› › ›

Spectre Gunbarrel ***Spoilers***

1…1415171920…53

Comments

  • Gareth00789Gareth00789
    Posts: 655
    sam mendes is a bond fan so how could he let this happen really
  • battleshipgreygtbattleshipgreygt
    edited October 2012 Posts: 1,220
    Gareth00789 wrote:
    sam mendes is a bond fan so how could he let this happen really
    I'm a HUGE Bond fan (probably bigger than Mendes) and I'm really indifferent about the gunbarrel being at the end. If the film opens more effectively without the gunbarrel, then put it at the end. I just can't believe that this is such a huge issue considering how incredible the film seems to be.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    in the end - it's still the producers' call - it's their property.... perhaps he wanted to start off with the gun barrel, but they told him no, it's staying at the end from now on..... who really knows for certain.... i too find it hard to believe that they would not have it at the beginning, considering it's the 50th anniversary #1, and #2 that having it at the end of QOS was a good way to bookend that whole Vesper storyline between CR and QOS (imo anyway)..... it seemed like a sure thing that it would be back in it's proper place for this film...... but, seems like it's not - oh well...... the only reason i can honestly come up with as to why it's not where it should be - is because when they rebooted Bond with CR, they wanted to redo everything, and i guess after 20 films of having the gun barrel at the start, they probably figured what better way to distance these new rebooted films from it's predecessors, than by switching the placement of the gun barrel.... that is my best guess anyway........ it's such a ticky tack alteration that i don't why they had to screw with it to begin with...... but, they did..... time to move on with it...
  • Gareth00789Gareth00789
    edited October 2012 Posts: 655
    battleshipgreygt wrote:
    Gareth00789 wrote:
    sam mendes is a bond fan so how could he let this happen really
    I'm a HUGE Bond fan (probably bigger than Mendes) and I'm really indifferent about the gunbarrel being at the end. If the film opens more effectively without the gunbarrel, then put it at the end. I just can't believe that this is such a huge issue considering how incredible the film seems to be.

    the gun barrel was always going to be a big concirn for me. its what i wanted, regardless to how good film is.

    What annoys me the most, and will for many, is that qos ended with the gun barrel to close the book on casino and quantum. Now that looks to have been pointless when they put it at the end again.

    i dont think there is any great exuse to not have it. watching a gun barrel a the begining seperates bond films from other action films. It makes it feel more thrilling as it opens. Oh well, no point going on, whats done is done.
  • OwenDavianOwenDavian
    edited October 2012 Posts: 214
    In early 2013: Rip your DVD copy of Skyfall, cut and paste the gunbarrel to the beginning. Problem solved.
  • MattMatt
    edited October 2012 Posts: 154
    IMO I don't believe that just the gun barrel on its own separates Bond films from any other, I think that all the ingredients in the 'Bond Cocktail' make it different.

    The espionage, style, sophistication, action, wit, villains, breathtaking sets and action are amongst some of the things that make a Bond film different, and that's why I love James Bond.

    I understand that the lack of a gun barrel at the beginning may leave some fans a bit flat and disappointed, but IMO having the gun barrel at the end will leave many people on an incredible high!
  • BondBond
    edited October 2012 Posts: 503
    Stupid idea, continuing to tweak with time-honored traditions like this. People call us petty for complaining about it, but aren't they the petty ones for changing it up for no apparent reason? Putting it at the end is so anti-climactic, especially when they've already done that with QOS.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    edited October 2012 Posts: 12,837
    Like I said, it's not going to ruin the film, but I am suprised, because they kept ging on about it having a 60s feeling, Bond with a capital B, etc. So you wouldve thought they put it at the start.
    commandbond007 wrote:
    here a thought.........the gunbarrel at the end could simply mean the end of 50 years from Dr. No to Skyfall, and the start of 50 years of Bond starts with Bond 24 that restart the gunbarrel at the beginning

    I don't think so. People said with QOS, it showed that he'd become Bond, etc.

    I don't think moving it to the end "means" anything.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    I don't think so. People said with QOS, it showed that he'd become Bond, etc.

    I don't think moving it to the end "means" anything.

    had they gone back to tradition, and put it back at the beginning of Skyfall - then IMO, the symbolism of the gun barrel at the end QOS still remains... now with them having it at the end of SF as well - well, it more or less throws that symbolism in the garbage...

    the thing that i dont understand, and it leaves me scratching my head... is why go through all the trouble of marketing the gun barrel so heavily leading into Skyfall if not to put it back where it belongs?... it's on the very first Skyfall poster - the Adele adverts for her theme song, and it's part of the 50th Anniversary logo..... now granted, it's still in the film, just at the end - but I myself (and a lot of others) took all this reference to the gun barrel in various adverts as they fully want to make sure to fans that is going back to "classic Bond" and the gun barrel placement, a hot topic of debate for QOS, will be put back where it belongs.....

    while it does not and will not ruin the movie in the slightest - it does kind of make you feel slightly 'lead on' - if u catch my drift..

