In time, will SP be more or less appreciated?

17810121351

Comments

  • edited March 2016 Posts: 12,837
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Backed them into a corner with what to do, wish she had just been another Bond girl instead of one that magically falls in love with Bond out of the blue.

    That's why I've always said, right from the initial leaks, that SP was written as Craig's last. I'm sure EON will want him back (it's just easier more than anything else, to shell out for the established draw and delay the risk of the next actor flopping), and maybe Craig himself will fancy another one (I think with the reception SP got, this is more likely, maybe he'll want to finish the franchise with the amount of critical acclaim he got from SF and CR), but I think it's clear that it was written as his final film. The callbacks to previous Craig films and the ending make this clear. Because as you've said, they've backed themselves into a corner. Their only real options are to either write her out with just a few throwaway lines and have Bond on a new, perhaps Blofeldless mission (making SP look like a joke) or kill her off, essentially retreading Vesper just a few films later. I doubt this was something that the writers really wanted. I bet they've planned for the possibility of a fifth Craig film but from the script, and comments of those involved in production (like the costume designer), I think it's pretty clear that SP was produced as Craig's swansong. I think the mixed reception of SP also makes a fifth Craig film a little less likely as they have backed them self into a corner and I don't think that the majority of audience members will be thrilled to see a continuation of that storyline. I'm honestly not sure what's going to happen. EON will without a doubt Craig back if they can as he's a big money maker and they seem to really like him, but will he want to return? And will they really want to continue the story of SP after the reception it got? They more or less completely dropped the Quantum storyline in favour of the more fan friendly Blofeld/SPECTRE, so I am wondering if they're not at least considering doing the same here. But doing that would mean a reboot with a new actor, and will EON want to do that if Craig does decide he'd like to make another one? Lots of different factors at play here I think. It'll be very interesting to see whether DC returns or not. But anyway, enough rambling, my point was that I think SP was written as his last.


    @bondjames I didn't really have a problem with the SP theme at first, I thought the somber tone fit the film quite well. But the more I listen to it the worse it becomes, the lyrics are about as far from Bondanian as you can get and Sam Smith's comments about it really got on my nerves. Can't believe it won the Oscar. I wouldn't say it's the worst Bond theme, it's not down there with DAD and AWTD (Jack White what were you thinking?), it still has a decent melody and I do like the general moodiness of it. But the falsetto parts and the lyrics just aren't James Bond to me, at all.

    doubleoego wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    However I will defend to my grave that the third act, compared to the two prior, is a big let down. I don't think the film required another action set piece, and in my opinion the love story was rushed, with poor dialogue. What could have been a near perfect 2hr movie, becomes a 2hr 20min merely excellent one.
    I can agree with that. I'm personally not a fan of anything after 'ball buster', except of course for the incredible "Bond, James Bond" ending.

    Having said that, I'm not sure how else they really could have done the 'love' story and I'm glad they focused on the casino parts rather than overdoing time with the romance angle, because that's what makes CR so special (the casino scenes imho).

    I agree. They clearly focused the majority of effort to make sure the Casino scenes worked, and that's why the later scenes with Bond and Vesper alone, with nothing in the way of plot or objective to support them, seemed more like an afterthought. I honestly don't think the collapsing house set piece adds anything to the film other than serve as a set up to an overly melodramatic death scene. I recognise the thematic importance of Vesper's death in solidifying Bond's character, but once the main plot is sorted with you cannot simply coast on a burgeoning relationship. I think there is a touch of self-indulgence in the storytelling, perhaps treating the material with slightly more reverence than it deserves. IMO streamlining the third act and making a few choice edits elsewhere (that parkour chase is simply too long to be convincingly plausible) would help to truly earn CR the reputation it currently enjoys.
    I think I agree with you on the third act. It did have a touch of self indulgence to it & it could have been a little tighter at the end without the building theatrics. However, this probably translates better on screen than the novel ending, and general fans normally demand and expect a big finale (keeping in mind this was the first Bond film in 4 years and since DAD) so they probably really had no choice. It's a no-win situation really.


