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
And you can account for that, can you?
Interviews, behind the scenes videos etc. say otherwise. Barabara and MGW are proud to have revived the series after the long interval.
The Brosnan films came about from a desire for the world to adapt to the changing times which resulted from the collapse of the Cold War. This is why we received films that played on the safer, box checking formula which placed equal emphasis on humour as well action and often attempted to blend the two together to mixed results. The action and the stuntwork is of extremely high quality but action, like many other elements, depends on the strength of its surroundings, and Brosnan's final film (s) suffered immensely from poor storytelling.
As such, and unfortunately for Brosnan, there would be a second shift in World Affairs in 2001, leaving everyone with an increased appetite for darker, edgier stories involving franchise characters. This change in appetite couldn't have come at a worse time for a film like DAD, and came just in time for something like The Bourne Identity. The Bourne films are ones I have a lot of love for, but they have a massively different approach to its respective character.
The same way Die Hard films are different to 80's Bond flicks in their utilisation of elements, Damon's Bourne is incomparable to Brosnan's Bond as they are products of a very different time and catered to an audience which wanted something different. The same audiences that would then go on to lap up Nolan's Batman fare and Craig's brooding Bond. This will pass again as all tastes do, and then reappear when timing is right.
They're incomparable, and as such, your topic is rather empty and pointless.
awesome post until the last line.
But your posts are pretty empty, dod, when you compare your "clutching at straws" with CraigMoores excellent post. Your points are very meandering, and this is why we are here now. It started of as GE vs TND in terms of dialogue and then turned to "Bourne embarrassed Brosnan", which you brought up.
I hope you're wrong, but fear you're right, as sadly at some point the public will want a return to the mindless fare. Things go in circles.
Regarding Bourne: There was no decline per se in Brosnan's Bond's popularity (DAD was the most successful one he'd done). What had changed was a significant uptick in interest in serious fare like Bourne in a post-911 context. Such movies could not have been as successful in prior years. That was an opportunity for EON (perhaps the opportunity they had been waiting for in years to make something like they did in the Dalton years & still reap financial success). They smelt it and they took it. Good for them.
Respect the thoughts here...
I know it was, lol
:)
Hmmm . I think Bond and Bourne are more comparable than Bond and Die Hard or Bond and Predator.
Bond and Bourne are a similar if not identical genre.
Not always. Craig's Bond certainly would be, and certain aspects of Dalton maybe. Moore and Brosnan certainly wouldn't though, and the comparison was Brosnan specific.
Genre, for me, is such a flexible term that it's almost lazy to use it sometimes, I think.
McTiernan and Spielberg are excellent directors of action, I'll give you that one. Those franchises had fantastic sequences, with the Desert Chase in Raiders being amongst my favourite scenes. That being said, I don't think it really damaged Bond all that much. Bond films still pulled in the punters and made a hell of a lot more money than Die Hard or Predator.
In fact, of the 80's Bond flicks, I think the tanker chase at the end of LTK could be held up against a lot of the action from the aforementioned films with little to no embarrassment.
Comparisons to the Indy films are honestly laughable.
In the Indy films, the laughs were fun and intentional.
That's probably the biggest 'WTF' moment we've had from you so far!
Really, you can find all the Bond films on YouTube if you know where to look ;)
Touché ;-). Completely agreed here.
It is a very long time (if ever) frankly since Bond was at the very forefront of creativity in popular entertainment. SF is a huge commercial success but the film cribs and borrows left right and centre, from TDK, from the Bond series itself (TMWTGG), Apocalypse Now, The Third Man, and who knows what else.
TND was a supremely well made formula-chaser with a little twist here & there. I happen to prefer TND by a little bit, but they were both hugely entertaining films. To quote Malcolm McDowall from Blue Thunder, "anyone who tells you different is a damn liar." :))
Simply, that some Bond films are better than others, heaping praise and interest when deserved, and scolding when deserved.
THe franchise is the most successful in film history, but there are highlights and lowlights.
Yeah. RIght. Spielberg ripped off OP for TOD.
Thank god he didn't rip off the deadly (YAWN) yo-yo scene.
They were proud to keep making millions, mate. C'mon.
That's true, but as of recently you could google octopussy full movie and it would pop right up, tarzan yell and all, lol.
Yeesh.
Your argument has now gone from the bizarre to the downright absurd. You have not provided any facts or evidence, you have just posted your ill-informed assumptions, your knowledge of the history of the Bond series is questionable, your comments are deliberately provocatative and to be brutally honest, they are the largest amount of drivel I have ever had the misfortune to read on this forum. And yes, that's an insult. I'm tired of beating around the bloody bush.
They were proud to have successfully taken Bond into a new era without Cubby. Brosnan's films, you forget, were also critical successes at the time. You should read The Essential James Bond for more on that.
What are you even talking about?
Indy owes a lot to Bond and really don't appreciate or get that much Bond hate on a Bond fan forum?????
Again no news at all.
Wow, thanks for letting us know something we all knew already.
So all your references to other non-Bond films are completely and utterly irrelevant then?
Essentially all we're left with is your personal dislike for Roger Moore and Octopussy. A point of view I find more sad than anything else. If you can't appreciate Sir Rog in arguably one of his best performances then I just feel sorry for you TBH .