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
But LTK had a bit of Thunderball's flavor.
Don't forget about the sharks. 😉 And a guy named Felix.
You mean the charcarodon charcariases? ;)
To me, it felt more Graham Greene, particularly the Felix scenes.
Underwater scenes too.
They could've, alternatively, had Bond shoot Mitchell through the gunbarrel, like this:
Very much so, yeah; 'that's why they eat the peppers'!
Yeah, I guess I kind of just don't know why that would happen there, but it would work, certainly.
There are palm trees, underwater scenes and sharks in TSWLM too. Not a guy named Felix but a clear reference to Tracy. So LTK has a TSWLM flavor too? We're grasping at straws here.
Engaging goes nowhere.
Sorry, I normally just ignore but I guess I'm just a bit tired tonight. I won't say any more.
Wow, you're right! And they took story elements from the same book, no less. So yes, LTK and LALD are positively tied. ;-)
They are very much tied. They both have an action scene containing large driving vehicles, an action scene containing planes, an action scene on water and has drug traffic as an important element in the plot. They both are exclusively set in North America with a fictitious country involved. They are veeery different in tone though... :P
It looks cool. That's enough for me. I used to be very rigid about how the gunbarrel is used, but these days I welcome experimentation.
You may be tired @mtm , but their schtick is getting tiresome and you nailed it, lol….
But the similarities end there for the most part.
Nothing is more Bondian than underwater stuff , that's my point.
That and ski chases.
Also, an inventive chase scene whether foot or vehicular, that looks different from other action films, is another Bondian thing.
Couldn't agree more mate.
I hope the next film has a snowy sequence. It always adds tension for some reason
I'm not inaccurate. Period.
I don't know which movie is hated here. TB or LTK? Because I don't undestand the controversy.
Yeah, It's the same with the underwater stuff. It's pretty Bondian.
I think the big snowscape instantly shows you that Bond is isolated in a hostile alien environment far removed from the everyday lives of many of us - it's just incredibly visual. One of the most important aspects of these stories is, as Joseph Campbell puts it, "A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder", and the big, empty snowscape is a great contrast to M's cosy office in London (the ordinary world) where Bond recieves his mission. It's really easy to see in longshots that Bond is alone and being chased by a pursuing team that outnumbers him, and again, that's great, is shows the audience what it needs to know without having to resort to dialogue.
The other reason it is so Bondian is that it's incredibly expensive and difficult to shoot in big snow, what with the isolation, the cold, and the fact you want your snow looking virginal until your characters mark it - you do not want visible tracks from the camera crew and the stunt team. I don't think many productions have the time or money to do it well, the whole thing must be a nightmare.
He wouldn't be running an arms group but he would've been a double 0 when Bond was starting out
Bond going up against a former agent.
It’s not a bad idea, and it does have scope.
Wow, that’s interesting. Had no idea they were circling Campbell, or at least considering him very early on… Well, each project is different and each recast is different. I think we fans seek patterns, when in reality, if there are any, most would be coincidental.
B26 will follow the route it needs to follow and I doubt that EoN and partners are worried about how they moved on from Pierce Brosnan.
They’re moving on from a different actor who, no matter what some want to believe, ended up being a very popular choice (probably the most consistently loved Bond since Connery). From a story perspective, they also gave the Craig Era a complete beginning, middle and end (literally); we saw him as a youngish novice, full of arrogance, who developed into middle age and then into a retired father figure who sacrificed his life for his family… They covered significant character ground, which is something that was never really explored with James Bond before (outside of his shortly lived marriage).
They have to now figure out what kind of story they will develop for the new person— whoever he may be. The audience expects some kind of depth, but the previous guy covered a lot of interesting ground.
They need to give some meat to the role (not only do audiences expect it now, but I’m sure the next actor will as well), without repeating what came in the last 15 years…
I’m one of the ones who is no rush and would rather they get the story right first (whether I’ll like the story or not is a moot point; they need to figure out the story they want to tell and tell it as best as they can, while also giving a worldwide audience what they expect out of a Bond picture)…
I’m worried about Amazon’s influence. EON may be okay taking time to figure out the direction of the series, but Amazon probably won’t be as lenient. I can imagine that if EON are still in the same boat two years from now, that won’t please Amazon very much. They’ve spent $8.5 Billion Dollars in acquiring MGM, and the whispers seem to indicate they mainly did that to acquire the Bond series. There’s only so many seasons of “007 - Road to a Million” they’re willing to green light before they want to see a real return on their investment. I can definitely imagine Amazon getting impatient with the perceived lack of progress, and forcing their way into EON’s creative process as a means of speeding things up. I’m also quite nervous that we’ll potentially get more of the “studio interference” that plagued the Brosnan years.
And Amazon bought MGM not for Bond, but for the ENTIRE library! Bond, and anything else they can reimagine, reboot and remake is the cherry on the top. But it’s the ENTIRE catalogue/library that made this deal worth making, so I’m not sure what news you heard?
If you got rid of the mobile phones in Casino Royale, I'd say much of that movie is very retro too. I really liked that whole vibe.
I think all four of the Daniel Crag James Bond movies have a muted timeless feel. I appreciated that.