    This is the type of exceptionalism I'm talking about. This is exactly why CR has the 'gold dust' reputation it does. seventy-five percent of any great work is perceived in the work itself (i.e. it is quantifiable), the other twenty-five percent is conceived in the mind of the viewer. Once a film, book, album whatever reaches the threshold of seventy-five percent, the brain will change it's reality so it can achieve the rest. This comes from our built in instinct to see value in things, and our tendency to overestimate value in order to remain optimistic about our prospects of survival. Problem is, this makes ascertaining the 'actual value' of content (i.e being objective) rather than it's perceived value (groupthink) difficult. Part of the issue is that often something which, in isolation, would be considered 'weak' is excused due to it's relationship with the surrounding material. This is why any perceived issues the content does have are downplayed as being 'superficial'.
    Wow. That went over my head, despite a couple of reads. I believe you are referring to a cognitive bias, rather than 'exceptionalism'. Yes, you are correct, there is a bias which leads to people overpraising certain things, and underpraising other things. Hot buttons if you like, which can turn off someone or impress someone beyond reasonableness. Marketers rely on this, as do politicians, film makers, salespeople and scriptwriters.

    Regarding the Venice part of the film, I'm really not too keen on it and truth be told, if it wasn't in the film, I'd probably watch CR much more than I do, because it does bring me down quite a bit. However as I said, I believe EON made the right decision here, for box office reasons and for general audience expectations reasons. They needed Vesper's death to resonate emotionally on film, and the way they went about it does (too much for me actually).

    I understand why they did it & I'm sure some liked that part, although it was indeed heavy on the emotions.

    Interestingly, they were able to make an entire follow up film partly based on the impact of that death.

    The exceptionalism I spoke of was to do with the fact that people will forgive laziness in CR, or FRWL that they wouldn't forgive in DAF or MR. So people make an exception, and don't mark CR down for it. They make excuses for a film they WANT to be a masterpeice, thus it becomes a masterpeice because they ignore the negatives.

    The funny thing is, that's the way I view most people here and most Bond fans in general. I think it was maybe 2 years ago in one thread when I mentioned that, yes I'm a fan of the movies and a life long Bond fan but honestly speaking, and speaking for myself here the Bond films overall are in general quite average and it's something I still stand by. The history, the bygone eras, certain interesting elements contribute to making the series what it is and you get people that without a doubt do indeed make excuses for these films in general to want and validate how great the series we've spent our entire lives so far watching is.

    It's called being a fan, for Fleming's sake. And most of us don't need to make excuses to see how great the franchise is. It's quite obviously done great things with great talent on board for over half a century. If it was a rubbish product, it wouldn't have lasted a tenth as long.

    A majority of the Bond films have a depth, complexity and relevancy that is fruitful to the eye if you only open them and see. I certainly won't stand to see these films relegated to such a low level in the cinematic pantheon.

    I can see where @doubleoego is coming from. Most of the films objectively speaking are probably quite average from a film making (in terms of cinematography and all the rest of it) and writing POV, and the majority of them are not complex or deep at all (I mean even going back to the start that's true, as well made as the early Connery Bonds are, there's zero depth there. Bond turns up, saves the world, gets the girl, the end).

    BUT not everything has to be complex or deep. Not everything has to be a piece of art or a masterpiece. I've loved James Bond for nearly all my life (it's bordering on 30 years since I saw my first Bond film). And that's because I've gotten more enjoyment out of the series than any other. And at the end of the day isn't the reason we watch films to be entertained? Whether he's starring in a character piece that breaks down why he is who he is or an OTT blockbuster where he drives a sports car into the sea and it turns into a submarine, you can't deny that Bond is always entertaining. I watch films to be entertained and the Bond films do that better than any others for me. Other action flicks are frequently producing better action scenes for sure, and there are definitely better thrillers, dramas, etc than what's on offer in the Bond films. But I don't really care about that. I enjoy watching my childhood hero doing what he does best with more style than anyone else. The Bond films are unique. While it's probably true that there's nothing especially exceptional about most of them, the unique formula is something I'll never get tired of watching. The action, adventure, cars, girls, glamour, exotic locations, the theme songs, the suave sophisticated hard faced hard drinking badass at the center of it all, the man that every bloke has probably wished they were at some point in their lifetime. Other films have some of these ingredients and a lot of other films do the individual ingredients better but you can't beat the unique cocktail of ingredients that makes a Bond film a Bond film imo.

