Controversial opinions about Bond films

1618619621623624705

Comments

  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,921
    echo wrote: »
    SP had the misfortune to follow SF, as well as the Sony leaks. There are other issues (casting, chemistry, the still-shocking underuse of Monica Bellucci). Seriously, the film needed a lot more Bellucci.

    It remains to be seen if SP's reputation will grow in coming years, but I'm hoping NTTD will bolster it.

    I don't know if I'd necessarily agree it was misfortune, unless we're talking strictly about the leaks which definitely coloured many people's opinion of the film before it even came out.

    However, creatively and conceptually, SF gave them free reign to go and tell any sort of story that they wanted to. It really couldn't have been any more ideal for them going forward. However, the story they chose to tell in SP is fundamentally misguided and dramatically inert. If NTTD manages to retroactively improve it, then that will be quite an astonishing achievement.

    Agree about Bellucci though - more of her rarely makes a film worse. ;)

    I agree about the story. It seems that they had a better idea for Blofeld (the African warlord who appalled White) that got pushed to the wayside.

    They could have done so much more with Bellucci. She could have been the sacrificial lamb, the wife/girlfriend of Blofeld, or Blofeld herself.
  • Posts: 14,798
    echo wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    SP had the misfortune to follow SF, as well as the Sony leaks. There are other issues (casting, chemistry, the still-shocking underuse of Monica Bellucci). Seriously, the film needed a lot more Bellucci.

    It remains to be seen if SP's reputation will grow in coming years, but I'm hoping NTTD will bolster it.

    I don't know if I'd necessarily agree it was misfortune, unless we're talking strictly about the leaks which definitely coloured many people's opinion of the film before it even came out.

    However, creatively and conceptually, SF gave them free reign to go and tell any sort of story that they wanted to. It really couldn't have been any more ideal for them going forward. However, the story they chose to tell in SP is fundamentally misguided and dramatically inert. If NTTD manages to retroactively improve it, then that will be quite an astonishing achievement.

    Agree about Bellucci though - more of her rarely makes a film worse. ;)

    I agree about the story. It seems that they had a better idea for Blofeld (the African warlord who appalled White) that got pushed to the wayside.

    They could have done so much more with Bellucci. She could have been the sacrificial lamb, the wife/girlfriend of Blofeld, or Blofeld herself.

    Oh please no! People complain about "Brofeld", why make things worse by turning Blofeld into something even further away than the source material? An African warlord with a Germanic name? An Italian femme fatale? Please! Why not ditch the "brother" angle altogether and make Blofeld an evil Eastern European man?
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,009
    Ludovico wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    SP had the misfortune to follow SF, as well as the Sony leaks. There are other issues (casting, chemistry, the still-shocking underuse of Monica Bellucci). Seriously, the film needed a lot more Bellucci.

    It remains to be seen if SP's reputation will grow in coming years, but I'm hoping NTTD will bolster it.

    I don't know if I'd necessarily agree it was misfortune, unless we're talking strictly about the leaks which definitely coloured many people's opinion of the film before it even came out.

    However, creatively and conceptually, SF gave them free reign to go and tell any sort of story that they wanted to. It really couldn't have been any more ideal for them going forward. However, the story they chose to tell in SP is fundamentally misguided and dramatically inert. If NTTD manages to retroactively improve it, then that will be quite an astonishing achievement.

    Agree about Bellucci though - more of her rarely makes a film worse. ;)

    I agree about the story. It seems that they had a better idea for Blofeld (the African warlord who appalled White) that got pushed to the wayside.

    They could have done so much more with Bellucci. She could have been the sacrificial lamb, the wife/girlfriend of Blofeld, or Blofeld herself.

    Oh please no! People complain about "Brofeld", why make things worse by turning Blofeld into something even further away than the source material? An African warlord with a Germanic name? An Italian femme fatale? Please! Why not ditch the "brother" angle altogether and make Blofeld an evil Eastern European man?

    From say, Poland, for example? 8-}
  • edited February 2021 Posts: 14,798
    Ludovico wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    SP had the misfortune to follow SF, as well as the Sony leaks. There are other issues (casting, chemistry, the still-shocking underuse of Monica Bellucci). Seriously, the film needed a lot more Bellucci.

    It remains to be seen if SP's reputation will grow in coming years, but I'm hoping NTTD will bolster it.

    I don't know if I'd necessarily agree it was misfortune, unless we're talking strictly about the leaks which definitely coloured many people's opinion of the film before it even came out.

