Controversial opinions about Bond films

1648649651653654705

Comments

  • Posts: 14,816
    I think on paper Carver is rather mundane and forgettable. Another evil tycoon. Thankfully they cast Jonathan Pryce in the role. I never found him very threatening, but at least he's entertaining.
  • edited June 2021 Posts: 1,394
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Looks like Peak had a whole array of unused concept posters for the movie:
    b51df8e78f0ca6f36b146e1b7c50f904.jpg



    Dalton looks like a zombie in that last image there!
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited June 2021 Posts: 17,787
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Looks like Peak had a whole array of unused concept posters for the movie:
    b51df8e78f0ca6f36b146e1b7c50f904.jpg



    Dalton looks like a zombie in that last image there!
    It's just the burnt out deadness inside Bond's soul being reflected there.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,022
    Pretty sure those were just rough concept drawings as opposed to something finalized for marketing.

    In fact one of them went onto be used for GOLDENEYE.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited June 2021 Posts: 14,935
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I think when you look at how no Prime Minister has been elected without Murdoch’s approval in the last 40-odd years, and how they dance around to appease him, it’s not exactly the stuff of conspiracy theories and calling his type ‘banal’ just seems mad to me. I don’t see how anyone could be okay with someone controlling our politics like that. Fox News is most certainly not just following the viewers: they played a huge part in getting Trump elected. They told their viewers to follow him.
    Yes of course cyber security is important (Silva on the other hand is a petty criminal, doing it for personal revenge against one woman), but that doesn’t mean it’s the only important thing in the world and everything else is just chicken feed.

    I don't know much about the Prime Minister situation, but you're not right about Fox, Murdoch and Trump. Fox and Murdoch were not pro-Trump during the 2016 primary, and to some extent relished a Clinton presidency because of what it would do for their business model. They got with the program later.

    Yes, when he decided to push for Trump over the other Republican candidates, he got elected. They don’t follow, they lead.
    See also Brexit.

    I very much recommend watching The Rise of the Murdoch Dynasty on iPlayer. Ian Hislop made a great programme about fake news throughout history too, starting with Hearst of course who pretty much literally did what Carver was shown trying to.

    No. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/05/why-rupert-murdoch-decided-to-support-trump.html

    Of course Murdoch would support the Republican against Hillary Clinton, but Fox, and Murdoch specifically, was not pushing Trump in the primary. Murdoch instructed the moderator at the GOP primary debate Fox hosted to hammer Trump. It was widely covered.

    Hoax, by Brian Stelter, is an entire book about Fox and its relationship with Trump, and is based on hundreds of interviews with people who work there. I recommend it.

    https://www.cnn.com/2015/07/12/politics/rupert-murdoch-trump-tweets/index.html

    Well yes; he decided to support Trump. We saw them publicly meeting in Scotland in 2016, just before Ailes got dumped out of Fox News and replaced by Murdoch himself. (There are stories that Ailes warned Trump about the difficult questions on the Fox republican debate but those are disputed even by Trump’s now enemies). Ivanka apparently tried to get Murdoch onboard in 2015 but he indeed was against DT at that point, but he swung around.

    That’s why I think this is fertile stuff for Bond villains: it almost seems a shame in a way they’ve used it already for Carver.
  • edited June 2021 Posts: 14,816
    My issues with evil businessmen are that they've been overdone, they often end up quite generic, they often seem to lead a far too public life and in the end, they're too often amateur criminals. I prefer villains who have professions at least indirectly related to the world of espionage: rogue spies, mercenaries, military officers, terrorists. I appreciate the lime can be very thin between the two and often the businessman is a cover at best (Zorin, Graves), but still.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,689
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I think when you look at how no Prime Minister has been elected without Murdoch’s approval in the last 40-odd years, and how they dance around to appease him, it’s not exactly the stuff of conspiracy theories and calling his type ‘banal’ just seems mad to me. I don’t see how anyone could be okay with someone controlling our politics like that. Fox News is most certainly not just following the viewers: they played a huge part in getting Trump elected. They told their viewers to follow him.
    Yes of course cyber security is important (Silva on the other hand is a petty criminal, doing it for personal revenge against one woman), but that doesn’t mean it’s the only important thing in the world and everything else is just chicken feed.

