Controversial opinions about Bond films

15152545657714

Comments

  • edited August 2013 Posts: 169
    LeighBurne wrote:
    The World is Not Enough would be five or ten spots higher if Bond had ended the film alone.
    TWINE is a bit of an odd one for me, in that it's the only Bond film I can think of that manages to be less than the sum of its parts. There's a lot of stuff I really like in there. Robert Carlyle is great as Renard, and Sophie Marceau's pretty good. There are some awesome scenes in the film as well, like when Bond first meets Renard and when he kills Electra at the end. But on the whole... I just can't really get into the end product.

    I seem to have that feeling about the Brosnan films in general, except for GoldenEye. The quality seems to be there on the screen, at least through TWINE, yet I've come away from these series entries somehow disatisfied. TND was the last Bond film I bothered to go see in a cinema until CR. Craig's films, even QoS, have so far kept me interested enough to pay the price of a ticket & popcorn.
  • Posts: 686
    1. I wish the producers would explore the Fleming friendship between Bond and Bill Tanner (no alternative lifestyles - just mates). Also, I want Bill Tanner to have more gravitas like in FYEO.

    2. I don't like Q, never really did. I am not much into gadgets and never understood why Bond and Q never got along.

    3. I thought the screenwriters have missed the boat since Octopussy. This is not to say OP was perfect.

    4. I think the majority of people on this site could do a better job in coming up with a screenplay for Bond, but it would be rejected since EON is in business to make a market oriented movie rather than a Bond movie.

    5. I would rather have a toned down movie with a good story rather than shoot'em film. If they could do both, fine.

    6. I would like to see Bond return to his Naval roots, show up in his RN uniform to the office. I am not sure how Craig could give credibility to this since he is bow-legged. This used to be a reason for rejection in the US military, not sure about the RN.

    7. I would like to see the product placement toned down a bit. I understand they need to make money, but please.

  • Posts: 6,396
    Perdogg wrote:

    1. I wish the producers would explore the Fleming friendship between Bond and Bill Tanner (no alternative lifestyles - just mates). Also, I want Bill Tanner to have more gravitas like in FYEO.

    2. I don't like Q, never really did. I am not much into gadgets and never understood why Bond and Q never got along.

    3. I thought the screenwriters have missed the boat since Octopussy. This is not to say OP was perfect.

    4. I think the majority of people on this site could do a better job in coming up with a screenplay for Bond, but it would be rejected since EON is in business to make a market oriented movie rather than a Bond movie.

    5. I would rather have a toned down movie with a good story rather than shoot'em film. If they could do both, fine.

    6. I would like to see Bond return to his Naval roots, show up in his RN uniform to the office. I am not sure how Craig could give credibility to this since he is bow-legged. This used to be a reason for rejection in the US military, not sure about the RN.

    7. I would like to see the product placement toned down a bit. I understand they need to make money, but please.

    4. I think that's a gross exaggeration there. I'm sure we'd all like to think we could sit down and write a screenplay but the reality is we really couldn't.

    5. I too would love to see Bond's naval roots explored. Perhaps a future film can show him seconded back to the RN for a mission.

    7. Think it's pretty universal that none of us here want to see PP in films, especially Bond, but it won't ever happen. PP has been around for as long as I can remember and the studios are always turn to sponsors to provide the necessary revenue to get their big budget movies produced. That's Hollywood I guess!
  • The amount of product placement in SF was nothing compared to what we got in Moonraker. Glaring close-ups to British Airways billboards, a pack of Marlboros clearly seen in Holly's nightstand drawer (yet she never smokes in the film), the list is endless. But then again, is it any surprise that the anti-Craig crowd is quick to point out the Heineken campaign and conveniently shelve prior and more egregious instances of said product placement?
  • SharkShark Banned
    Posts: 348
    Perdogg wrote:
    6. I would like to see Bond return to his Naval roots, show up in his RN uniform to the office. I am not sure how Craig could give credibility to this since he is bow-legged.