    However, creatively and conceptually, SF gave them free reign to go and tell any sort of story that they wanted to. It really couldn't have been any more ideal for them going forward. However, the story they chose to tell in SP is fundamentally misguided and dramatically inert. If NTTD manages to retroactively improve it, then that will be quite an astonishing achievement.

    Agree about Bellucci though - more of her rarely makes a film worse. ;)

    I agree about the story. It seems that they had a better idea for Blofeld (the African warlord who appalled White) that got pushed to the wayside.

    They could have done so much more with Bellucci. She could have been the sacrificial lamb, the wife/girlfriend of Blofeld, or Blofeld herself.

    Oh please no! People complain about "Brofeld", why make things worse by turning Blofeld into something even further away than the source material? An African warlord with a Germanic name? An Italian femme fatale? Please! Why not ditch the "brother" angle altogether and make Blofeld an evil Eastern European man?

    From say, Poland, for example? 8-}

    Hey why not? Heck I'd go for Austrian as the original Blofeld had Germanic blood.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited February 2021 Posts: 17,727
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    SP had the misfortune to follow SF, as well as the Sony leaks. There are other issues (casting, chemistry, the still-shocking underuse of Monica Bellucci). Seriously, the film needed a lot more Bellucci.

    It remains to be seen if SP's reputation will grow in coming years, but I'm hoping NTTD will bolster it.

    I don't know if I'd necessarily agree it was misfortune, unless we're talking strictly about the leaks which definitely coloured many people's opinion of the film before it even came out.

    However, creatively and conceptually, SF gave them free reign to go and tell any sort of story that they wanted to. It really couldn't have been any more ideal for them going forward. However, the story they chose to tell in SP is fundamentally misguided and dramatically inert. If NTTD manages to retroactively improve it, then that will be quite an astonishing achievement.

    Agree about Bellucci though - more of her rarely makes a film worse. ;)

    I agree about the story. It seems that they had a better idea for Blofeld (the African warlord who appalled White) that got pushed to the wayside.

    They could have done so much more with Bellucci. She could have been the sacrificial lamb, the wife/girlfriend of Blofeld, or Blofeld herself.

    Oh please no! People complain about "Brofeld", why make things worse by turning Blofeld into something even further away than the source material? An African warlord with a Germanic name? An Italian femme fatale? Please! Why not ditch the "brother" angle altogether and make Blofeld an evil Eastern European man?

    From say, Poland, for example? 8-}

    Hey why not? Heck I'd go for Austrian as the original Blofeld had Germanic blood.

    As far as I can recall the original Blofeld was of Greek and Polish ancestry so I see nothing wrong with a Polish actor portraying him. That would be perfect casting, actually. Telly Savalas had the Greek ancestry at least and he remains the most faithful incarnation we've seen in the Bond films thus far. Blofeld should have an Eastern European accent in my book and be suitably "foreign other" in the classic British thriller sense.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,009
    Waltz easily could have been the best screen Blofeld in that sense. Despite being Austrian and not Polish, unlike the others he did at least fit into that "foreign other" trope you describe @Dragonpol and could convincingly portray a lot of the character's traits. He'd obviously be more akin to the later Blofeld after he had significantly dropped weight, but it would be something. It's a damn shame that he was used the way he was.
  • Posts: 7,500
    Waltz easily could have been the best screen Blofeld in that sense. Despite being Austrian and not Polish, unlike the others he did at least fit into that "foreign other" trope you describe @Dragonpol and could convincingly portray a lot of the character's traits. He'd obviously be more akin to the later Blofeld after he had significantly dropped weight, but it would be something. It's a damn shame that he was used the way he was.

    I still believe that with a better script, Waltz could have been the ultimate Blofeld...
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    jobo wrote: »
    Waltz easily could have been the best screen Blofeld in that sense. Despite being Austrian and not Polish, unlike the others he did at least fit into that "foreign other" trope you describe @Dragonpol and could convincingly portray a lot of the character's traits. He'd obviously be more akin to the later Blofeld after he had significantly dropped weight, but it would be something. It's a damn shame that he was used the way he was.

    I still believe that with a better script, Waltz could have been the ultimate Blofeld...

    Don't link his childhood to Bond's (just make him target Bond because 007 had repeatedly ruined his plans), then have a better climax at the actual desert hideout after Bond has escaped from torture (basically something different from the London scenes), and I think you are correct. Waltz could have been terrific. Who knows, he still might be...
  • Posts: 14,798
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    SP had the misfortune to follow SF, as well as the Sony leaks. There are other issues (casting, chemistry, the still-shocking underuse of Monica Bellucci). Seriously, the film needed a lot more Bellucci.

