Things i would have changed in...... Thunderball

1356

Comments

  • Posts: 11,189
    Nothing!!
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    edited September 2016 Posts: 4,007
    "It just did not make any sense to me that Grant would take his sweet time preparing to kill Bond, once he got the drop on the British agent."

    @DRush76

    Grant was a sadistic psychopath. It makes perfect sense he would take his time with Bond and humiliate him.

    He thought he had the drop on Bond and was going to make some more money with the sovereigns. He just didn't count on Bond's resourcefulness and cunning.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited September 2016 Posts: 4,520
    I think nothing, mabey there can have cut pre-title scene so movie wil start with maintitles like Dr No. I also think the Train scene is bit long.
  • DRush76 wrote: »
    I'm curious. SPECTRE wanted to use Bond to steal the Soviets' Lektor machine from their consulate in Istanbul. Okay. But Blofeld was planning on selling it back to the Soviets? Why? He could not find another client?
    And that the producers weren't putting up too much of a fight. To the point that LTK seemed, at the time, like a television production and Dalton was casually saying that he thought this would probably be the last Bond film.

    I saw nothing wrong with the production quality of "LICENSE TO KILL". The problem was that the plot seemed straight out of a two-part episode of "MIAMI VICE". Heck, they even had a Key West cop who looked like Don Johnson.

    If there is one scene from "FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE" I really had a problem with, it was the final confrontation between Bond and Donovan Grant. From a dramatic viewpoint, it proved a great moment for Sean Connery and Robert Shaw to exercise their acting chops. From a storytelling viewpoint, it made no sense to me. It just did not make any sense to me that Grant would take his sweet time preparing to kill Bond, once he got the drop on the British agent. While Grant was busy searching through the unconscious Bond’s jacket and putting on his gloves, I found myself screaming at my TV screen – "What in the hell are you waiting for? Kill him!" I see now that it was an excuse for Grant to reveal SPECTRE's plans to Bond. I really wish this could have been done in another way.

    That is a good point, but, if we have this problem here, then we must have this problem with every other film... What is casually known in mainstream audiences as 'Bond Villain Stupidity' is a defining trait of Bond, IMO. Villains getting cocky and overconfident, giving Bond an opportunity to use his intelligence to escape and overpower the villain. The villain dies from his own vices. It is very fitting.

    Regarding the Lektor, one also thinks that Kronsteen is not so smart after all... It's because of his dumb plan that the Lektor is given to the British. If not for SPECTRE's plan spectactularly backfiring they would not have anything.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Posts: 4,520
    Les time on Goldfinger his farm and in the mountains.
    Remove the reference to Frwl in maintitles
  • KaijuDirectorOO7KaijuDirectorOO7 Once Upon a Time Somewhere...
    Posts: 189
    Maybe a SPECTRE reference, but that may feel a bit gratuitous.
  • -Don't do that editing trick with the fast-motion removal of Bond's duck hat.

    -Redo the grappling hook trick in a way that doesn't look fake.

    -Make the sound of the tracking system in Bond's car less annoying. It is really really grating.

    -Remove the old lady in the car chase. Tonally out of place.

    -Have the gangsters not overreact during their deaths.

    The only bad back projection was at Miami. Bond all but rapes Pussy Galore but I've already talked about how chauvinism defined Bond in the 60s and how Connery sort of gets it away with it. Again these are all minor gripes. GF still holds up as a classic so once again it is all small potatoes.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited September 2016 Posts: 9,117
    DRush76 wrote: »
    I'm curious. SPECTRE wanted to use Bond to steal the Soviets' Lektor machine from their consulate in Istanbul. Okay. But Blofeld was planning on selling it back to the Soviets? Why? He could not find another client?

    This is one big problem I have with FRWL.

    Once the Soviets realised the Lektor was compromised that would be it. All Lektors would be binned and a new machine implemented. Even though it would be a lot of hassle and expense, at the height of the Cold War they simply couldn't tolerate this device falling into enemy hands, even if SPECTRE did retrieve it for them. Also would've thought the yanks would've paid pretty highly to get hold of one if its so valued but it is never mentioned that Blofeld is even exploring this.

    Aside from the oft mentioned terrible hand wave the only other one I can think of is the terrible cut when the tear gas grenade goes off while the camera is still on Bond.

    Q states it will go off 'in their face' so why the hell don't we see it?
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 4,007
    "Aside from the oft mentioned terrible hand wave the only other one I can think of is the terrible cut when the tear gas grenade goes off while the camera is still on Bond."

    That is a really puzzling edit, you're right. I think Raymond Benson also brings it up in his Bond Bedside Companion book.


  • Posts: 19,339
    about 75% of it.
  • Posts: 16,169
    Birdleson wrote: »
    GOLDFINGER

    Nothing.

    Me, too. I wouldn't even replace the blue jumpsuit. I love GF as is.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2016 Posts: 23,883
    This is one of the few films where I disagree with most of the community. Its a film I hardly want to watch anymore, because I find it rather dull after the laser sequence.

    Therefore, I would change nearly everything after that scene. I haven't given it too much thought, but for starters I'd prefer if Bond escaped Goldfinger's residence after learning about Operation Grand Slam. I would then have him, along with the military, launch a bid to stop the operation, which continues on to the final confrontation at Fort Knox.

