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
GE has an emotional arc for Bond, but it is "woven" into the skeleton of a traditional bond film, meaning it shows up where the structure allows, but "the basics" are all present and correct. The World Is Not Enough is an attempt to tell a deeper story with bond, and than placing the familiar elements rather clumsily over the top. For instance, to begin with the PTS was supposed to end with Bond jumping out the window, but they quickly found that that "wasn't bond enough", so they hastily added the Thames chase on, which is why it was the longest PTS until recently.
By "the basics" I mean pulling off the elements people expect from Bond without any attempt to tell a deeper story. Goldfinger and Live And Let Die fall into this category, as while there may well be some drama, it is mostly for the purpose of creating tension, not to be genuinely emotionally affecting. It might be sad that Tilly died before she could avenge her sister Jill (or vice versa) but ultimately its supposed to be forgotten about quickly and moved onto the next set piece. Similarly Domino losing her powers is more incidental than central to bond's mission to stop Kanagas plans - more or less brushed off.
I somewhat can see what you mean about the Skyfall PTS. Him using the crane to hook the train carriage, leap inside and then check the cuffs is very bondian and inventive. I also liked the "he's keen to get home" line, the enzyme shake talk with Q in SP, and ofcourse the paloma sequence of B25. But its still just a handful of small moments sprinkled throughout a mammoth 2hr 25 minute runtime, whereas something like TND is a brisk 2 hrs and has so much bond bravado crammed in its bursting at the seams.
I'm still not quite sure how those elements of GE aren't integral to the story. You can easily argue that GE is a better Bond film and crafts specific Bondian scenes better than TWINE (I'd agree), but otherwise I'm not sure if this is simply a case where you prefer GE so are more willing to overlook that it might have more of those 'emotional elements' than you would normally claim not to want in a Bond film.
I mean, what you say about those specific films in terms of 'deeper stories' might be true, but it's all still a bit vague. I still don't know what you think the basics are of a Bond adventure, what every Bond film should fundamentally have, and how these should be done. Again, people can have very different things to say about this. Personally I'm not quite sure how different the basics of Bond are to telling a story along the lines of GE, SF, SP, NTTD, or even TWINE or DAD.
I personally believe SF's PTS is pure cinematic Bond. Not only do you have Bond chasing Patrice in varied ways (from foot, to motorbike, to a fight on a train) but you have those Bondian absurdities such as him being able to commandeer the crane (very similar to Bond hijacking a tank or taking a car from the store in TMWTGG - why would the key be in the vehicle? No one care as it's heightened reality). Honestly though, I think that film is chock full of Bond elements and is very inventive with them, whatever this may mean to someone. Silva's abandoned ghost-town island is this otherworldly (I'd say Fleming-esque) location, and the build up to his reveal with Severine feels very classic Bond. In terms of Bond himself, the film has much of Fleming's character in there (on the one hand he's a man whose vices have the potential to destroy him, he's often conflicted about his job, and even his past from the books is integrated into the story) but he also retains those flourishes of the cinematic character (his quips, his devil may care attitude, and quite frankly how awesome he can be - I remember watching SF in the cinema a few times and being on the edge of my seat when Bond gives Mallory a wink before he shoots the fire extinguisher. Fun fact, I also distinctly remember people cheering during one showing when Bond blows up his house straight after Silva destroys his Aston Martin. Just something about the Bond theme blaring and the bravado of the moment got them going I think. Anyway, for me that's pure Bondian escapism). Even some of the broad ideas like the question of Bond's place in the modern world and how Silva and him are these twisted mirror images of each other (by the way very much ideas integral to GE as well) feel fundamentally Bond to me.
I know people here have talked about other aspects of SP and NTTD they find Bondian (I dunno, could be Bond landing on a sofa after the explosion, Blofeld's base, the Cuba sequence, Matera etc.) As I implied, I don't think the fundamentals of Bond are inherently separate from things like character, and I think there's quite a lot of understanding about Bond in this way in both those films. Obviously comparing SP and NTTD to a film like TND will bring up differences. They're different Bond adventures, and even with the latter movie's fans (I love it personally) there are people - fans on here in fact - who would claim it doesn't always feel like Bond more than it does a generic 90s action movie at times. But to each their own. They're all still very much Bond films for me.
Whether one likes it or doesn't like it, I think missing things like a "Bond stare" are to reflect how the character changed.
Connery and Moore did it a lot. My favourite is in FRWL after his fight with Grant where he looks disheveled but adjusts his tie and fixes his suit.
You get the more tongue in cheek nods to it by Moore’s era with him adjusting his tie after slapping the henchman off the roof in TSWLM. Then later there’s Brosnan adjusting his tie underwater in TWINE.
The last few movies all dealt with Bond battling his doubles/dark egos or whatever; as if Blofeld being a reflection of Bond is somehow a novel idea. Even the silliest Bond movies like TMWTGG and DAD did this exact same thing, only they weren't so pretentious as to think it was deep or interesting, and the filmmakers weren't so foolish as to center the plots themselves around this idea; those movies had a ton of other stuff happening in them, too.
Babs and MGW need to rewatch the staples (GF, TSWLM, GE- something other than OHMSS) and remember what made them work: things like story, pacing, tone, and imagination, not how they treated Bond himself. Bond isn't supposed to have an arc. He didn't even have one in the novels. Just ignore modern writing conventions and go back to what worked originally. It's not like you can improve upon that formula.