    It remains to be seen if SP's reputation will grow in coming years, but I'm hoping NTTD will bolster it.

    I don't know if I'd necessarily agree it was misfortune, unless we're talking strictly about the leaks which definitely coloured many people's opinion of the film before it even came out.

    However, creatively and conceptually, SF gave them free reign to go and tell any sort of story that they wanted to. It really couldn't have been any more ideal for them going forward. However, the story they chose to tell in SP is fundamentally misguided and dramatically inert. If NTTD manages to retroactively improve it, then that will be quite an astonishing achievement.

    Agree about Bellucci though - more of her rarely makes a film worse. ;)

    I agree about the story. It seems that they had a better idea for Blofeld (the African warlord who appalled White) that got pushed to the wayside.

    They could have done so much more with Bellucci. She could have been the sacrificial lamb, the wife/girlfriend of Blofeld, or Blofeld herself.

    Oh please no! People complain about "Brofeld", why make things worse by turning Blofeld into something even further away than the source material? An African warlord with a Germanic name? An Italian femme fatale? Please! Why not ditch the "brother" angle altogether and make Blofeld an evil Eastern European man?

    From say, Poland, for example? 8-}

    Hey why not? Heck I'd go for Austrian as the original Blofeld had Germanic blood.

    As far as I can recall the original Blofeld was of Greek and Polish ancestry so I see nothing wrong with a Polish actor portraying him. That would be perfect casting, actually. Telly Savalas had the Greek ancestry at least and he remains the most faithful incarnation we've seen in the Bond films thus far. Blofeld should have an Eastern European accent in my book and be suitably "foreign other" in the classic British thriller sense.

    I'd rather have that, and have him of middle age, not a young un. But I'd be okay with a Germanic actor, or a Greek actor, heck I'm happy with the casting of Christoph Waltz all things considered.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited February 2021 Posts: 17,727
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    SP had the misfortune to follow SF, as well as the Sony leaks. There are other issues (casting, chemistry, the still-shocking underuse of Monica Bellucci). Seriously, the film needed a lot more Bellucci.

    It remains to be seen if SP's reputation will grow in coming years, but I'm hoping NTTD will bolster it.

    I don't know if I'd necessarily agree it was misfortune, unless we're talking strictly about the leaks which definitely coloured many people's opinion of the film before it even came out.

    However, creatively and conceptually, SF gave them free reign to go and tell any sort of story that they wanted to. It really couldn't have been any more ideal for them going forward. However, the story they chose to tell in SP is fundamentally misguided and dramatically inert. If NTTD manages to retroactively improve it, then that will be quite an astonishing achievement.

    Agree about Bellucci though - more of her rarely makes a film worse. ;)

    I agree about the story. It seems that they had a better idea for Blofeld (the African warlord who appalled White) that got pushed to the wayside.

    They could have done so much more with Bellucci. She could have been the sacrificial lamb, the wife/girlfriend of Blofeld, or Blofeld herself.

    Oh please no! People complain about "Brofeld", why make things worse by turning Blofeld into something even further away than the source material? An African warlord with a Germanic name? An Italian femme fatale? Please! Why not ditch the "brother" angle altogether and make Blofeld an evil Eastern European man?

    From say, Poland, for example? 8-}

    Hey why not? Heck I'd go for Austrian as the original Blofeld had Germanic blood.

    As far as I can recall the original Blofeld was of Greek and Polish ancestry so I see nothing wrong with a Polish actor portraying him. That would be perfect casting, actually. Telly Savalas had the Greek ancestry at least and he remains the most faithful incarnation we've seen in the Bond films thus far. Blofeld should have an Eastern European accent in my book and be suitably "foreign other" in the classic British thriller sense.

    I'd rather have that, and have him of middle age, not a young un. But I'd be okay with a Germanic actor, or a Greek actor, heck I'm happy with the casting of Christoph Waltz all things considered.

    Yes, you're probably right about the Germanic background of Blofeld too. I need to take Thunderball and OHMSS off the shelf to check but I think he was something of a mongrel, shall we say. Fleming also referred to "that lunatic Hitler scream" when describing Blofeld in YOLT and I recall him speaking in German with Irma Bunt in that novel.