    Huh? Where did you get this nugget from?

  • edited August 2013 Posts: 6,396
    The amount of product placement in SF was nothing compared to what we got in Moonraker. Glaring close-ups to British Airways billboards, a pack of Marlboros clearly seen in Holly's nightstand drawer (yet she never smokes in the film), the list is endless. But then again, is it any surprise that the anti-Craig crowd is quick to point out the Heineken campaign and conveniently shelve prior and more egregious instances of said product placement?

    I think there was still a fair amount of pp in SF albeit much more subtle than usual but I was so engrossed in the story that I didn't really notice it or was indeed bothered by it. It was only on the second viewing that I noticed the Heineken bottle! You're right about MR though. That was pp at it's most blatant and most sickening. I'll also throw in the HK hotel suite in DAD into the mix. The way the camera pans across the bed was like a bloody advert for Harrods!
  • Posts: 686
    Shark wrote:
    Perdogg wrote:
    6. I would like to see Bond return to his Naval roots, show up in his RN uniform to the office. I am not sure how Craig could give credibility to this since he is bow-legged.

    Huh? Where did you get this nugget from?

    Dream House.
  • Posts: 686
    The amount of product placement in SF was nothing compared to what we got in Moonraker. Glaring close-ups to British Airways billboards, a pack of Marlboros clearly seen in Holly's nightstand drawer (yet she never smokes in the film), the list is endless. But then again, is it any surprise that the anti-Craig crowd is quick to point out the Heineken campaign and conveniently shelve prior and more egregious instances of said product placement?

    I have no problem with DC, just the way he is being utilized by EON.
  • RC7RC7
    edited August 2013 Posts: 10,432
    Perdogg wrote:
    Shark wrote:
    Perdogg wrote:
    6. I would like to see Bond return to his Naval roots, show up in his RN uniform to the office. I am not sure how Craig could give credibility to this since he is bow-legged.

    Huh? Where did you get this nugget from?

    Dream House.

    He is indeed slightly bow-legged. The problem for me with Craig is that he looks slightly packed into his suits. I hope he loses a bit of the beef in B24, he could still look damn good, just more lithe and less MMA. Then get him in Naval attire, preferably with a decent overcoat.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 3,494
    Perdogg wrote:
    The amount of product placement in SF was nothing compared to what we got in Moonraker. Glaring close-ups to British Airways billboards, a pack of Marlboros clearly seen in Holly's nightstand drawer (yet she never smokes in the film), the list is endless. But then again, is it any surprise that the anti-Craig crowd is quick to point out the Heineken campaign and conveniently shelve prior and more egregious instances of said product placement?

    I have no problem with DC, just the way he is being utilized by EON.

    Then why the need to point out he is bow-legged? It's true that he is slightly, but why bring up seeing him in uniform once again if you are going to use bow legs as a reason for not credibly doing so?

  • Posts: 6,396
    Perdogg wrote:
    The amount of product placement in SF was nothing compared to what we got in Moonraker. Glaring close-ups to British Airways billboards, a pack of Marlboros clearly seen in Holly's nightstand drawer (yet she never smokes in the film), the list is endless. But then again, is it any surprise that the anti-Craig crowd is quick to point out the Heineken campaign and conveniently shelve prior and more egregious instances of said product placement?

    I have no problem with DC, just the way he is being utilized by EON.

    Then why the need to point out he is bow-legged? It's true that he is slightly, but why bring up seeing him in uniform once again if you are going to use bow legs as a reason for not credibly doing so?

    It makes a change from the whole "blonde and blue eyed" argument most likely.
  • Posts: 686
    Perdogg wrote:
    The amount of product placement in SF was nothing compared to what we got in Moonraker. Glaring close-ups to British Airways billboards, a pack of Marlboros clearly seen in Holly's nightstand drawer (yet she never smokes in the film), the list is endless. But then again, is it any surprise that the anti-Craig crowd is quick to point out the Heineken campaign and conveniently shelve prior and more egregious instances of said product placement?

