In time, will SP be more or less appreciated?

1262729313251

Comments

  • Posts: 7,653
    Apparently Purvis and Wade are writing the new Bond film.
    Ugh. Back to mediocre screenwriting.

    I'd rather gave that than poor directing which has been the bane of the last two movies.

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    40 years on, this iss probably forgotten
  • SaintMark wrote: »
    Apparently Purvis and Wade are writing the new Bond film.
    Ugh. Back to mediocre screenwriting.

    I'd rather gave that than poor directing which has been the bane of the last two movies.

    So you'd rather start with a bad story?

    OK
  • Posts: 11,425
    I agree that a good director is probably more important, in that they can make something decent even out of a mediocre script. But give a bad director a quality screenplay and they'll probably produce rubbish.

    Ideally we'd have good writing and good directing tho.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
  • edited March 2017 Posts: 11,425
    No it starts with the script. Worry about the director later.

    to-make-a-great-film-need-three-things-the-script-the-script-and-the-script.jpg

    quote-with-a-good-script-a-good-director-can-produce-a-masterpiece-with-the-same-script-a-mediocre-akira-kurosawa-387999.jpg

    I am prepared to defer to Hitch and Kurosawa.

    However, as P+W are on board, we can assume the script will be (at best) mediocre, so our only hope is that we get a good director on board to salvage something from the inevitable wreckage.
    peter wrote: »

    Interesting. This does reinforce the image of EON as slightly hapless. I'm not one for knocking them particularly, and claiming 'they don't know what they're doing', but this kind of thing just seems to so commonplace with EON. Why have they only now appointed someone to start working on the story, when time after time in recent years, it's the failure to have a decent story and script that has caused major issues.

    All very strange IMO.
  • Posts: 230
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I really liked Seydoux, though I think that's partly because she's lovely to look at.

    I also think she gave one of the best Bond Girl performances. She doesn't have the charisma of Rigg or Green but she didn't have to for this part since Madelyn is much less of a Type A personality. Her relationship with Bond and the transparent Daddy Issues going on made it really interesting.

  • Posts: 11,425
    Agree on Seydoux but not Green
  • Posts: 7,431
    Definitely wrong about Green! Wonderful performance, the perfect Vesper Lynd. Her scenes with Craig were superb! Seydoux is very easy on the eye, Hitchcock would have loved her, icy performance! Again, great with Craig!
  • edited March 2017 Posts: 3,327
    Getafix wrote: »
    No it starts with the script. Worry about the director later.

    to-make-a-great-film-need-three-things-the-script-the-script-and-the-script.jpg

    quote-with-a-good-script-a-good-director-can-produce-a-masterpiece-with-the-same-script-a-mediocre-akira-kurosawa-387999.jpg

    I am prepared to defer to Hitch and Kurosawa.

    However, as P+W are on board, we can assume the script will be (at best) mediocre, so our only hope is that we get a good director on board to salvage something from the inevitable wreckage.
    peter wrote: »

    Interesting. This does reinforce the image of EON as slightly hapless. I'm not one for knocking them particularly, and claiming 'they don't know what they're doing', but this kind of thing just seems to so commonplace with EON. Why have they only now appointed someone to start working on the story, when time after time in recent years, it's the failure to have a decent story and script that has caused major issues.

    All very strange IMO.

    Shambolic!

    This sums up what has been going wrong in the Barbara EON years. No one is really in charge. No one is really running a tight ship. You get the impression when Cubby was around that he had final say, he called all the shots, and he was steering the ship.

    Ever since GE, the scripts feel that they are done by committee. Every man and his dog has a say. Endless rewrites. In Cubby's day it was simple. It helped that Maibaum was a class above P&W anyway, but Cubby knew what he wanted. Focus on story, not on silly, contrived back stories involving Bond's past, and try to rely on Fleming as much as possible.

    Now here is the big difference. Adaptation of actual Fleming scenes and characters, not trying to re-imagine Fleming, which is what has been happening under Craig's tenure, and to a lesser extent the Brosnan era too.