    So yeah the films are probably quite average but it's still my favourite franchise because I have more fun watching them than any other. SP was a testament to this. All these years later and I'm still being blown away by the new Bond film (SP is now my favourite, it's at least tied with LTK for me). Was SP the best film of 2015? Probably not. But it's definitely the one I enjoyed the most. And that can be applied to Bond as a whole for me.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Was SP the best film of 2015? Probably not. But it's definitely the one I enjoyed the most. And that can be applied to Bond as a whole for me.
    Are you me? Or just taking the time to write what I think? Is it a mutant power...?
    =))
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited March 2016 Posts: 4,399
    You misunderstand me, sir. I was using CR as an example, a film I happen to think is overrated. The same rule applies to FRWL which I love. I am not using my logic to prove anything other than a simple law of human nature. That law states that, you are more likely to trust your deepest friend over a complete stranger, even if they were to tell you the exact same thing.

    yes, it's called the herd mentality... i know all about it.
    There is a groupthink which tells us that DAD is a PoS and CR is the second coming. This is written into culture, I did not put it there myself. As soon as you begin to swim against the tide of popular opinion, you will be met with a resistance, which, however slightly, is greater than the degree to which you are wrong. Again this can vary, but provided you have a valid point, chances are some people will disregard it unfairly. This is because there is safety in numbers, and no matter how much what you say makes objective sense, people feel more comfortable to stay with the majority.

    or DAD might just be a p.o.s?? lol

    i think what my real problem is with what your suggesting with CR, is that you believe if it wasn't for this "herd mentality" on this forum - that that film wouldn't be ranked as high as it is (which would in theory, prove your point).... meaning that you believe the majority of us simply go with the flow with our opinions of it, so we avoid being the odd man out.... i respect that you believe that - but i think thats a load of BS..... sorry..

    I have seen plenty - PLENTY on these boards that don't rank that film as high as some others.... just because the majority of us do doesn't mean we are merely trying to "fit in"..... or that we are all some collective hive mind... and i can only speak for myself - but i don't shame someone if they don't fall in line with what i think (i know others get off on that).. but i don't - and a lot of us more level headed folk around here don't either..

    again, i don't disagree about herd mentality in general - but using it to explain away CR's popularity here (because you have a differing opinion on it) is nonsense, and coming from a skewed/bias motive - not an objective one.....

    but it's hard to prove that, since it's not something tangible - it's like trying to prove a negative... and i really am in no mood to go around in circles on this - because that's all we'd be doing lol.

    so - agree to disagree.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited March 2016 Posts: 11,139

    I can see where @doubleoego is coming from. Most of the films objectively speaking are probably quite average from a film making (in terms of cinematography and all the rest of it) and writing POV, and the majority of them are not complex or deep at all (I mean even going back to the start that's true, as well made as the early Connery Bonds are, there's zero depth there. Bond turns up, saves the world, gets the girl, the end).

    BUT not everything has to be complex or deep. Not everything has to be a piece of art or a masterpiece. I've loved James Bond for nearly all my life (it's bordering on 30 years since I saw my first Bond film). And that's because I've gotten more enjoyment out of the series than any other. And at the end of the day isn't the reason we watch films to be entertained? Whether he's starring in a character piece that breaks down why he is who he is or an OTT blockbuster where he drives a sports car into the sea and it turns into a submarine, you can't deny that Bond is always entertaining. I watch films to be entertained and the Bond films do that better than any others for me. Other action flicks are frequently producing better action scenes for sure, and there are definitely better thrillers, dramas, etc than what's on offer in the Bond films. But I don't really care about that. I enjoy watching my childhood hero doing what he does best with more style than anyone else. The Bond films are unique. While it's probably true that there's nothing especially exceptional about most of them, the unique formula is something I'll never get tired of watching. The action, adventure, cars, girls, glamour, exotic locations, the theme songs, the suave sophisticated hard faced hard drinking badass at the center of it all, the man that every bloke has probably wished they were at some point in their lifetime. Other films have some of these ingredients and a lot of other films do the individual ingredients better but you can't beat the unique cocktail of ingredients that makes a Bond film a Bond film imo.

    So yeah the films are probably quite average but it's still my favourite franchise because I have more fun watching them than any other. SP was a testament to this. All these years later and I'm still being blown away by the new Bond film (SP is now my favourite, it's at least tied with LTK for me). Was SP the best film of 2015? Probably not. But it's definitely the one I enjoyed the most. And that can be applied to Bond as a whole for me.

    Thanks you! You saved me a whole lot of time there. I'd first like tto say I never said tge Bind films were a "rubbish product" those arebt my words.
    Secondly I even said I've been a fan all my life so far. These films are entertaining which is why I'm a fan but I'm not blind neither and to me the series isn't a collection of masterpieces with the odd misstep here and there as some fans believe them to be. The films, everything Bond are nonsense admittedly so by Fleming himself albeit entertaining nonsense and as far as I'm concerned with a handful of really good films in an otherwise overall average collection I'm a massive fan.
  • Are Bond films average? Maybe. (They have an average 71% rating on RT) But they are far better than all of that action drivel out there.

