›

The James Bond Debate Thread - 336 Craig looks positively younger in SP than he does in SF.

1…3233353738…190

Comments

  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited February 2012 Posts: 11,189
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    Completely disagree. Craig and Dench actually have a character dynamic. One that I assume will continue into Skyfall. Plus they're both good actors playing off of eachtother whereas Brosnan didn't deserve to share screentime with Dench.

    Well he did!

    I'm not sure why but I just think her and Brosnan had a bit more chemistry. They just "fitted" better IMO - the little smiles they gave one another is a bit of a tell to me. Maybe it was a bit of a motherly thing, Pierce (far inferior to Dench acting-wise) looked up to her and Dench showed him the ropes whereas with Craig it was more of a level playing field. Who knows.
  • bondbat007bondbat007
    Posts: 1,407
    Although it's overplayed a bit, I enjoy the Dench/Craig relationship far more than her and Brosnan. GE was good, TND was very good too "remind her..." then TWINE I don't mind, but that sort of relationship (the whole trust issue) is played much better in the Craig films. Then to have her switch back to a ruthless cold M in DAD was a little stretch. Although of course she did a great job. But overall I enjoy her work with Craig more
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,695
    Agree completly. Dench is simply not imposing enough to stand next to Craig. Brosnan was much softer so Dench worked. But Craig is like Connery and Dalton, where you need a much stronger and bigger authority figure to stand next to such tough and strong men... By the way Craig acts in CR and QOS and by his petulant problem with authority, I always wonder how Dench can possible give orders to Craig and expect him to follow them...

    this is not a female or male problem, but a problem of imposing authority figure, something that Dench fails utterly and completly at. I'd have much less problem with Craig's adolescent antics if M wasn't so soft and sweet like Dench. I don't think Connery would have listened even 1 minute to Dench's psychobabble. Male or female M for Dench's replacement, but a more imposing figure please.

    Fiennes would be great IMO.
  • JBFan626JBFan626
    Posts: 1,497
    I don't think one was better over the other. Judi Dench is a fine actress and was convincing in all 6 of her Bond films as M, equally capable and believable alongside both Brsonan and Craig. She's just been given some bad material along the way ( e.g.: prison scene in TWINE, 'trust' banter in QOS). So I disagree with said thesis and say she was equally exceptional.
  • KerimKerim Istanbul Not Constantinople
    Posts: 2,629
    I flatuate in the general direction of this theory. Dench's on screen chemistry with Craig is light years ahead of Brosnan's. Like it or not, Judy's maternal characteristics in her role works for a young, inexperienced Bond. Dench's two best roles as M are CR and QOS. Dench displays tough love with Craig to help him develop personally and professionaly. Dench successfully neuters Brosnan at some point in everything but TND.
  • KennonKennon
    Posts: 297
    I think Dench as M worked just fine in all her six films, haven't really a problem with her. She's making the best out of the role, that's why it became ever more important. Don't see that this is due to Craig or Brosnan, it's more due to the writing IMO.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited February 2012 Posts: 23,650
    I agree with the thesis. Dench had a strong first appearence in GE and although she was subsequently reduced to an old hag with motherly concerns about Bond, her relationship with the Brosnan Bond was at that point well established and somehow, she still didn't feel like the queen of lecturing to the same proportions she does now.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,650
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 045</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>The unsure fate of Blofeld at the end of DAF was a screenwriting flaw.</b></font>
  • JBFan626JBFan626
    edited February 2012 Posts: 1,497
    No, DAF in it's final form with both the Tom M. re-write and the return of Connery, did not require a revenge finale. This would have worked had Lazenby returned. But since he didn't, DAF as we know it, works as a solitary, episodic Bond adventure: Bond vs. Blofeld, like in the spirit of YOLT. In this sense, it makes more sense to keep Blofelds fate a mystery with the possibility that the archnemesis could return for future films (He never really did mind you, but this at least keeps style of Bond as serial, going as a franchise).
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited February 2012 Posts: 6,023
    Agree absolutely. I'm sure they wanted to keep the door open for his return, but if so, they could have written his exit much better.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,506
    There is also the question? Why the suggested appearance in FYEO? So really i agree with the thesis. Such an iconic charactor to suggest he is dumped down a chimney and thats it? Think it was a mistake to have done that!

  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    edited February 2012 Posts: 3,262
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 045</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>The unsure fate of Blofeld at the end of DAF was a screenwriting flaw.</b></font>

    Disagree. As Tom Mankiewicz said on the Superman II:The Donner Cut DVD commentary, he thought Blofeld in Bond was like Lex Luthor in Superman, i.e., one could never really kill him off. EON had no idea in 1971 that Kevin McClory would pull the stunt he later did during TSWLM pre-production when Blofeld was supposed to be the primary villain instead of Stromberg.
    JBFan626 wrote:
    No, DAF in it's final form with both the Tom M. re-write and the return of Connery, did not require a revenge finale. This would have worked had Lazenby returned. But since he didn't, DAF as we know it, works as a solitary, episodic Bond adventure: Bond vs. Blofeld, like in the spirit of YOLT. In this sense, it makes more sense to keep Blofelds fate a mystery with the possibility that the archnemesis could return for future films (He never really did mind you, but this at least keeps style of Bond as serial, going as a franchise).

    Agreed. Although we at least got some kind of closure with FYEO's PTS.

  • JBFan626JBFan626
    Posts: 1,497
    PrinceKamalKhan wrote:
    Agreed. Although we at least got some kind of closure with FYEO's PTS.

