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
It's definitely a mark against the film tho, and one of the reasons I think CR is overrated. Fans just aren't comfortable admitting it has faults.
3:-O
Amazing movie. Flawless casting too. And Damon's best performance. I would love to see him as Bourne again (sorry for the bad pun), that said I rather wished he had made a sequel to Ripley, unfortunately Minghella is dead.
Wow. Big, bold and slightly daft statement.
As to whether they're on a par, I guess that's a matter of taste. I'm fairly sure that there are a lot of sane people out there who'd pick Clint as a director over Spielberg.
Clint has two best director Oscar wins (which I think is the same as Spielberg), plus a further three nominations. His films are often category-defying and have been widely lauded by his peers. He deels with fascinating issues, and has been making 'meaningful' movies arguably a little longer than Spielberg. I think you'd struggle to find any one in Hollywood who holds him in as low regard as you seem to.
Again, I'm not knocking Spielberg. But as with your need to knock Damon, in order to somehow elevate Craig in comparison, I don't really get it. I don't really care who you prefer, but the idea that Clint is not a top level Hollywood director in his own right, or very much someone who can be interestingly compared to Spielberg, is absurd.
Actually, I think their film making style, and choice of subjects, has been converging over recent years, making their films very much open to comparison. You could see either of them having directed a number of each others' films over the past couple of decades - the subject and style of film making just seem to fit.
They both share an interest in and respect for the WW2 generation and the sacrifices they made. They've both dealt with issues that touch on race/ethnicity and how we deal with it. They're both no strangers to action movies.
Overall, Spielberg has directed more big Hollywood blockbusters (many of which are of course classics)but as I said above, if anything, I think Clint's become more successful and arguably the better and more interesting director over the past decade. Yes, Spielberg has made a massive contribution to film as a producer as well, but Clint's acting contribution is not exactly insignificant. These are two titans of Hollywood. Arguing over who is the best is perhaps a little pointless, but I don't think you're thesis that one is clearly head and shoulders above the other holds water at all.
I don't have an issue with someone prefering Spielberg, but not sure why this has to be done by unconvincingly trying to claim that Clint is an also ran, when he's clearly also one of the top Hollywood directors.
I wish they'd go for a full redo adaptation of all her Ripley novels - there's potential for a blockbuster series here.
I believe there are several film versions of TTMR. I've wanted to see the Alain Delon one for a while. I also enjoyed Ripley's Game but found Malkovich's predictably OTT performance makes it actually a more cartoonish and less disturbing film than the Damon movie.
If you're a big Highsmith fan, did you see The Two Faces of January with Vigo Mortensen? I thought it was pretty good. It has a very similar look and feel as TTMR. I remember watching it actually and (as parts of it are set in Istanbul) comparing it to SF and wishing the Bond films could capture some of the weirdness, tension and genuine sense of danger.
Both directors are very different. I don't get the impression Eastwood is all that interested in science-fiction. His taste seems to be more fact-based dramas.
Thanks @Getafix. I did not even know about The Two Faces of January. I will check it out as soon as I can. The Delon version of TTMR is very good, if you can get over the fact that it's in French. Cinematography is beautiful, in that romantic 1960's sort of way.
Re: Malkovich in Ripley's Game - I agree that he is OTT. Unfortunately Malkovich is Malkovich - like Jack Nicholson or Christoph Waltz, he can't help chew up the scenery whenever he's on screen. I've always thought he'd be a great Bond villain for that reason.
They are different of course, but I also think there are some notable similarities between their ways of working as well. I genuinely felt that American Sniper could have been a Spielberg film. May be Spielberg would have given a slightly more nuanced view of the Iraqis in the film, but stylistically I thought there was a lot in common.
That might be because Matt Damon was trying (may be not all that successfully) to play an Afrikaner white South African (i.e. of Dutch origin) speaking English....
He definitely wasn't trying to do a British accent though, which is may be why you thought it wasn't very good.
I don't hold dodgy accents against either Craig or Damon though. Both are good actors. Not many actors can do good accents. I often think that even those who are supposedly good at it (Meryl Streep) are actually not that great. Accents are so hard to do. When somone does it well, it's really impressive.
Any way, there is a great tradition of appalling accents in Hollywood. Imagine Mary Poppins without Dick Van Dyke's dreadful 'cockney' or The Untouchables without Sean Connery (was he even trying to do an Irish accent?) - they'd be lesser films.
...or old Dickie Attenborough in Jurassic Park ;)
Both very good. American Sniper is historically totally misleading and portrays ordinary Iraqis as all 'terrorists' (even though all they're doing is resisting an occupying army), but is brilliantly made and gripping. It even changes fundamental aspects of the central character's own account of events. The only part which is true is that a man went to Iraq and shot lots of people.
I enjoyed Lincoln. Don't know enough about the history to say whether it is accurate or not, but it's a well made film, with the usual show-stealing performance from Day-Lewis.
That's an important clarification, too. Thanks.
Yes, important, as the character he is depicting, Francois Pienaar, would have spoken Afrikans as his first language, not Englihs. So Damon is portraying an Afrikaner, speaking in a language that is not supposed to be his first languauge. Quite challenging, when you think about it.
Totally agree.
Has done one in CR, putting on his tux, SF after jumping into the
Passenger carriage, and I read somewhere he looks to do it in SP.
I'm trying to think of one but so far my mind is a blank. :)
Just my view. Felt similarly about Brosnan's tie straightening thing.
Hmm, I can't think of a moment either. This group has done such a stellar job at cataloguing the many objects Dan's Bond has tossed this way and that with reckless abandon, but we've never turned all of our energies to this particular challenge.
Agreed, annoying and not cool at all.
What will the next Bond do? Check his zipper?
Seems to be going further and further down the body indeed.
De-wedge his boxers?
Maybe we should start a thread about Tom Ripley. I watched Plein Soleil, I was not impressed. Partially because French actors play American characters talking in French with French accents. Except Freddie Miles who speak French with an American accent: "Tom, voo zêtes oun sacré farçoeur" I lost it with that.
Surprise! ;)