It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Renny Harlin no thanks. John Woo couldn't really have been any worse than what we were getting at that time. But the over-stylised fight scenes probably would have aged badly.
Campbell will do 26
A lot has to do with the marketing to a sequel to a cult film made thirty years ago. The appropriate age range went, but the new film couldn't connect with the younger demos.
Once again, this has nothing to do with the director-- he is being universally praised for hitting another film out of the ballpark-- and everything to do with a very curious source material that would always find it difficult to connect with younger audiences.
No, Babs isn't looking at B.O., she's looking at quality; after all, Babs knows that JUST releasing a Bond film, regardless of who Bond is, or who the director is, has gotta be worth half a billion at the WW B.O. And from there, any additional dollar sold will then depend on who and what is in the finished product. What a blessed franchise!
No the B.O. for BR 2049 will not change Villeneuve's dance card.
It's a brilliant film BR 2049 and Villeneuve is proving himself to be a very adept director. I don't expect it to do brilliantly BO-wise for the reasons you've outlined. A lot of my friends haven't seen the original, so they are a bit 'meh' about the idea of seeing BR 2049.
Box office will definitely be a consideration of the distributor, even if it might not be for EON. So will profitability. We are at an interesting time with B25, due to the new distributor, the fact that it will be Craig's last (and so it will be more difficult to directly capitalize on its success for a follow up) and the ostensible one picture deal.
It is possible that there are competing visions on the table, including directors.
Having seen BR2049, I believe the man they have to get is Roger Deakins. They could combine him with Joe Blow as director for all I care and the film would still be decent enough, as long as P&W do their bit and the cast is up to snuff.
However, we know whomever directs this will also bring on his own writers as well... Like a Paul Haggis (although I don't think he came through Campbell proper, I'm sure he was hired on to sculpt more of the director's vision into the CR script-- which is usually the case when script-doctors are hired onto a production). The bigger the director (Villeneuve), the more likely he has his handful of writers he likes working with.
I have hope that the script for B25 will be battle-ready once cameras roll (unlike SP). Nail the script in development and get a strong visionary to execute...
Sicario is brilliant!
Honestly though, I really believe there is more going on than meets the eye, primarily due to the distribution deal. The fact that we've heard a few directors tossed about lately suggests that there are possibly different approaches being considered, perhaps using the same script ideas as base.
At the end of the day, they have to beg Deakins to come back. BR2049 was great, but Gassner and Deakins were as (if not more) responsible for that than Villeneuve imho. As an example, I personally found Arrival (Bradford Young) to be a 'meh' film visually, but Sicario and Prisoners (both Deakins) were absoutely phenomenal.
But, in the end @ClarkDevlin, we all see and respond to different things in the films we watch!. Although I can't see your perspective on this one, doesn't discount that the fact that Sicario just didn't do it for you. Perhaps I missed your reasons for disliking the film, but I'd surely like to hear so.
...But, these plot points didn't unfold over the course of a sagacious pace. You needed to go back and forth from what you've seen in your mind to connect the dots and see what's taking place. It was a convoluted mess from my perspective and definitely the opposite of an easygoing story. You're going to need multiple viewings to understand it, and for this sort of a film, I don't crave another viewing, nor dying to see it again if at all.
It reminds me of the time when I couldn't grasp what did I just see in Quantum of Solace back in the day, or what Bond was after, or what was the endgame. It took me some years to fit all the puzzled pieces together. I hope we don't get a Bond film like that at all.
If we're talking a Craig Bond, and if it's a finale for that run, I'd rather have another Casino Royale in terms of grit and action. Story-wise? Pretty much the same but without that lovey-dovey aspect or the personal connection.
You and me both, mate.
Sicario isn't that complicated and it didn't seem convoluted to me on first viewing - all the pieces of the jigsaw steadily fall into place.
I can completely relate to where you're coming from re: Sicario. I'm very much a visual person, and if characters also interest me then I can be hooked even if the plot is lacking or convoluted.
So even though I agree with you, I found the film to be visually a treat (Deakins), quite tense and atmospheric (Villeneuve), and I really liked all the characters (particularly Blunt's and the always brilliant Brolin's) and the interactions and emotions between them. In that regard, it reminded me of SF.
@peter Have you nicked my avatar deliberately to cause confusion?
???
It has just premiered.
I would love it if Bond got the DV treatment but there would be a backlash.
Regarding Sicario, there's no doubt it had great visuals in it. One particular scene even, an after-the-sunset landscape as the silhouettes of the soldiers go down with a haunting soundtrack in the background, stands out for me. However, I felt cheated out with the story. See, the way things are depicted, up to the point where Toro's character's true intentions were revealed, we were led to believe that there's a "sicario" out there who's heavily deadly. A triggerman/killer/sniper/whatever whose wrath nobody survives. So, that particular scene that I mentioned with the haunting visuals, I thought these soldiers were marching to their own death. But, it simply was an ambush like any other seen once or twice earlier in the film. And none of them were even engaging after that much construction of a suspenseful anticipation.
As for the characters, despite the great cast, I found none of them interesting with the exception of Toro's character and his performance. Then again, I love Toro in any role. He's always great. Others, in my opinion, were let down by the bland portrait of their parts. That's just me, though. In comparison, Skyfall is hell of a film. And this one comes from me who hates that film.
Sorry, mate, but Skyfall an adult film? It felt like an absolute poor rehash of The Dark Knight with Easter Eggs from old Bond films shoved down our throats. The actions of every character in it didn't make sense as if they deliberately made all the mistakes that led to Silva's victory (whose objective alone was poor, especially for a Bond villain). An adult Bond film is From Russia with Love. And they made hell of a job with it.
Though now that I think about it, having the soldiers tussle with some ridiculously talented hitman in those tunnels as the finale would've been intense, or even something akin to the finale of Full Metal Jacket, with them up against someone they can't even see.
I would argue Spielberg could do it and do it well even now but I know my thoughts and voice will be lost in a series of posts bringing up every bad film the man has done.
Sorry bring up Crystal Skull all you want but I just don’t think Spielberg would do that dare I say it but IF Bond 25 is based on You Only Live Twice the idea of
Purvisand Wade doing the script (they are for the record always better at adapting Fleming then when they are left to their own devices see the first 2/3rds of Die Another Day and Casino Royale for proof)
And Spielberg directing (like he did with Jaws can find the heart of the story)
Sigh it would probably beat Casino Royale as my favorite bond film of all time...
However I am still mildly interested in Yann and Dennis so long as Sam Mendes is far away I am happy