    I too am more than happy with the casting of Waltz as Blofeld. On paper, he's a great choice but they should have taken inspiration from the books (specifically TB) where his character and background are well laid down by Fleming over the course of two detailed chapters. The white Persian cat wasn't overused and was introduced rather organically in Spectre. However the origin story of the YOLT facial scar we could have done without I think. It would be rather novel for them to follow the books for once when it comes to Blofeld. We've never exactly seen the Fleming Blofeld on screen, although Telly Savalas was the closest to it.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited February 2021 Posts: 17,727
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    royale65 wrote: »
    Same as the CGI glacial tsunami para-sailing--Brosnan's abdomen simply shouldn't have been presented on screen.

    He looked great everywhere else. Poor judgment on the part of the filmmakers.

    Maybe they should have GGI'd his Guinness belly away?

    They supposedly did touch-ups (I was told that he had “moobs” that needed taking care of and his waist-line).

    That's very interesting. Never heard that before. It still seems to not have been enough for some of the posters on this thread, however! :)

    If it's true, then it's enough for me. Considering none of the posters you're referring to have actually responded to it, yet, your last sentence is a bit silly though! :)

    No, I was merely using foresight as even though Brosnan had been "nipped and tucked" with CGI in that scene the posters here were still complaining that he looked too well fed. So the fact CGI was used didn't need to be known by them. They still think he's too fat for a POW at that point in the film regardless of whether CGI was used or not.

    I am sorry but this is one of the most idiotic things I have read here. Pierce Brosnan was not fat in Die Another Day. He looks like he does in The World Is Not Enough. He is not fat.
    James Bond film are not real life. They are adventure fantasy film. This is the many reasons the James Bond series is so popular.
    Thank you.

    Did you actually carefully read what I wrote above? It would appear not or that you did not understand what I was saying if you did. I think you've come to the wrong conclusion about what I meant. On the subject of the most idiotic things you've read here you could certainly make a good starting point by rereading your own post...
  • edited February 2021 Posts: 2,887
    I wasn't happy about Waltz's casting when it was announced and the end result did nothing to change my mind. EON hasn't had much luck in casting Oscar winners and hoping they'll repeat their magic. NTTD might prove an exception, as Bardem did in Skyfall. Waltz's prior performances had already edged very close to camp, and the minute Blofeld goes camp he loses all credibility as a supervillain. If you're going to re-establish him in the 21st century as a seriously threatening villain, for a mass audience mostly too young to be nostalgic about the character, it's better to cast an actor who doesn't have an established image, rather than someone whose screen persona has become so familiar that Saturday Night Live jokes about it on Celebrity Jeopardy. In the past EON was able to brilliantly cast supervillains from under-the-radar character actors (Joseph Wiseman) and out-of-left-field entertainers (Lotte Lenya) and come up with surprising and effective results. In Spectre Walzt was cast in a role that wasn't fully thought out and had to fall back on his mannerisms. That's symptomatic of the overall tiredness and laziness of Spectre, a film more content to reshuffle cliches than rethink them.
  • Posts: 1,879
    Revelator wrote: »
    I wasn't happy about Waltz's casting when it was announced and the end result did nothing to change my mind. EON hasn't had much luck in casting Oscar winners and hoping they'll repeat their magic. NTTD might prove an exception, as Bardem did in Skyfall. Waltz's prior performances had already edged very close to camp, and the minute Blofeld goes camp he loses all credibility as a supervillain. If you're going to re-establish him in the 21st century as a seriously threatening villain, for a mass audience mostly too young to be nostalgic about the character, it's better to cast an actor who doesn't have an established image, rather than someone whose screen persona has become so familiar that Saturday Night Live jokes about it on Celebrity Jeopardy. In the past EON was able to brilliantly cast supervillains from under-the-radar character actors (Joseph Wiseman) and out-of-left-field entertainers (Lotte Lenya) and come up with surprising and effective results. In Spectre Walzt was cast in a role that wasn't fully thought out and had to fall back on his mannerisms. That's symptomatic of the overall tiredness and laziness of Spectre, a film more content to reshuffle cliches than rethink them.

    Well said. I was also wary when Waltz was cast due to his past villain associations and his SP performance did nothing to disprove that when I finally saw it. I may be one of the few who liked the Spectre meeting and found that vibe unsettling. I didn't get any threatening vibe from the face-to-face with Blofeld. He and Bond were almost DAF friendly and that wasn't a good thing.
  • Revelator wrote: »
    In the past EON was able to brilliantly cast supervillains from under-the-radar character actors (Joseph Wiseman) and out-of-left-field entertainers (Lotte Lenya) and come up with surprising and effective results.

    I'd say we still have some of that in latter day Bond in the form of villain performances from Robert Davi, Sophie Marceau, and Mads Mikkelson.