    I have no problem with DC, just the way he is being utilized by EON.

    Then why the need to point out he is bow-legged? It's true that he is slightly, but why bring up seeing him in uniform once again if you are going to use bow legs as a reason for not credibly doing so?

    I brought it up because it used to be that one could not join the military if someone was bow-legged, at least in the States.
  • Posts: 6,396
    Perdogg wrote:
    Perdogg wrote:
    The amount of product placement in SF was nothing compared to what we got in Moonraker. Glaring close-ups to British Airways billboards, a pack of Marlboros clearly seen in Holly's nightstand drawer (yet she never smokes in the film), the list is endless. But then again, is it any surprise that the anti-Craig crowd is quick to point out the Heineken campaign and conveniently shelve prior and more egregious instances of said product placement?

    I have no problem with DC, just the way he is being utilized by EON.

    Then why the need to point out he is bow-legged? It's true that he is slightly, but why bring up seeing him in uniform once again if you are going to use bow legs as a reason for not credibly doing so?

    I brought it up because it used to be that one could not join the military if someone was bow-legged, at least in the States.

    It is a Bond movie we're talking about. If you can suspend your disbelief over the course of the previous 23 films, I don't think someone who is bow legged in naval uniform should really make a great deal of difference! That is really clutching at straws.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 34,609
    I may have stated it before, but here's one: I love the GE soundtrack.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 686
    If you can suspend your disbelief over the course of the previous 23 films, I don't think someone who is bow legged in naval uniform should really make a great deal of difference! That is really clutching at straws.

    I am sorry I thought this was a Bond site and not Tiger Beat. ;)
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,036
    Creasy47 wrote:
    I may have stated it before, but here's one: I love the GE soundtrack.

    That makes two of us @Creasy47. ;)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 34,609
    @Murdock, nice to have support!! ;)
  • Posts: 7,641
    Murdock wrote:
    Creasy47 wrote:
    I may have stated it before, but here's one: I love the GE soundtrack.

    That makes two of us @Creasy47. ;)

    count me in as well, I like Serra's work.

  • Posts: 6,396
    Perdogg wrote:
    If you can suspend your disbelief over the course of the previous 23 films, I don't think someone who is bow legged in naval uniform should really make a great deal of difference! That is really clutching at straws.

    I am sorry I thought this was a Bond site and not Tiger Beat. ;)

    Being as I am British and therefore didn't get that reference at all - until I Googled it, I'm guessing that's the type of publication you guys on dcinb.com are reading these days ;-)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited August 2013 Posts: 34,609
    I'm American and have never heard of Tiger Beat until I just Googled it. Doesn't appear to be up my alley, though like I've said before, I'll act like an adolescent girl if Deakins is confirmed to return to 'Bond 24.'
  • StirredNotShakenStirredNotShaken I'm gonna use this to clarify that Dalton is tied with Craig
    Posts: 1,736
    SaintMark wrote:
    Murdock wrote:
    Creasy47 wrote:
    I may have stated it before, but here's one: I love the GE soundtrack.

    That makes two of us @Creasy47. ;)

    count me in as well, I like Serra's work.

    I've never understood how people bash Serra's work for the film then praise Kirkhope's work for the game. Both are great.
  • SharkShark Banned
    Posts: 348
    SaintMark wrote:
    Murdock wrote:
    Creasy47 wrote:
    I may have stated it before, but here's one: I love the GE soundtrack.

    That makes two of us @Creasy47. ;)

    count me in as well, I like Serra's work.

    Don't forget me!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 34,609
    If you haven't seen 'Leon: The Professional,' you should check it out. Serra did the score for that and it was incredibly similar to GE.
  • These are arguably two parts of the same point, but:

    1. I like seeing the formula get shaken up. All the Bonds I've seen in theaters have been with DC (starting with CR), and I've honestly enjoyed seeing different aspects of the character explored. Granted, not all of it's from Fleming (e.g., childhood issues), but I like the conflict it brings. Should the films go down the road that a lot of people are proposing (i.e., going back to just being about Bond taking on a bad guy, nothing else), without some EXTREME innovation and creativity on EON's part every single time, I feel that it would get...well, not boring, but maybe less interesting; like they would come dangerously close to fading into the background along with all the other action/thriller movies.