    I don't know much about the Prime Minister situation, but you're not right about Fox, Murdoch and Trump. Fox and Murdoch were not pro-Trump during the 2016 primary, and to some extent relished a Clinton presidency because of what it would do for their business model. They got with the program later.

    Yes, when he decided to push for Trump over the other Republican candidates, he got elected. They don’t follow, they lead.
    See also Brexit.

    I very much recommend watching The Rise of the Murdoch Dynasty on iPlayer. Ian Hislop made a great programme about fake news throughout history too, starting with Hearst of course who pretty much literally did what Carver was shown trying to.

    No. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/05/why-rupert-murdoch-decided-to-support-trump.html

    Of course Murdoch would support the Republican against Hillary Clinton, but Fox, and Murdoch specifically, was not pushing Trump in the primary. Murdoch instructed the moderator at the GOP primary debate Fox hosted to hammer Trump. It was widely covered.

    Hoax, by Brian Stelter, is an entire book about Fox and its relationship with Trump, and is based on hundreds of interviews with people who work there. I recommend it.

    https://www.cnn.com/2015/07/12/politics/rupert-murdoch-trump-tweets/index.html

    Well yes; he decided to support Trump. We saw them publicly meeting in Scotland in 2016, just before Ailes got dumped out of Fox News and replaced by Murdoch himself. (There are stories that Ailes warned Trump about the difficult questions on the Fox republican debate but those are disputed even by Trump’s now enemies). Ivanka apparently tried to get Murdoch onboard in 2015 but he indeed was against DT at that point, but he swung around.

    That’s why I think this is fertile stuff for Bond villains: it almost seems a shame in a way they’ve used it already for Carver.

    He swung around when the primaries were down to three candidates, and Trump had the largest plurality. Murdoch didn't persuade the critical mass of Republicans to support Trump: it's nearly the other way around. Again, you can see the following their viewers in real time as they try not to lose them to OAN and Newsmax.

    He certainly would have made efforts to try to make Never Trump Republicans though.

    More on topic, I would like EON to stay away from corporate tycoon bad guys for a while. Given how many folks think Bill Gates wants to microchip them via vaccine, or that arms dealers control the mass media, or that TND is a mild embellishment of the modern world, I don't think conspiracism needs any more mental fodder!

    Also, I stated before that I think TND gets WAY too much credit for being somehow ahead of its time. Given the way the film has no awareness of digital media, nor of the fact that the traditional mainstream press has less power to persuade than it ever has, it just totally misses the mark. But Daniel Kleinman was somehow on the ball! His title sequence is full of digital imagery that is actually incongruent with the actual content of the film, but does represent what people want the film to retrospectively be about.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,028
    I do like that title sequence, to be fair. It's often cited as his weakest, but that's hardly an insult considering the quality of his work is usually superb.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited June 2021 Posts: 1,689
    Love Kleinman. But does anybody else find his placement of text occasionally odd?
    IMG-20210606-135324.jpg
    I always think he's great at everything in the title sequences except the actual titles...
    IMG-20210606-135356.jpg


  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,022
    In what way?
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited June 2021 Posts: 1,689
    In what way?

    Sometimes there are very large gaps between things that would not normally have huge gaps between them. Between "Performed by" and "Garbage" for example. Or how far the word "presents" is from the rest. It's unique to Kleinman's Brosnan films.

    Like how this:
    IMG-20210606-135420.jpg
    looks weird compared to this:
    bond-spyloved-movie-screencaps-com-923.jpg
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 13,900
    Yeah, the gaps are a bit odd, especially when it's on the same line. Like when you hit the 'Tab' button accidentally. Although, it's fine to have 'presents' a bit lower than normal.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,022
    That may be the least controversial thing brought up in this thread.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,689
    :)) I'm a bit OCD about the title sequences.
  • MalloryMallory Do mosquitoes have friends?
    edited June 2021 Posts: 2,056
    The only thing I dislike is the boring font choice, same old Arial. Give us something a bit snazzier.

    Perhaps that is why I like MK12’s custom font for QoS
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,787
    QBranch wrote: »
    Yeah, the gaps are a bit odd, especially when it's on the same line. Like when you hit the 'Tab' button accidentally. Although, it's fine to have 'presents' a bit lower than normal.