    From the moment I saw Inglourious Basterds, I thought Waltz would make an incredible Bond villain. What I hadn't counted on was that the brilliance in that performance relied heavily upon the masterful direction of Quentin Tarantino (and yes it was campy and comedic and over-the-top, but carefully crafted and fascinating to watch just the same).

    When I realized Waltz was to be playing Blofeld, however, somehow I knew it was an ill fit. The clash between Mendes and Waltz over their vision for the character sealed Oberhauser's tepid fate as much as did any poorly conceived ideas that found their way into the shooting script.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited February 2021 Posts: 8,009
    Does anyone know if it was Waltz pushing for the more campy performance or was it Mendes? Obviously Mendes has to take responsibility for it at the end of the day but considering the problems during production it would be interesting to know.

    It'll be curious to compare how Waltz performs with Fukanaga directing - though the performance would likely be different anyway considering the character has been caught and humbled by Bond.

    I was quite excited when he was announced as I wasn't of the opinion that he was a one-trick pony. Unfortunately it didn't work out as hoped.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,921
    Walken is an Oscar winner and did fine in his Bond film.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,048
    echo wrote: »
    Walken is an Oscar winner and did fine in his Bond film.

    He helped make his lesser movie better, same with Christopher Lee.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,009
    echo wrote: »
    Walken is an Oscar winner and did fine in his Bond film.

    He's great in it. He brings ridiculous amounts of energy and prevents the film from flatlining at points.
  • Posts: 2,887
    echo wrote: »
    Walken is an Oscar winner and did fine in his Bond film.

    He was okay, but no more than that. I don't think anyone compiling a list of Walken's best performances would pick his work in AVTAK. That's not wholly Walken's fault--he was playing a cardboard cut-out of a Bond villain and there wasn't much chemistry between him and Moore. They were practically from different planets of acting.
  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    Posts: 4,378
    When I realized Waltz was to be playing Blofeld, however, somehow I knew it was an ill fit. The clash between Mendes and Waltz over their vision for the character sealed Oberhauser's tepid fate as much as did any poorly conceived ideas that found their way into the shooting script.

    It is well known that Waltz wasn't happy with his final Blofeld incarnation. But I didn't read before that there was a clash between him an Mendes. Which source is telling so?
  • Posts: 6,726
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    royale65 wrote: »
    Same as the CGI glacial tsunami para-sailing--Brosnan's abdomen simply shouldn't have been presented on screen.

    He looked great everywhere else. Poor judgment on the part of the filmmakers.

    Maybe they should have GGI'd his Guinness belly away?

    They supposedly did touch-ups (I was told that he had “moobs” that needed taking care of and his waist-line).

    That's very interesting. Never heard that before. It still seems to not have been enough for some of the posters on this thread, however! :)

    If it's true, then it's enough for me. Considering none of the posters you're referring to have actually responded to it, yet, your last sentence is a bit silly though! :)

    No, I was merely using foresight as even though Brosnan had been "nipped and tucked" with CGI in that scene the posters here were still complaining that he looked too well fed. So the fact CGI was used didn't need to be known by them. They still think he's too fat for a POW at that point in the film regardless of whether CGI was used or not.

    I am sorry but this is one of the most idiotic things I have read here. Pierce Brosnan was not fat in Die Another Day. He looks like he does in The World Is Not Enough. He is not fat.
    James Bond film are not real life. They are adventure fantasy film. This is the many reasons the James Bond series is so popular.
    Thank you.

    Did you actually carefully read what I wrote above? It would appear not or that you did not understand what I was saying if you did. I think you've come to the wrong conclusion about what I meant. On the subject of the most idiotic things you've read here you could certainly make a good starting point by rereading your own post...

    I am sorry for my misreading. English is not my first language I’m sorry. I get very angry with so many James Bond member who are horrible to Pierce Brosnan and Die Another Day. I have misreading your post.
    We are all suppose to be liking James Bond. We are among friends of James Bond yes?

    Yes, we are all James Bond fans, but am afraid you wont get too many of us defending DAD, who,for most,including myself,consider it the worst of the series!
    Oh, and welcome to the forum!!
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    When I realized Waltz was to be playing Blofeld, however, somehow I knew it was an ill fit. The clash between Mendes and Waltz over their vision for the character sealed Oberhauser's tepid fate as much as did any poorly conceived ideas that found their way into the shooting script.

    It is well known that Waltz wasn't happy with his final Blofeld incarnation. But I didn't read before that there was a clash between him an Mendes. Which source is telling so?

