Skyfall? I personally think both of those are funny.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited February 2021 Posts: 7,518
    I think the difference is that Bond naturally uses most of these products anyway. The shaver for example, if you didn't know you could buy it in Boots, you wouldn't know it was product placement.

    At least in MR the billboards are funny and are integrated into the sequence.

    The Mondeo in CR (a f**king Mondeo!!!!!! Of all the cars...) is embarrassing because it doesn't add anything. He's not driving a cool car. It's not even his car, it's a hire car. It has no purpose being there.

    At least the others are nice shirts, cameras, drinks etc. Bond might choose them anyway.

    How was he supposed to get to the One and Only Club? I'd say it serves a pretty obvious purpose.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,009
    I think the difference is that Bond naturally uses most of these products anyway. The shaver for example, if you didn't know you could buy it in Boots, you wouldn't know it was product placement.

    At least in MR the billboards are funny and are integrated into the sequence.

    The Mondeo in CR (a f**king Mondeo!!!!!! Of all the cars...) is embarrassing because it doesn't add anything. He's not driving a cool car. It's not even his car, it's a hire car. It has no purpose being there.

    At least the others are nice shirts, cameras, drinks etc. Bond might choose them anyway.

    You are right. I was actually surprised how low-key the razor placement is. A small print on the packaging that is barely readable due to the movement. The way he uses the razor is weird, but it makes sense that he has one and then it just disappears during a cut. I would have assumed there would be a lingering shot of the razor after he puts it in it's base with the logo very visible (like in an ad). In the end I only know that it is a Philips Philishave Sensotec HQ8894 because I am a weirdo who looks these things up and there are other weirdos who put that information on the internet.

    What are people's opinions on the tongue-in-cheek mentions of VW Beetles and the Omega in Skyfall? I personally think both of those are funny.

    I actually remember the lingering shot of the watch in Skyfall while Bond is changing gears on the digger being the first time I actually said "that's some blunt product placement" in a theatre. Even in Casino Royale, the mention of the watch in conversation felt more organic, mainly because Vesper's assessment was pretty spot on and she didn't instantly go for Omega.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    I think the difference is that Bond naturally uses most of these products anyway. The shaver for example, if you didn't know you could buy it in Boots, you wouldn't know it was product placement.

    At least in MR the billboards are funny and are integrated into the sequence.

    The Mondeo in CR (a f**king Mondeo!!!!!! Of all the cars...) is embarrassing because it doesn't add anything. He's not driving a cool car. It's not even his car, it's a hire car. It has no purpose being there.

    At least the others are nice shirts, cameras, drinks etc. Bond might choose them anyway.

    How was he supposed to get to the One and Only Club? I'd say it serves a pretty obvious purpose.

    Hire a sexier car!
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,009
    I think the difference is that Bond naturally uses most of these products anyway. The shaver for example, if you didn't know you could buy it in Boots, you wouldn't know it was product placement.

    At least in MR the billboards are funny and are integrated into the sequence.

    The Mondeo in CR (a f**king Mondeo!!!!!! Of all the cars...) is embarrassing because it doesn't add anything. He's not driving a cool car. It's not even his car, it's a hire car. It has no purpose being there.

    At least the others are nice shirts, cameras, drinks etc. Bond might choose them anyway.

    How was he supposed to get to the One and Only Club? I'd say it serves a pretty obvious purpose.

    Hire a sexier car!

    So it's the car itself you have an issue with, rather than the product placement?
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    I think the difference is that Bond naturally uses most of these products anyway. The shaver for example, if you didn't know you could buy it in Boots, you wouldn't know it was product placement.

    At least in MR the billboards are funny and are integrated into the sequence.

    The Mondeo in CR (a f**king Mondeo!!!!!! Of all the cars...) is embarrassing because it doesn't add anything. He's not driving a cool car. It's not even his car, it's a hire car. It has no purpose being there.

    At least the others are nice shirts, cameras, drinks etc. Bond might choose them anyway.

    How was he supposed to get to the One and Only Club? I'd say it serves a pretty obvious purpose.

    Hire a sexier car!

    So it's the car itself you have an issue with, rather than the product placement?

    Both. It's a shit scene and a shit car.

  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,518
    I think the difference is that Bond naturally uses most of these products anyway. The shaver for example, if you didn't know you could buy it in Boots, you wouldn't know it was product placement.

    At least in MR the billboards are funny and are integrated into the sequence.

    The Mondeo in CR (a f**king Mondeo!!!!!! Of all the cars...) is embarrassing because it doesn't add anything. He's not driving a cool car. It's not even his car, it's a hire car. It has no purpose being there.

    At least the others are nice shirts, cameras, drinks etc. Bond might choose them anyway.

    How was he supposed to get to the One and Only Club? I'd say it serves a pretty obvious purpose.

    Hire a sexier car!

    So it's the car itself you have an issue with, rather than the product placement?

    Both. It's a shit scene and a shit car.

    Haha I can't really imagine having a problem with the scene personally. A problem with the car, fine. I've never had an issue with this scene whatsoever.
  • Posts: 7,500
    I love that scene! The music is terrific and Craig oozes a young, flamboyent energy!
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,009
    I think the difference is that Bond naturally uses most of these products anyway. The shaver for example, if you didn't know you could buy it in Boots, you wouldn't know it was product placement.

    At least in MR the billboards are funny and are integrated into the sequence.

    The Mondeo in CR (a f**king Mondeo!!!!!! Of all the cars...) is embarrassing because it doesn't add anything. He's not driving a cool car. It's not even his car, it's a hire car. It has no purpose being there.

    At least the others are nice shirts, cameras, drinks etc. Bond might choose them anyway.

    How was he supposed to get to the One and Only Club? I'd say it serves a pretty obvious purpose.

    Hire a sexier car!

    So it's the car itself you have an issue with, rather than the product placement?

    Both. It's a shit scene and a shit car.

    :)) Fair enough.
Sign In or Register to comment.