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
I'll admit, the romantic lines in the Craig Era felt flowery, everytime they're making those dialogues very romantic for Craig's Bond, it comes off as strange and crude.
Those dialogues with Vesper, and also with Madeleine.
As much as the chemistry between Craig and Green was strong, their dialogues especially that 'little finger line' also stood out to me, and yes, that 'armour' too, it's too much frolicking trying too hard to be emotional.
Also Bond's dialogues with Madeleine too, especially in the third act scene in Norway, when they've met again.
I'm not that much anchored in their lines, or to say, invested by those.
I think those too much frolicky, flowery words started with The World Is Not Enough, some of the dialogues between Bond and Elektra are at some point, a bit flowery too, then it went ultimately down in DAD, then continued until CR.
I think it's one of those reasons why the romance of Bond and Tracy really worked, their dialogues were great and compelling, I'm invested in the way they talked to each other.
It's not trying hard tp be flowery and complex, it's just written as a way for them to deal with each other, there's a romantic and sexual tension in their dialogues.
As @SIS_HQ said, the closest I can think of is TWINE. But even that's not quite as flowery as a lot of CR's lines. Most of the awkwardness I put down to Brosnan's acting and the direction.
I know that one of P&W's quirks is that they can be a bit over descriptive in their scripts. If I recall correctly they did most of the writing on CR, with Paul Haggis contributing mainly to the climax and other bits and pieces too. If I'm honest, Haggis' dialogue has tinges of that unnaturalness too from his other works.
It may well have been a case where had a different writer been enlisted for redrafts some of the dialogue would have been reworked and polished up. Can't say for sure though obviously. But yes, as enjoyable as it is it's not the wittiest Bond script.
It might be Haggis; it might be some other uncredited writer we've never even heard of who did some dialogue polishing, I think that happens a bit with movies- the names of the script doctors are kept quiet.
Again I don't think the direction and Brosnan's acting help, but I did find a scene like the one in which Bond confronts Elektra ("he knew about my shoulder, he knew where to hurt me") to be a wee bit overdramatic and soap opera-esque. Still not like the problems with CR's dialogue but closest I can think of. Very strange.
On a slightly unrelated note, one of the problems I've always had with TWINE's dialogue is its inability to make its own fantasy seem in any way realistic in the context of the film. Stuff like Dr. Warmflash's explanation about how the bullet in Renard's brain gives him superhuman strength just feels like it's complete bulls*it. Which is a shame because the concept of an anarchist dying from such a thing is so interesting and had it been done in the Craig era probably could have been handled better.
I do hope the next era is able to hone that mixture of such 'out of the box' concepts while also feeling plausible.
The bullet in Renard’s brain came from Stamper from TND originally. It even made it into Raymond Benson’s novelization. So it seems it was planned for a while honestly.
As for CR’s dialogue not being witty enough, I don’t think it was meant to as witty as we’re use too. Remember, Martin Campbell also tried to get P & W fired from CR. That could have been one of the main reasons. They also look at the most recent science magazines for their ideas in the villains and gadgets departments. Not the worst source, but it seems to be getting stale.
I actually don't mind the Renard thing: it doesn't really go anywhere, but it is in that Fleming wheelhouse of slightly pervy twisted physical problems. But I agree the 'he can push himself, harder, faster' stuff is slightly out of step with that and almost feels like someone from the studio or something has said 'oh can that make him superstrong to add a bit more threat?'- feels a bit chucked-in-on-top.
Electra even has a physical deformity, which is very Fleming: he would usually find a way to make his heroines imperfect in some way.
I still say the plot to TWINE is rather thrilling and felt like a real shock as a Bond fan at the time: stuff like MI6 being attacked, Bond getting injured or M being kidnapped just never happened and really stirred the slightly staid formula up a bit. Seeing these characters in new situations is exciting. It didn't quite come together as a great film, and dialogue is missing that Bond sparkle, but I do think part of that lies with the direction too.
I think LTK is another one where the story is actually really nicely done in a few places, and I rate it higher than I rate the finished film.
Never knew that. Very interesting.
I might be in the minority but I think it's a great idea done very badly. Cut the "the bullet makes him feel no pain and gives him superhuman strength" aspect and you're left with a man who could die at any moment. For a terrorist like Renard who is all about chaos and 'living in the moment' no matter the cost it's definitely a blow and gives him a sense of tragedy.
I do think Robert Carlyle was badly miscast in that film though. One gets the sense the script is attempting to set up Renard as this charismatic, even good looking (albeit very dangerous) man. More along the lines of Javiar Bardem as Silva in SF (a very similar character in a sense, and actually I believe Bardem was considered for the role). Carlyle is a great character actor and can play creepy, unpredictable sorts, but it's difficult picturing him as this extraordinary, even seductive terrorist.
Very true. Despite how interesting it is, it just doesn't quite work and even fails very badly for me. It's interesting to think about a better version of that film, but that said I think its failure led to them 'reattempting' these things with SF (it shares so many plot similarities) which I'm thankful for.