    I don't think this is the first time this came up or the most in depth, but in a recent interview you find linked below Waltz himself said: "I feel more at home with Cary Fukunaga than with Sam Mendes. Fukunaga is insanely analytical and has the technical apparatus in his little finger. He can play on it like a piano and manage the shoot with a self-evident skill. Of course I'm really excited to see the result." and "You know, it's my job, and it was my job before. I see an honorable cause in the conscientious exercise of the profession. I don't always have to agree with a director to do this well. I am only a small believer in conviction."

    Hardly proof of a "clash", but it's clear he isn't happy with his Blofeld.
    Contraband wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    New interview with Waltz in German:

    https://www.gq-magazin.de/entertainment/artikel/christoph-waltz-corona-diese-leute-die-sich-querdenker-nennen-denken-entlang-des-brettes-das-sie-vorm-kopf-haben

    Talks about his thoughts on the rumours of the film going to streaming ('it's as stupid to see Bond on a small screen as it is to see a TV series on the big screen'), praising the hell out of Fukunaga saying he felt more at home working with him than Mendes, and that there was a small screening of the film for the cast in London which he couldn't make...

    de>eng:

    https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&u=https://www.gq-magazin.de/entertainment/artikel/christoph-waltz-corona-diese-leute-die-sich-querdenker-nennen-denken-entlang-des-brettes-das-sie-vorm-kopf-haben

  • Posts: 7,500
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    royale65 wrote: »
    Same as the CGI glacial tsunami para-sailing--Brosnan's abdomen simply shouldn't have been presented on screen.

    He looked great everywhere else. Poor judgment on the part of the filmmakers.

    Maybe they should have GGI'd his Guinness belly away?

    They supposedly did touch-ups (I was told that he had “moobs” that needed taking care of and his waist-line).

    That's very interesting. Never heard that before. It still seems to not have been enough for some of the posters on this thread, however! :)

    If it's true, then it's enough for me. Considering none of the posters you're referring to have actually responded to it, yet, your last sentence is a bit silly though! :)

    No, I was merely using foresight as even though Brosnan had been "nipped and tucked" with CGI in that scene the posters here were still complaining that he looked too well fed. So the fact CGI was used didn't need to be known by them. They still think he's too fat for a POW at that point in the film regardless of whether CGI was used or not.

    I am sorry but this is one of the most idiotic things I have read here. Pierce Brosnan was not fat in Die Another Day. He looks like he does in The World Is Not Enough. He is not fat.
    James Bond film are not real life. They are adventure fantasy film. This is the many reasons the James Bond series is so popular.
    Thank you.

    Did you actually carefully read what I wrote above? It would appear not or that you did not understand what I was saying if you did. I think you've come to the wrong conclusion about what I meant. On the subject of the most idiotic things you've read here you could certainly make a good starting point by rereading your own post...

    I am sorry for my misreading. English is not my first language I’m sorry. I get very angry with so many James Bond member who are horrible to Pierce Brosnan and Die Another Day. I have misreading your post.
    We are all suppose to be liking James Bond. We are among friends of James Bond yes?

    Yes, we are all James Bond fans, but am afraid you wont get too many of us defending DAD, who,for most,including myself,consider it the worst of the series!
    Oh, and welcome to the forum!!


    There are two ways of looking at it:

    1) I am a Bond fan, therefore I should love every Bond film and never criticise anything.

    Or...

    2) I am a Bond fan, therefore I react emotionally when they make Bond films that are bad, embarrassing or put the series in a bad light.

    My position is mainly the second. It really upsets me when people involved with Bond films mess up whether it's due to laziness or horrible decision making.

    It is also curious the double standards some fans express. Some of the same people who would claim that any criticism of the Brosnan era is "unbondian" will have no problem with lashing out against Spectre or Skyfall themselves...
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited February 2021 Posts: 1,664
    jobo wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    royale65 wrote: »
    Same as the CGI glacial tsunami para-sailing--Brosnan's abdomen simply shouldn't have been presented on screen.

    He looked great everywhere else. Poor judgment on the part of the filmmakers.

    Maybe they should have GGI'd his Guinness belly away?

    They supposedly did touch-ups (I was told that he had “moobs” that needed taking care of and his waist-line).