    Maybe that's what happened? ;)
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 13,900
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Yeah, the gaps are a bit odd, especially when it's on the same line. Like when you hit the 'Tab' button accidentally. Although, it's fine to have 'presents' a bit lower than normal.
    Maybe that's what happened? ;)
    Once may be regarded as a misfortune. Twice seems like carelessness.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,787
    QBranch wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Yeah, the gaps are a bit odd, especially when it's on the same line. Like when you hit the 'Tab' button accidentally. Although, it's fine to have 'presents' a bit lower than normal.
    Maybe that's what happened? ;)
    Once may be regarded as a misfortune. Twice seems like carelessness.

    You just can't get the staff these days. ;)
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 13,900
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Yeah, the gaps are a bit odd, especially when it's on the same line. Like when you hit the 'Tab' button accidentally. Although, it's fine to have 'presents' a bit lower than normal.
    Maybe that's what happened? ;)
    Once may be regarded as a misfortune. Twice seems like carelessness.
    You just can't get the staff these days. ;)
    008 can replace him.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,787
    QBranch wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Yeah, the gaps are a bit odd, especially when it's on the same line. Like when you hit the 'Tab' button accidentally. Although, it's fine to have 'presents' a bit lower than normal.
    Maybe that's what happened? ;)
    Once may be regarded as a misfortune. Twice seems like carelessness.
    You just can't get the staff these days. ;)
    008 can replace him.

    He follows orders, not typographical instincts. :)
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,022
    Mallory wrote: »
    The only thing I dislike is the boring font choice, same old Arial. Give us something a bit snazzier.

    Perhaps that is why I like MK12’s custom font for QoS

    That’s why I don’t like the animated QOS font, it distracts from what should be interesting visuals (though even they are subpar). The only exception is FRWL.
  • Posts: 2,400
    Mallory wrote: »
    The only thing I dislike is the boring font choice, same old Arial. Give us something a bit snazzier.

    Perhaps that is why I like MK12’s custom font for QoS

    I would argue that the "Quantum" typeface is the ONLY good thing about the MK12 title sequence :)) I've said it a million and a half times, but it's the worst of the series by about ten miles from whatever comes 23rd. Hell, the Never Say Never Again title sequence is better and that's just a bunch of 007's zooming in towards the screen! :)) :)) :))
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,689
    Mallory wrote: »
    The only thing I dislike is the boring font choice, same old Arial. Give us something a bit snazzier.

    Perhaps that is why I like MK12’s custom font for QoS

    I would argue that the "Quantum" typeface is the ONLY good thing about the MK12 title sequence :)) I've said it a million and a half times, but it's the worst of the series by about ten miles from whatever comes 23rd. Hell, the Never Say Never Again title sequence is better and that's just a bunch of 007's zooming in towards the screen! :)) :)) :))

    Why?
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,028
    I also, probably controversially, quite like the Quantum title sequence. I never quite understood why people dislike it so much. There's plenty of nice flourishes in it, for my eyes at least.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,869
    I also, probably controversially, quite like the Quantum title sequence. I never quite understood why people dislike it so much. There's plenty of nice flourishes in it, for my eyes at least.
    +1
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,689
    I also, probably controversially, quite like the Quantum title sequence. I never quite understood why people dislike it so much. There's plenty of nice flourishes in it, for my eyes at least.

    Absolutely. MK12 smashed it. The only thing I would imagine anyone NOT liking is the font. It's got great energy, and while I really do love Danny Kleinman's work, MK12 avoided some of the really on-the-nose political cartoon-style symbolism Danny sometimes does. (Actually labeling a tombstone with Bond's name is particularly cringey)
  • MalloryMallory Do mosquitoes have friends?
    Posts: 2,056
    I too like the whole QoS title sequence. The women coming out of the sand is a particularly nice touch.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 12,996
    Begs the question asked earlier, whats not to like?
  • MalloryMallory Do mosquitoes have friends?
    Posts: 2,056
    Begs the question asked earlier, whats not to like?

    Exactly!

    B90-DF2-D0-14-BE-47-F8-B023-614392089846.jpg

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,022
    I think it’s ugly and repetitive.

    “Oh great, another bullet firing in sand.”
Sign In or Register to comment.