    I feel Wilson is behind this too. He wanted to push for a family origin back story in 1986 with TLD, which Cubby rightly vetoed. Obviously now with Cubby long gone out of the picture, Wilson and co. have allowed to run riot, changing the entire history of what Fleming originally wrote. They all feel they can add their penny's worth and know exactly how Fleming would have wrote a scene - often with disastrous results!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Getafix wrote: »
    Agree on Seydoux but not Green
    Agreed.

    I mentioned on one of these threads recently that upon reflection, I personally see Seydoux as easily the worst lead female in the Craig era and a complete disappointment in SP. Her character was meant to be pivotal to the narrative, and much of my displeasure with the latest film stems from my inability to buy her importance to Bond. Quite frankly, Craig acts as if he'd rather be someplace else than with her. They have absolutely zero chemistry together and moreover her part is extremely poorly written.

    If I were a betting man, I would surmise that this is why we have the contrived sequences (eg. physically jumping Bond post-Hinx fight & the sudden discovery and professions of love during the torture sequence only after a few days of knowing one another). Perhaps this is also why we were delivered a sappy Bond title song more befitting Titanic - all to compensate for the evident lack of magnetism between these two on screen.

    No doubt she is easy on the eyes, and perhaps that's why Cruise used her successfully in a largely non-speaking role in MI-GP. EON should have maybe done something similar.

    Talk of her returning for B25 turns my stomach.
  • Posts: 676
    bondjames wrote: »
    If I were a betting man, I would surmise that this is why we have the contrived sequences (eg. physically jumping Bond post-Hinx fight & the sudden discovery and professions of love during the torture sequence only after a few days of knowing one another). Perhaps this is also why we were delivered a sappy Bond title song more befitting Titanic - all to compensate for the evident lack of magnetism between these two on screen.
    Mendes seemed to acknowledge the fact that WOTW has to pull a lot of weight in selling the romance (see video below): "What's amazing about a Bond song as good as [Sam Smith's] is that it can actually help storytelling as well."



    When you watch the film, the song seems to suggest some kind of epic romance to come. But it just doesn't transpire and the attempt to force it at the end is weak as hell.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Milovy wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    If I were a betting man, I would surmise that this is why we have the contrived sequences (eg. physically jumping Bond post-Hinx fight & the sudden discovery and professions of love during the torture sequence only after a few days of knowing one another). Perhaps this is also why we were delivered a sappy Bond title song more befitting Titanic - all to compensate for the evident lack of magnetism between these two on screen.
    Mendes seemed to acknowledge the fact that WOTW has to pull a lot of weight in selling the romance (see video below): "What's amazing about a Bond song as good as [Sam Smith's] is that it can actually help storytelling as well."



    When you watch the film, the song seems to suggest some kind of epic romance to come. But it just doesn't transpire and the attempt to force it at the end is weak as hell.
    Exactly. It's tonally all over the map and nothing that it attempts to sell is convincing in any way shape or form. Just completely mediocre all round in my view. So I really don't see how it can become more appreciated with time.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Is there a lot of deleted material maybe theirs like a couple extra scenes they had to take out to lower the run time?
  • I don't think they were concerned about lowering SP's runtime. Considering the film clocks in at 2 1/2 hrs, they probably put in everything they could.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Speaking of runtimes qos is only 1:45 or something, is their a lot of deleted stuff for that, apart from the 1 minutes mr white death scene
  • Posts: 3,336
    Agree. I wish some of the films where shorter, because then i would of had more choices if i don't have too much time free. And a little cut would also improve a few.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited March 2017 Posts: 13,807
    Speaking of runtimes qos is only 1:45 or something, is their a lot of deleted stuff for that, apart from the 1 minutes mr white death scene
    The boat chase was planned to run outside the harbor and become more fantastic, but I think rights were denied to go beyond what we saw on screen.

    An entire sequence planned for 10 days' filming at Cusco, Peru, was dropped for budget and scheduling difficulties.
    wow.jpg cusco4.jpgCusco_Banner.jpg
  • Posts: 3,336
    Missed opportunity there.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    Shame that the film lost both of those things. Could've stretched the runtime to an even two hours, would've been real nice.
  • Posts: 1,680
    Im actually starting to appreciate QOS for its length. Sometimes CR & SF can be a drag to finish.