    Die Hard's doing great people tell me.
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    Posts: 1,984
    DAF is hilarious.

    Bond movies aren't meant to be Oscar productions or Hitchcock films. But there's a reason why they've lasted so long and adapted so many times. Think of another franchise with that level of adaptability.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Bond will outlive all of us ! :))
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    DAF is awful, it lacks any mence. Connery look like a caricature of a Vegas 2nd hand car dealer. The worst Connery film, and one of the worst films in the series.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    DAF is awful, it lacks any mence. Connery look like a caricature of a Vegas 2nd hand car dealer. The worst Connery film, and one of the worst films in the series.

    Did you mean menace?

    Thinking about it, DAF is a comedy, it's that simple. Sometimes a dark comedy (Wint & Kidd), sometimes slapstick, sometimes outright funny.

    Could DAF be called a cult classic?
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Watching OHMSS really highlights just how creatively stumped the current crop of Bond writers are; based on Fleming or not.

    34 minutes into OHMSS we have Tracy going from disliking Bond to secretly having feelings for him and then being full blown in love caithness him and all done credibly...and that's within 34 minutes. The Bond/Swann relationship induces eye rolling from me and I think it really hurts the film given what we the audience are expected to take from their relationship. Oh well back to watching OHMSS.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    DAF is awful, it lacks any mence. Connery look like a caricature of a Vegas 2nd hand car dealer. The worst Connery film, and one of the worst films in the series.

    Did you mean menace?

    Thinking about it, DAF is a comedy, it's that simple. Sometimes a dark comedy (Wint & Kidd), sometimes slapstick, sometimes outright funny.

    Could DAF be called a cult classic?

    I think it is quickly earning a cult status among Bond fans. It's such a unique film, there really is nothing else like it in the franchise. I don't consider Moore era comedy to be anything like the same as DAF is, although there is a few moments of overlap (the comedy sheriff, for instance.) I think DAF is the only 'dark comedy' in the series, with some silliness thrown in. The Moore era is very rarely dark and funny at the same time. 'Wint and Kidd' are an example of this from DAF, menacing and hilarious simultaneously. Those are some underrated henchmen.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    The relationship between Bond is just not convincing. Not really Craig or Seydoux's fault, its the script doesn't convey it effectively at all we are supposed to believe she fell in love with him?

    I know some don't like the venice climax ( I love it) but the convincing element of Craig's grief and anger coupled with the betrayal of Vesper and dealing with her loss. In that scene I believe it and far more convincing than anything in SPECTRE.

    OHMSS is a masterclass in writing Bond, Maibaum with polishes has never been better.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Shardlake wrote: »
    The relationship between Bond is just not convincing. Not really Craig or Seydoux's fault, its the script doesn't convey it effectively at all we are supposed to believe she fell in love with him?

    I know some don't like the venice climax ( I love it) but the convincing element of Craig's grief and anger coupled with the betrayal of Vesper and dealing with her loss. In that scene I believe it and far more convincing than anything in SPECTRE.

    OHMSS is a masterclass in writing Bond, Maibaum with polishes has never been better.

    This multiplied by a million.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited March 2016 Posts: 9,020
    Shardlake wrote: »
    The relationship between Bond is just not convincing. Not really Craig or Seydoux's fault, its the script doesn't convey it effectively at all we are supposed to believe she fell in love with him?

    I know some don't like the venice climax ( I love it) but the convincing element of Craig's grief and anger coupled with the betrayal of Vesper and dealing with her loss. In that scene I believe it and far more convincing than anything in SPECTRE.

    OHMSS is a masterclass in writing Bond, Maibaum with polishes has never been better.

    The Venice climax is so thrilling and wonderfully shot. And it's Venice!
    I always loved it, and I cried bitter tears over Vesper's death. One of the best moments in the whole franchise together with Tracy's death.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I just assume, some more romantic scenes took place away from the cameras. As an
    audience I don't think we have to be spoon fed every detail.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,195
    RC7 wrote: »
    As a package CR is superior to every other Craig entry by some distance IMO.

    Yes! Which is why they should bring Campbell and Arnold back for Daniel's Swann song. ;)

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    More romantic scenes took place off screen in SP? LOL I don't think so. What we saw was what we got and we saw was terribly executed.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I must have a word with the execution branch. :D
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,713
    I enjoyed SP, but I didn't buy the relationship between Bond and Madeleine at all. Heck, 'John Wick' had a more credible romance between Keanu Reeves and his wife, despite the actress having not more than 90 seconds of screentime in the whole film.
  • edited March 2016 Posts: 11,189
    I love Swann, but I have to agree with others and say that she comes off more like a short-term fling for Bond rather than a serious romantic interest.