    I would also eliminate all the goofy bits which truly annoy me, including Connery's funny faces in the plane toilet and in the cell. Make him more determined, serious and concerned to escape.

    I've always felt GF was a film better suited to Moore on account of these silly bits, but realize I'm in the minority.
  • Posts: 19,339
    bondjames wrote: »
    This is one of the few films where I disagree with most of the community. Its a film I hardly want to watch anymore, because I find it rather dull after the laser sequence.

    Therefore, I would change nearly everything after that scene. I haven't given it too much thought, but for starters I'd prefer if Bond escaped Goldfinger's residence after learning about Operation Grand Slam. I would then have him, along with the military, launch a bid to stop the operation, which continues on to the final confrontation at Fort Knox.

    I would also eliminate all the goofy bits which truly annoy me, including Connery's funny faces in the plane toilet and in the cell. Make him more determined, serious and concerned to escape.

    I've always felt GF was a film better suited to Moore on account of these silly bits, but realize I'm in the minority.

    Not totally,i agree with you,been saying the same for ages.

  • @bondjames But Bond's plan was to sabotage GF's plan from the inside. He sensed PG was a weak link. Your alternative would be to scrap that?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2016 Posts: 23,883
    A fair point @Comte_de_Bleuchamp, and Bond's (Connery's) cool while captive in Kentucky is admirable. There's also no doubt that his 'turning Pussy' was a highlight, as I've noted elsewhere recently.

    It's a tough call. I just would have preferred a little more 'pace' and 'tension' during that entire stud farm sequence, which just seems to go on forever. I'm not too keen on the flying circus as well, which seems so '60's kitsch' in the way it's presented.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 4,007
    Wouldn't change a thing. The perfect Bond film for me. Even improves storywise on the novel.

    My top Bond film.
  • @bondjames agreed on the flying circus. I have to hit the mute button when they are introduced.
  • Posts: 1,296
    I would probably redo the music, bring in David Arnold to do it. :)


























    ............................. Just kidding bitches! :) Nothing comes to mind right now for my changes.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,423
    Well, you never know, Purvis and Wade may retroactively change Goldfinger to be part of SPECTRE....
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    I'm tempted to say all the soldiers falling over needed reshooting as its far from convincing but then they are actually acting because they are just putting it on so its actually a clue to the audience that something is amiss and not sloppy direction.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Maybe have an airplane without strings on it at the end, and let Oddjob eat Goldfinger s cat. That s it.
  • edited September 2016 Posts: 19,339
    I'm tempted to say all the soldiers falling over needed reshooting as its far from convincing but then they are actually acting because they are just putting it on so its actually a clue to the audience that something is amiss and not sloppy direction.

    That was seriously bad...as was in the PTS when Bond fires his rope launcher over the wall and you can see it is blatantly coming from somewhere else as it shoots overl...lazy stuff.

  • I'm tempted to say all the soldiers falling over needed reshooting as its far from convincing but then they are actually acting because they are just putting it on so its actually a clue to the audience that something is amiss and not sloppy direction.

    Why are you tempted then? If the falling over was 'convincing', that would in fact be bad acting. They portrayed expertly people instructed to fall over.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    I'd remove Tilly Masterson from the film. I get she's there to avenge Jill but she's just dead weight honestly. Set up to be killed immediately. Plus her voice is annoying. I just want her gone.

    I would have liked to have seen Bond sneaking around Auric Enterprises more, maybe even sneaking inside to steal documents and such. That's about it.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I'm tempted to say all the soldiers falling over needed reshooting as its far from convincing but then they are actually acting because they are just putting it on so its actually a clue to the audience that something is amiss and not sloppy direction.

    That was seriously bad...as was in the PTS when Bond fires his rope launcher over the wall and you can see it is blatantly coming from somewhere else as it shoots overl...lazy stuff.

    Where is that thin white rope coming from?
  • Posts: 19,339
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I'm tempted to say all the soldiers falling over needed reshooting as its far from convincing but then they are actually acting because they are just putting it on so its actually a clue to the audience that something is amiss and not sloppy direction.

    That was seriously bad...as was in the PTS when Bond fires his rope launcher over the wall and you can see it is blatantly coming from somewhere else as it shoots overl...lazy stuff.

    Where is that thin white rope coming from?

    God knows but it is below and ahead of Bond's gun...

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Connery was well equipped.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    I'm tempted to say all the soldiers falling over needed reshooting as its far from convincing but then they are actually acting because they are just putting it on so its actually a clue to the audience that something is amiss and not sloppy direction.

    Why are you tempted then? If the falling over was 'convincing', that would in fact be bad acting. They portrayed expertly people instructed to fall over.

    I'm tempted because it is done so laughably. The plain flies over and a second later everyone falls down. How is the gas diffusing down that quickly?

    They are lucky the Flying Circus pilots are total bimbos (albeit ones with pilot's licences) as one look at this pantomime would tell them something is awry.

    Another one - the ejector seat shot.

    This is the money shot of the DB5 chase and what do we get? A long shot in the dark? Any chance we could get a shot properly displaying the gadget in all its OTT glory?

    SP's is better but still way too quick to tell what is going on.
  • Posts: 676
    There is the "3 more ticks" countdown error. I'd change that.
  • Posts: 4,044
    Milovy wrote: »
    There is the "3 more ticks" countdown error. I'd change that.

    The bomb has a fairly obvious off switch, that Bond doesn't see.

Sign In or Register to comment.