    That's very interesting. Never heard that before. It still seems to not have been enough for some of the posters on this thread, however! :)

    If it's true, then it's enough for me. Considering none of the posters you're referring to have actually responded to it, yet, your last sentence is a bit silly though! :)

    No, I was merely using foresight as even though Brosnan had been "nipped and tucked" with CGI in that scene the posters here were still complaining that he looked too well fed. So the fact CGI was used didn't need to be known by them. They still think he's too fat for a POW at that point in the film regardless of whether CGI was used or not.

    I am sorry but this is one of the most idiotic things I have read here. Pierce Brosnan was not fat in Die Another Day. He looks like he does in The World Is Not Enough. He is not fat.
    James Bond film are not real life. They are adventure fantasy film. This is the many reasons the James Bond series is so popular.
    Thank you.

    Did you actually carefully read what I wrote above? It would appear not or that you did not understand what I was saying if you did. I think you've come to the wrong conclusion about what I meant. On the subject of the most idiotic things you've read here you could certainly make a good starting point by rereading your own post...

    I am sorry for my misreading. English is not my first language I’m sorry. I get very angry with so many James Bond member who are horrible to Pierce Brosnan and Die Another Day. I have misreading your post.
    We are all suppose to be liking James Bond. We are among friends of James Bond yes?

    Yes, we are all James Bond fans, but am afraid you wont get too many of us defending DAD, who,for most,including myself,consider it the worst of the series!
    Oh, and welcome to the forum!!


    There are two ways of looking at it:

    1) I am a Bond fan, therefore I should love every Bond film and never criticise anything.

    Or...

    2) I am a Bond fan, therefore I react emotionally when they make Bond films that are bad, embarrassing or put the series in a bad light.

    My position is mainly the second. It really upsets me when people involved with Bond films mess up whether it's due to laziness or horrible decision making.

    It is also curious the double standards some fans express. Some of the same people who would claim that any criticism of the Brosnan era is "unbondian" will have no problem with lashing out against Spectre or Skyfall themselves...

    I think I can side with both positions in some sense. As a happily vocal fan of Spectre, some of the hyperbole surrounding it (as well as DAD, QOS, and whatever else) can just become ridiculous.

    All 24 EON-produced Bond films are entertaining, competently produced movies. Not everything is everybody's bag though, and that's fine. You don't have to like an invisible car (though I might say it's not a lot sillier than an underwater car), but it's not like the writers and producers were unaware of how ridiculous it is. You don't have to like the editing in QOS (though I think it's beautifully done and serves a thematic purpose), but it's not like the filmmakers screwed up. That's exactly what they were going for. It's just not for you.

    Criticizing and picking apart Bond films is good fun, and there's plenty of material to overanalyze, but when you start hearing people talking about how this or that movie is unwatchable, emotionally abusive torture, it's really worth little more than an eyeroll.

    Especially given how many hated films, or aspects of them, have very clear points of comparison in more beloved movies.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,921
    When I realized Waltz was to be playing Blofeld, however, somehow I knew it was an ill fit. The clash between Mendes and Waltz over their vision for the character sealed Oberhauser's tepid fate as much as did any poorly conceived ideas that found their way into the shooting script.

    It is well known that Waltz wasn't happy with his final Blofeld incarnation. But I didn't read before that there was a clash between him an Mendes. Which source is telling so?

    I don't think this is the first time this came up or the most in depth, but in a recent interview you find linked below Waltz himself said: "I feel more at home with Cary Fukunaga than with Sam Mendes. Fukunaga is insanely analytical and has the technical apparatus in his little finger. He can play on it like a piano and manage the shoot with a self-evident skill. Of course I'm really excited to see the result." and "You know, it's my job, and it was my job before. I see an honorable cause in the conscientious exercise of the profession. I don't always have to agree with a director to do this well. I am only a small believer in conviction."

    Hardly proof of a "clash", but it's clear he isn't happy with his Blofeld.
    Contraband wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    New interview with Waltz in German:

    https://www.gq-magazin.de/entertainment/artikel/christoph-waltz-corona-diese-leute-die-sich-querdenker-nennen-denken-entlang-des-brettes-das-sie-vorm-kopf-haben

    Talks about his thoughts on the rumours of the film going to streaming ('it's as stupid to see Bond on a small screen as it is to see a TV series on the big screen'), praising the hell out of Fukunaga saying he felt more at home working with him than Mendes, and that there was a small screening of the film for the cast in London which he couldn't make...

    de>eng:

    https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&u=https://www.gq-magazin.de/entertainment/artikel/christoph-waltz-corona-diese-leute-die-sich-querdenker-nennen-denken-entlang-des-brettes-das-sie-vorm-kopf-haben

    It is refreshing that Waltz has such stature and confidence that he can be so open about his feelings toward his directors. Usually everything is "spun."