Indeed. Thanks for the FRWL reminder.
The same goes for the film itself. I hope we get something that understands what makes Bond films what they are, but still feels fresh. That’s what every great Bond film does. We’ve had the Craig era (the average viewer really doesn’t dwell all that much about its flaws as we do here), and every other Bond tenure is long gone and part of that long 007 history. I certainly wouldn’t want them to simply retread anything from any of these eras, no matter what they take away from these films in spirit.
My favourite is the shot following Eve's Land Rover which passes by a line of policemen sitting on their motorbikes, who then take off in pursuit at speed one by one. There's something very tongue-in-cheek and Roger Moore about that shot to me.
Of course, the fact these stunts are done for real helps with the believability. I'm sure it's possible to kite surf a big wave, but the fact it's done with such appalling computer effects, with no genuine stunt work, I think is why it's so derided. It crosses the line into sci-fi/fantasy, where absolutely anything can happen as long as you have the software, and we just have to accept it.
The sound effects and gags are truly problematic for me. In all my decades of enjoying the RM Bonds, those problems are, by far, the most difficult for me to overcome. If I were to plug in my TMWTGG disc right now, I'd enjoy most of the film, but when the whistle happens, and JW starts doing his Henry Kissinger thing, I will be looking around to check that no one catches me watching that. I'm embarrassed; always have been.
Lol.
Whilst I do like your thirst for continuation and love of Bond.
I also see the need to rejuvenate the Bond character.
Whether Nolan is right for Bond is debate able .
At the end of the day EON have never been pressured into a corner, and likely never will be told how too make their films.
Nolan’s biggest stumbling block is his want and need for control.
Something EON are not likely to hand over.
What is interesting @Benny is that Campbell seems to suggest in his interviews that EON give you free rein to do what you want as long as they "think you're on the right track". So presumably Campbell met with their approval on his two films, as did Mendes, hence the fairly bold storytelling they were allowed to explore. So presumably EON view Nolan as being closer to Danny Boyle, too precious to accept input into his vision for the character.
I just find it bizarre that a director with the prestige of Nolan is signalling he'd be very much interested in directing the next Bond, and EON are seemingly lost for ideas and motivation. It appears, at least only on the surface, to be an obvious formula for success. Not that it's always that simple, of course, but sometimes the most obvious decisions are the most logical, e.g. hiring Brosnan in 1994.
EON do give their directors a lot of creative freedom from what I’ve read. I’ve read of people who have worked with them using words to the effect of ‘it’s like an indie movie which happens to be a big budget blockbuster’, and they seemingly approach it like this. But they are a business at the end of the day. They have to know their collaborators are going to do their job - in this case for the director to make the film they need in the best possible way. It’s no good if they have an acclaimed director who won’t play ball or isn’t giving them the best possible work (ie. Boyle).
I'm just operating on the information we have. If EON had set up a shell company by now, or there were credible industry rumours that a writer had been hired and they were waiting to make an announcement, then I could happily presume they are much further along than we know, but for the time being I have to take Barbara at her word when she says nothing is happening. EON have been known to be coy in the past, but I don't think it's wise or particularly logical to assume that's the case here on face value.
There is always the possibility that Nolan goes off to make his horror movie he keeps talking about, and then is free again to direct bond 26 for a July 2028 release date. I certainly don't think that's outside the realm of possibility, and personally I'd much prefer Nolan to Villeneuve. Nolan movies might be a bit impenetrable at times, but I still say The Dark Knight Trilogy, Prestige and Inception demonstrate a greater level of directorial showmanship than anything Villeneuve has shown us thus far.
Again, we’re really not privy to any sort of game plan with EON in regards to this. It may well be the case that not working (at least officially) on Bond 26 but instead focusing on the video game and public events is actually the smarter move. We can take all this at face value, but we don’t know if they lack direction or motivation one way or the other.
Not the greatest fan of Villeneuve either (although Prisoners is awesome) but I’m not too sold on Nolan. I think some of his usual directing decisions could clash with EON (ie. He doesn’t use 2nd Unit Teams, which Bond obviously does routinely. Honestly, even in TDK he has a tendency towards sloppy and rather confusing filmmaking the bigger the action scene, so he’d likely benefit by deferring sometimes, but he doesn’t seem to want to). I dunno, a Nolan directed Bond movie doesn’t excite me, but if that’s what we get I’ll give it the benefit of the doubt.
Who knows. Probably with more rubbish sound design though.
And a Bond who sounds like he’s garbling a mouth of marbles haha
Preferably with a lot of clanging background noise and people mumbling. I prefer not to hear all of the exposition, especially if the film is already convoluted.
From the James Bond Dossier:
Who will write Bond 26? Broccoli has said that Neal Purvis and Robert Wade are likely to be hired initially to work on the next film. Screenplays are almost always collaborative so they are unlikely to be the only writers involved. New writers are often hired to sort out specific script problems, such as dialogue or structure.
People forget the early days of the internet when people could host anything on a website without any kind of consequences, and now you say the wrong thing on twitter and you lose your job.
That's where we are with AI currently, it's a wild west - there are no rules. Taylor Swift, one of the most powerful people on the planet, has her likeness stolen for AI porn which goes viral, how can this continue? Eventually there will be lawsuits, and new rules will have to be made, and hopefully, people will start to value things made by humans for their own sake - because humans actually experience things firsthand, which AI can't.