    I'm choosing to interpret the "I love you" line as a result of the terror she was witnessing.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    DAF is awful, it lacks any mence. Connery look like a caricature of a Vegas 2nd hand car dealer. The worst Connery film, and one of the worst films in the series.

    Did you mean menace?

    Thinking about it, DAF is a comedy, it's that simple. Sometimes a dark comedy (Wint & Kidd), sometimes slapstick, sometimes outright funny.

    Could DAF be called a cult classic?

    Yes, I meant menace. I don't think of DAF as darky comic, it's camp, it's fat Elvis in a jumpsuit, it's gaudy.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited March 2016 Posts: 17,789
    I enjoyed SP, but I didn't buy the relationship between Bond and Madeleine at all.
    Bond had a shot at a traditional romance with Vesper, and it didn't work out. Time for a good old asymmetrical courtship. It could work.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I think off screen he showed her a few photos of him in his blue swimming shorts,
    And it was love at first sight for Madeline. :D
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    I just assume, some more romantic scenes took place away from the cameras. As an
    audience I don't think we have to be spoon fed every detail.

    There's being spoon fed and there's having to write the script yourself.

    If I have to spend hours imagining scenes of Bond and Madeline going mountain biking or to see Mamma Mia together to make the relationship credible then you've failed as a director and a scriptwriter.

    Same goes for trying to make sense of the relationship between Quantum and SPECTRE and how the ring links everything. A throwaway line here and there and a 3 second shot of Q doing some sort of chemical scan doesn't really fill in all the holes for me.

    Just a thought Sam but maybe think about that next time you're pretentiously spending 5 minutes of screen time following Bond walking up the street and into a hotel room or blowing up half the budget just to get yourself on Record Breakers with Roy Castle & Norris Mcwhirter?
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384

    @TheWizardofIce
    "There's being spoon fed and there's having to write the script yourself" :))
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    [
    ...imagining scenes of Bond and Madeline going mountain biking or to see Mamma Mia together ...

    =)) That just made my day =))
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    i neither like nor dislike DAF... it is without a doubt the weakest film out of Connery's 6.... he looked as if he couldn't be bothered for an effort.. and Tiffany Case, while a knockout in the looks department, goes from a sassy, in control woman at the start - to a helpless annoying mess by the end.... there are some fun moments in this - as i said, i still get enjoyment out of watching it - it's a guilty pleasure for sure... but it's certainly in the lesser tier of Bond films IMO - right next to films like TWINE, AVTAK and MR..... the only redeeming aspects of this movie are Shirley Bassey's opening song (which is my personal favorite).. and Barry's score (which is among one of his best - IMO, 2nd only to OHMSS).
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited March 2016 Posts: 8,195
    A lot of people comment that Connery looks like he's having fun again in DAF; maybe he is but his appearance shows contempt for the character and the fans. There is no reason, with a reasonable amount of effort, that he could not have looked just about the same as in Thunderball. This was for a (fat) paycheck
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    HASEROT wrote: »
    i neither like nor dislike DAF... it is without a doubt the weakest film out of Connery's 6.... he looked as if he couldn't be bothered for an effort.. and Tiffany Case, while a knockout in the looks department, goes from a sassy, in control woman at the start - to a helpless annoying mess by the end.... there are some fun moments in this - as i said, i still get enjoyment out of watching it - it's a guilty pleasure for sure... but it's certainly in the lesser tier of Bond films IMO - right next to films like TWINE, AVTAK and MR..... the only redeeming aspects of this movie are Shirley Bassey's opening song (which is my personal favorite).. and Barry's score (which is among one of his best - IMO, 2nd only to OHMSS).

    But, but...... :((
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    talos7 wrote: »
    A lot of people comment that Connery looks like he's having fun again in DAF; maybe he is but his appearance shows contempt for the character and the fans. There is no reason, with a reasonable amount of effort, that he could not have looked just about the same as in Thunderball. This was for a (fat) paycheck

    Connery is a shadow of himself in DAF. Unbelievable if you think that it's only 4 years after YOLT.
    If DAF had been a OHMSS style movie, Connery's lackluster performance and looks would have been a disaster of gigantic proportions. But as DAF is pure comedy bordering on parody at times, it didn't matter that much and the movie can be seen as pure camp fun.
Sign In or Register to comment.