    I still believe in 15-20 more years QOS will get an OHMSS type of appreciation & cult following. It mimicked Bourne but was still ahead of its time.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    everyone says qos is just a mimic of bourne, while thats true, qos takes a shit on every bourne film by far. The action is 30 times better, and the story is just as good as a bourne story if not better because of originality. Some of the action in qos is unparalleled in modern cinema even though it has fast editing and quick cuts which a lot of people understandably don't like. I agree as time goes on it will be reaccessed by many.
  • edited March 2017 Posts: 6,844
    Speaking of runtimes qos is only 1:45 or something, is their a lot of deleted stuff for that, apart from the 1 minutes mr white death scene
    An entire sequence planned for 10 days' filming at Cusco, Peru, was dropped for budget and scheduling difficulties.

    That setting looks incredible. Shame it didn't feature. Would have made a stellar film even more stellar. I wonder, though, as that's a mountainous setting, if the sequence wasn't intended as part of the aerial dogfight—or even just an alternate setting for the same sequence.
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Im actually starting to appreciate QOS for its length. Sometimes CR & SF can be a drag to finish.

    I still believe in 15-20 more years QOS will get an OHMSS type of appreciation & cult following. It mimicked Bourne but was still ahead of its time.

    That would be great, and deserved.
    everyone says qos is just a mimic of bourne, while thats true, qos takes a shit on every bourne film by far. The action is 30 times better, and the story is just as good as a bourne story if not better because of originality. Some of the action in qos is unparalleled in modern cinema even though it has fast editing and quick cuts which a lot of people understandably don't like.

    A bit crude, but certainly true of every Bourne film I've seen, which is the first three.
    I agree as time goes on it will be reaccessed by many.

    You mean reassessed. "Reaccessing" is what Bond was doing with both Goodhead and the Earth at the conclusion of Moonraker.
  • edited March 2017 Posts: 11,425
    The first three Bourne films are very good. I don't see Bond 'sh***ing' over any of them.

    I also think QOS works well partly because of its shorter running time.

    As observed above, Craig's other three are overlong IMO. CR just about justifies it, although I think drags in places, while SF and SP just feel flabby and poorly conceived/edited.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    The pacing in QoS is way off to me, the fact it doesn't really breathe is why, ironically, I find it drags. It doesn't have enough light and shade.
  • Posts: 7,431
    I wouldn't agree that QoS doesn't have light and shade. Between the frantic action there are many excellent dramatic scenes. The opening exchange beteen Bond and M (I think QoS shows Craig and Dench at their best!) interrogation of Mr. White, the terrific scene on the plane with Greg Beam meeting Greene, the Opera set piece, all the scenes between Bond and Mathis, Camilles later scenes, and of course the final encounter with Yusef! These scenes are all brief, so probably get overlooked because of the many action set pieces, but they have impact!
  • Posts: 19,339
    A BIG impact @mathis ...I also love the fight with Greene at the end...a trained agent having to deal with a total psycho,as Greene shows his true colours,and snaps,doing away with his controlled exterior.

    I think Greene is a very under-rated villain,and one of my favourites.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    I wouldn't agree that QoS doesn't have light and shade. Between the frantic action there are many excellent dramatic scenes. The opening exchange beteen Bond and M (I think QoS shows Craig and Dench at their best!) interrogation of Mr. White, the terrific scene on the plane with Greg Beam meeting Greene, the Opera set piece, all the scenes between Bond and Mathis, Camilles later scenes, and of course the final encounter with Yusef! These scenes are all brief, so probably get overlooked because of the many action set pieces, but they have impact!

    I didn't say it didn't have light and shade, my problem is that it doesn't have enough. It's a film that's eager to get from A to B as quickly as possible, which would be fine if the plot in someway necessitated that, but it doesn't.
  • Posts: 4,325
    I don't think they were concerned about lowering SP's runtime. Considering the film clocks in at 2 1/2 hrs, they probably put in everything they could.

    Post production on Spectre was very short. Mendes was still editing the weekend before the premiere.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Getafix wrote: »
    The first three Bourne films are very good. I don't see Bond 'sh***ing' over any of them.
    I agree. The first three represent one of the better trilogies ever made, and there certainly wouldn't have been any QoS without The Bourne Supremacy, which clearly influenced it in many ways.
Sign In or Register to comment.