    Right, I think the flaw was actually in the FYEO PTS. The ending of DAF, seems to suggest that the return of Blofeld in future Bond films was a possibility. However, as @RogueAgent mentions, such an iconic figure is merely dumped down a chimney in FYEO and that's that, which really demeans the whole iconic history of the character and retroactively tarnishes the ending the DAF (no fault of DAF). Damn you FYEO PTS!

  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,506
    JBFan626 wrote:
    PrinceKamalKhan wrote:
    Agreed. Although we at least got some kind of closure with FYEO's PTS.

    Right, I think the flaw was actually in the FYEO PTS. The ending of DAF, seems to suggest that the return of Blofeld in future Bond films was a possibility. However, as @RogueAgent mentions, such an iconic figure is merely dumped down a chimney in FYEO and that's that, which really demeans the whole iconic history of the character and retroactively tarnishes the ending the DAF (no fault of DAF). Damn you FYEO PTS!

    Absolutely? Although i know nothing of the reasoning behind that PTS? And regardless of the propaganda at the time between McClory and EON....etc? That just smells of sour grapes and EON made a mistake in doing it IMHO. Surely at somepoint someone must have thought? Perhaps we could buy the rights in the future like they did with CR?

    Why on earth they did it i will never know? But it's all there to see? Tracey Bonds grave, Pleasance style Blofeld and the White Persian cat! I always have a heavy heart when i see that PTS. It show neither side in a positive light!
  • 6of16of1
    Posts: 63
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 045</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>The unsure fate of Blofeld at the end of DAF was a screenwriting flaw.</b></font>

    Well, at any rate it was somewhat disappointing. If you pretend OHMSS never happened the way to keep the arch villain would have been to just leave him - YOLT style - without the fuss of having him dangling. For a revenge end the fight - what fight there was - wasn't anywhere exciting enough. The way it is DAF's treatment of Blofeld is neither fish nor fowl.
  • VirageVirage
    Posts: 1,856
    No, because maybe they wanted to write him back in!!!
  • bondbat007bondbat007
    Posts: 1,407
    Virage wrote:
    No, because maybe they wanted to write him back in!!!

    It should of been made clear that he was alive then. If they wanted an unknown fate, they didn't succeed. So I agree with this thesis
  • Dr_MetzDr_Metz
    edited February 2012 Posts: 401
    The original ending had Blofeld die. It had Bond and Blofeld fighting in a salt mine, with Blofeld dying in the end. I agree with the thesis in a way, but the "Lex Luthor" idea Mankiewicz had made sense. The man really is Bond's arch-nemesis, to have him be the main villain in only just 3 out of 20 films is a bit anti-climatic.

    The movies stopped caring about continuity with YOLT, so I don't mind that they were planning to reuse Blofeld later on, instead of killing him in DAF, which would have been a proper revenge for Tracy, really. I actually think TSWLM would have been better with Blofeld, which was the original plan, before Kevin McClory stepped in.
    bondbat007 wrote:
    It should of been made clear that he was alive then. If they wanted an unknown fate, they didn't succeed. So I agree with this thesis
    But they did succeed. You really didn't know if Blofeld was dead for sure. It didn't show him blowing up along with the oil rig or something.
    JBFan626 wrote:
    Damn you FYEO PTS!
    I can't see Blofeld as the main villain in any of the 80's Bond films. I can see him as the main villain in TSWLM and/or MR, however.

  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,351
    I'd say it wasn't, as it seemed to be the plan to bring him back all along. And that almost worked for The Spy Who Loved Me had McClory never been involved with Bond.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,650
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 046</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>GE wouldn't have been as good without Serra composing the score.</b></font>
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    Could have been better with a different composer, we'll never know. But as it is I find the score pleasantly fitting. It is less powerfull without the images though.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,506
    It is certainly different! Some of it i like, some of it i am not so keen on. Whether it is the cherry on the top to make GE good? Not so sure on that one. And they got someone else in to score the Tank chase as Serra's version was underwhelming to put it politely!
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 046</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>GE wouldn't have been as good without Serra composing the score.</b></font>

    Strongly disagree. GE(as it stands) has never been one of my favorites but would've benefited greatly from John Barry scoring it instead(and Dalton playing Bond but that's for another debate).
  • 6of16of1
    Posts: 63
    PrinceKamalKhan wrote:
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 046</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>GE wouldn't have been as good without Serra composing the score.</b></font>

    Strongly disagree. GE(as it stands) has never been one of my favorites but would've benefited greatly from John Barry scoring it instead(and Dalton playing Bond but that's for another debate).

    Well, bit of a cop out there, isn't it? Which film wouldn't benefit from a Barry score?

    My tuppence: I liked Serra's effort a lot and to me it's definitely one of the more charming elements of GE. Which isn't to say it couldn't have been better.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    I listened to the romantic casino theme the other night on my iPod to help me get to sleep. That says it all. Agree.
  • identigraphidentigraph
    Posts: 1,052
    Disagree, I think the score is one of the weakest elements of the film, it's very cheesey and not timeless like the older scores, it has dated very badly.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,695
    One of the best score of the franchise, gives Barry a run for the money in terms of quality. I agree with the thesis.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    I wouldn't go so far as to say that DC but it's still a very effective score. I'm listening to Whispering Statues as I write this.
  • JBFan626JBFan626
    Posts: 1,497
    Agreed with thesis. Obviously I'd take Barry any day, but as it is, Serra really elevates the film.
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    6of1 wrote:
    Well, bit of a cop out there, isn't it? Which film wouldn't benefit from a Barry score?

    How is it a "cop out"? From what I read, Barry was originally offered the opportunity to score GE but MGM/UA couldn't meet his price. Even if Barry had never scored any Bond film, I still am not a fan of Serra's score.

Sign In or Register to comment.