› ›

Would you rather a return to the gun barrel at the start OR have it at the end of the film?

1…209210211212213215»

Comments

  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 14,791
    That's well said @BT3366 and would be ideal for me.


    SF opening if it had a gunbarrel start. Gunbarrel indicates Bond shot a bad guy. Bond walks into focus, continues down the corridor to find an associate. Obviously 007 didn't shoot fellow agent Ronson. So there's not an automatic conflict there.

    The first gunbarrel for an actor can be ambiguous as mentioned earlier (Bob Simmons as Connery in DN, FRWL, GF) or clearly the actor Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan, and Craig.

    The Bond actor will be known at the time of the film's release, on posters and trailers. I'll be looking to recognize the actor in the Bond role at first opportunity on screen. And that moment will establish him to audiences, gunbarrel or otherwise. My thinking is for BOND 26 the gunbarrel demands a clear introduction of the new Bond, from there it will be film history regardless.

  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,872
    cooperman2 wrote: »
    At the start. Always. It's the few seconds that let you know this isn't some bog standard action movie this is a JAMES BOND film.

    +1
Sign In or Register to comment.