No one seems to have seen P & W's QOS script, but from what they themselves have said, it included allowing Mr. White to escape so that Bond could follow him and infiltrate Quantum in an attempt to find Yusef. Which he did - followed by an extensive sequence where Bond indulged in some prolonged torture of him! Marc Forster basically went 'nah' and got on the phone to Haggis... Not sure why Forster succeeded in getting P & W dropped where Campbell had failed.
Yeah I can't disagree: he's an excellent actor but he just doesn't make much impact in that film. He's almost a bit too tragic and pathetic, in the classical sense of the word. If you imagine Bardem playing him it does rather come alive.
That's a good point, yes. Despite all of the interesting and fresh ideas in it, TWINE somehow combines to be lesser than the sum of its parts and I find it surprisingly dull. I'm glad they tried again with SF, where it worked much better and became one of the very best Bond movies for my money.
Which question?
Sounds very much like something from 24. Yes, it's good that they went a different direction (although I'd argue that QOS could have done with another writer, had there been the opportunity). And to be fair it doesn't sound as much like P&W were dropped but more that Haggis was brought on to do extensive rewrites with a tighter schedule.
A young Bardem would have brought that character to life a bit more, certainly. But I'm glad we got an older Bardem as Silva. Perhaps he was always destined to be a Bond villain. Can't really imagine anyone else doing Renard justice (Jean Reno was also considered, but I don't think even he quite has those same seductive qualities as Bardem).
Also, I think the question (not that it was necessarily a question) was the thing about us not seeing Robert Brown's M's house from a page or two ago.
I think that LTK and TWINE were lesser received at their times for trying something different. Now EON has been copying from them for awhile now. With people seemingly liking it. TWINE is like Jeffery Deaver with Carte Blanche. They were my first time being exposed to film and literary Bond. I’ll always stand by them for trying something different, while making them modern for their time. Namely main female villains. I do understand people’s frustrations with them though. But I’ll always have a soft spot for them.
Yeah just reading through its entry in Some Kind of Hero it doesn't sound like P&W were dropped, just the usual part of the process where the script passes through different writers. It sounds like quite a lot of the film was in their first version, albeit with some scenes in a different order. Seems like Haggis added a lot of the themes, which the film is actually fairly rich in, even though the script is unfinished.
I quite like his idea that Vesper would have betrayed Bond because she had a child who Quantum were threatening, but I do think the problem there is that she killed herself when they still had her kid; which I'm not sure really works when you then try to make out she was a mother protecting her child.
Reno is an interesting thought I guess: I can see him being quite good in it but yeah, even though he's charismatic I don't know if he's charismatic in the Bond villain sense. I'm certainly glad we got Bardem as Silva (what I find quite funny is that the baddie in the early versions of the Skyfall script was literally named 'Javier Bardem' :D )
I think all the ideas were good and fresh, it just didn't turn out as being a great film. I guess sometimes it just works that way. The lack of a female villain since is kind of bizarre I think.
TWINE on the other hand was an utter mess. Despite trying to give us a female Bond villain, as a whole it failed to give the audience that.
Elektra was a bad girl, but in the end Renard was the bad guy Bond had to defeat.
Despite several attempts, Bond has never gone toe to toe with a true female threat.
Never knew that! I suppose it makes sense considering he seems to have been on EON's radar before No Country. Only thing that's ever so slightly odd is getting a Spanish actor to play a former MI6 agent. I always assumed Bardem was considered/cast after the script was written and the character's real name/alias was adjusted for his nationality.
A Renard played by Bardem would have been interesting in the sense that he would have been a younger man in his peak with what is essentially an inevitable death sentence, almost like a terminal illness. It may have hammered home that tragic element of the character more. Regardless I think he would have brought that similar gleeful, almost trickster-like spark that he did with Silva. Wonderfully charismatic actor.
It'd be nice to get a proper female villain who's not a side character or trying to seduce/deceive Bond. It could also be very interesting seeing Bond go up against a villain who's a woman in terms of how it might play slightly differently than him going up against a man in certain respects.
I like the sniper idea though, and I can see Bond going head to head with a female assassin not unlike the movie Scaramanga. Actually I can see something like the scene in TMWTGG novel where Bond has to kill Scramanga, is tricked by him, and shot with a poison dart working with a female villain. It's an ever so slightly different dynamic seeing Bond having to kill a woman in that setting, and it brings something fresh to his hesitancy.
I’d like a physically active Irma Bunt in the future. Make her more distant from OHMSS.
I think Rosa Klebb was the closest thing we could ever had.
Especially the fight in the hotel with she disguised as a chambermaid.
Heck, in the novel she actually manages to strike Bond with her poisoned tip knife.
Possibly one of the reasons may have been the Writer's Guild that they are (or were) a part of. They couldn't do the rewrites needed to help QOS out. Another reason I think they need to go is the unnecessary (and poor) character plot twists. It's happened on EVERYONE of their movies. The only times it worked was in TWINE with Elektra King being the main villain and SF, with Eve into Moneypenny.
He knew about my SHOULDer. He knew where to HURT me.
It's the delivery that's bad.
The miracles of the pause button.
What's poor about them? I can't see why, say, Frost turning out to be a baddie is worse than Kristatos, for example. I'm not sure Moneypenny is really a plot twist at all.