    Fukunaga seems like a much more controlled director than Mendes (who comes from the theater, and does many, many takes). Whether that results in a better film, nobody knows yet (well, Babs does, but she's not talking).
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,727
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    royale65 wrote: »
    Same as the CGI glacial tsunami para-sailing--Brosnan's abdomen simply shouldn't have been presented on screen.

    He looked great everywhere else. Poor judgment on the part of the filmmakers.

    Maybe they should have GGI'd his Guinness belly away?

    They supposedly did touch-ups (I was told that he had “moobs” that needed taking care of and his waist-line).

    That's very interesting. Never heard that before. It still seems to not have been enough for some of the posters on this thread, however! :)

    If it's true, then it's enough for me. Considering none of the posters you're referring to have actually responded to it, yet, your last sentence is a bit silly though! :)

    No, I was merely using foresight as even though Brosnan had been "nipped and tucked" with CGI in that scene the posters here were still complaining that he looked too well fed. So the fact CGI was used didn't need to be known by them. They still think he's too fat for a POW at that point in the film regardless of whether CGI was used or not.

    I am sorry but this is one of the most idiotic things I have read here. Pierce Brosnan was not fat in Die Another Day. He looks like he does in The World Is Not Enough. He is not fat.
    James Bond film are not real life. They are adventure fantasy film. This is the many reasons the James Bond series is so popular.
    Thank you.

    Did you actually carefully read what I wrote above? It would appear not or that you did not understand what I was saying if you did. I think you've come to the wrong conclusion about what I meant. On the subject of the most idiotic things you've read here you could certainly make a good starting point by rereading your own post...

    I am sorry for my misreading. English is not my first language I’m sorry. I get very angry with so many James Bond member who are horrible to Pierce Brosnan and Die Another Day. I have misreading your post.
    We are all suppose to be liking James Bond. We are among friends of James Bond yes?

    Not to worry. I just thought it was odd how you were reading the exact opposite into what I'd written from what I actually meant to convey. Those are the perils of language I suppose: the risk of misinterpretation. I agree that we are supposed to be liking James Bond here but sometimes criticism is a form of harsh love when it is used constructively.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited February 2021 Posts: 17,727
    Thank you Mr. Dragonpol. We are friends here I hope.
    Controversial thoughts. Die Another Day is not a very bad James Bond film and Octopussy and AView ToA Kill are many time overrated James Bond film.

    Here's hoping. Octopussy is one of my favourite Bond films and I don't think many fans would call A View to A Kill overrated. It'd be more in the underrated category I would think. So I'd say those are pretty controversial views, especially valuing Die Another Day over both of them. That's the beauty of Bond, though. Every Bond fan has wildly divergent opinions. I suppose it would get boring if we all liked the same things! To each their own...
  • Posts: 6,726
    Thank you Mr. Dragonpol. We are friends here I hope.
    Controversial thoughts. Die Another Day is not a very bad James Bond film and Octopussy and AView ToA Kill are many time overrated James Bond film.

    Well, we are worlds apart re Bond, as I love OP, probably Moores best, and I abhor DAD, worst Bond movie by a country mile! AVTAK has a lot of good stuff in it, and is still watchable!
  • Posts: 7,500
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Thank you Mr. Dragonpol. We are friends here I hope.
    Controversial thoughts. Die Another Day is not a very bad James Bond film and Octopussy and AView ToA Kill are many time overrated James Bond film.

    Well, we are worlds apart re Bond, as I love OP, probably Moores best, and I abhor DAD, worst Bond movie by a country mile! AVTAK has a lot of good stuff in it, and is still watchable!

    FYEO and OP are consistently the two films I get the most pleassure from watching in the Moore era. Neither are perfect, but there is so much good stuff there!
  • Posts: 6,726
    jobo wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Thank you Mr. Dragonpol. We are friends here I hope.
    Controversial thoughts. Die Another Day is not a very bad James Bond film and Octopussy and AView ToA Kill are many time overrated James Bond film.

    Well, we are worlds apart re Bond, as I love OP, probably Moores best, and I abhor DAD, worst Bond movie by a country mile! AVTAK has a lot of good stuff in it, and is still watchable!

    FYEO and OP are consistently the two films I get the most pleassure from watching in the Moore era. Neither are perfect, but there is so much good stuff there!

    Agreed AVTAK has a great villain in Zorin, but OP has lots to recommend, and I feel FYEO is due a reappraisal!
Sign In or Register to comment.