    Okay, new Bond movie, awesome action scenes, snappy dialogue, shocking twists and turns, but by the end of it all, the villain dies, Bond's got the girl, and every character has remained mentally/emotionally static throughout. I know some people might like that, but I don't think I would. I think there are ways to feature character depth/development that don't tread over used-up ground, but perhaps that's a train of thought for another thread.

    2. I like that the gunbarrel has been done differently for the past few films. I know many feel that it's inclusion between the logos and the PTS is an integral part of a Bond film, and I can certainly understand that sentiment; it's got definite merit. That being said, even the GB is something I enjoy seeing done differently at different times. The following notion is probably even more controversial, but: if I knew the GB would be at its same traditional place for every future movie, I probably wouldn't like the predictability.

    I know the opening shot afterward could be as intense/stunning/etc. as the director could manage, but I'd almost rather see that first than feel like the GB was showing up, then stepping out the way to let it through. I've particularly enjoyed the drama/mystery of the past two films' openings; they drew me in and made me want to know what was going on. I've got an idea that could sort of draw a compromise between traditional/nontraditional GB placement, but again, that's probably for another thread.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited August 2013 Posts: 4,391
    As for controversy - I've never been that big a fan of the DB5. Nice enough looking car and I can enjoy it for what it is in GF but that should have been it. For it to appear in TB was just about excusable but its resurrection in the modern era was just a pathetic comfort blanket for certain fans who love all the cliches to be ticked off.

    I bought into the nostalgia of if in SF and it is a great moment when he shoots the goons outside SF even if it makes zero narrative or timeline sense.

    Please God let it finally be gone now that Silva has blown it to shit.

    I like this controversial opinion and agree with you. I'm tired of the DB5 being trotted out, as if we Bond fans are supposed to have a Pavlovian response to it. It should have stayed in the '60s.
    The World is Not Enough would be five or ten spots higher if Bond had ended the film alone.

    Love this one. Of all of Brosnan's films this one pretty much cries out for a downer ending.

    Imagine if, after Bond saved Istanbul, Elektra died at the very end. Then Moneypenny, say, called Bond and said, "Well, James, you saved the world again." Bond: "The world is not enough."

    Cut to black.
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    edited August 2013 Posts: 16,036
    David Arnold is the best Bond composer since John Barry.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 16,340
    Murdock wrote:
    David Arnold is the best Bond composer since John Barry.
    Not controversial at all in my book, Murdock!
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,036
    chrisisall wrote:
    Murdock wrote:
    David Arnold is the best Bond composer since John Barry.
    Not controversial at all in my book, Murdock!
    Maybe not to you but a lot would disagree. ;)
  • Posts: 686
    For Your Eyes Only is probably the second best James Bond movie - ever. It is kind of hard to see that after 31 years of changes in popular culture. It was made in a day where EON was a leader. It is kind of ironic that there was a slight archeological angle to the film the same summer Indiana Jones came out.

    Its plot is probably the best and makes the most sense and is definitely Flemingesque. Maibaum and Wilson did a great job writing a script based on many novel elements including Goldfinger, Live and Let Die, Risico, and For Your Eyes Only. Not only are the fleming elements from text, but also flemingesque in tone.

    The humour wasn't overdone and I loved the Naval angle with the Minister Defence and the First Sea Lord. Sheena Easton song is great and even the ending with faux Maggie brings a smile to my face to this day. The PTS was okay, but I guess it was sort of a message to Kevin McClory . I would have preferred a Barry OST.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 16,340
    Perdogg wrote:
    For Your Eyes Only is probably the second best James Bond movie - ever.
    Good film yes, but second best?
    You must give me the name of your occularist. :))
Sign In or Register to comment.