  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    Yeah I get you. I thought after seeing it in the posters and everything they might have been trying to tell us "don't worry, we've put it back where it belongs"
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited October 2012 Posts: 4,399
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    Yeah I get you. I thought after seeing it in the posters and everything they might have been trying to tell us "don't worry, we've put it back where it belongs"

    exactly - even HapHazard has said the same thing.. that he couldn't picture the gun barrel being anywhere but at the beginning of SF considering the trouble they are going through to have it everywhere associated with the film and 50th Anniversary........... but, his statement was made before the news of it being at the end was revealed..

  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    edited October 2012 Posts: 3,497
    Well, Bond 24 & 25 should have it at the start. Because it moves us away to not so pleasant areas, even if it's a Godfather II kinda film, it will still detract.

    Not the biggest possible problem, but you get my point...

  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited October 2012 Posts: 4,399
    JamesCraig wrote:
    Well, Bond 24 & 25 should have it at the start. Because it moves us away to not so pleasant areas, even if it's a Godfather II kinda film, it will still detract.

    Not the biggest possible problem, but you get my point...

    if it's not at the start of Skyfall (considering it's a stand alone story, not associated with either CR or QOS) then i highly doubt, nor do i expect it to be back at the beginning of Bond 24 or 25...... this was as good a time as any to throw it back where it belongs - but if they aren't doing it now, then they never will........ no sense in getting your hopes up...
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    Hm
    Eve wasn't going to be Moneypenny to and Miranda Tate wasn't going to be the stabbing c*nt

    So, who knows? :\"> :)>-
  • hisqoshisqos
    Posts: 80
    Since the Martini seems also to be a deal breaker :(( perhaps whilst making your protests and demands you can also get them to do a Spielberg and have Roger order one in each of his 7 films. As far as I know there is no such rule about the GB can never be anywhere else but at the start of a Bond film. Bizarre how there is always whinging about cliches, same old same old, no originality et al but dare to change anything and the knives come out.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    hisqos wrote:
    Since the Martini seems also to be a deal breaker :(( perhaps whilst making your protests and demands you can also get them to do a Spielberg and have Roger order one in each of his 7 films. As far as I know there is no such rule about the GB can never be anywhere else but at the start of a Bond film. Bizarre how there is always whinging about cliches, same old same old, no originality et al but dare to change anything and the knives come out.

    I can see your point, but from what I gathered:
    the Martini is back, even with the famous line that according to some "fans" was in every Bondmovie. I don't know if Craig says it though, so there's another thing to whine about

  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    HASEROT wrote:
    JamesCraig wrote:
    Well, Bond 24 & 25 should have it at the start. Because it moves us away to not so pleasant areas, even if it's a Godfather II kinda film, it will still detract.

    Not the biggest possible problem, but you get my point...

    if it's not at the start of Skyfall (considering it's a stand alone story, not associated with either CR or QOS) then i highly doubt, nor do i expect it to be back at the beginning of Bond 24 or 25...... this was as good a time as any to throw it back where it belongs - but if they aren't doing it now, then they never will........ no sense in getting your hopes up...

    Yeah if they don't put it at the start now (with it being the 50th anniversary, people complaining after it was at the end of QOS, etc), they might never put it at the start again.
    hisqos wrote:
    As far as I know there is no such rule about the GB can never be anywhere else but at the start of a Bond film. Bizarre how there is always whinging about cliches, same old same old, no originality et al but dare to change anything and the knives come out.

    It was there for 40 years, 20 films, so yeah I think it is kind of an unwritten rule. There's just no need to change it, it seems like a chang for the sake of change. At least in CR and QOS they sort of had an excuse.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    I really like the CR GB tbh: not too fast, "realistic", story fitting.

    Purrfect intro do DC's Bond.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    The CR gunbarrel is ok but I think there was no need, it was a change for the sake of change. And the barrel itself looked ugly.
  • hisqoshisqos
    Posts: 80

    Blanket statements of change for the sake of change and the like kind of makes arguments redundant since you haven't yet seen the film to make that determination. Sorry but I can't take seriously these comments based on knee jerk condemnation.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    hisqos wrote:
    Blanket statements of change for the sake of change and the like kind of makes arguments redundant since you haven't yet seen the film to make that determination. Sorry but I can't take seriously these comments based on knee jerk condemnation.

    i have no problem with where the GB is at at all in the film frankly, though i would prefer it at the start.....

    i'll echo @thelivingroyale 's comment about it being "change for the sake of change".... it really is when you look at it.... changing the look and placement of it adds really nothing to the plot or film itself, so why move it? - it was alright for CR, and i can understand the symbolism of having it at the end of QOS.... but as i've stated before myself, it's a cosmetic change that wasn't and isn't necessary...
  • Gareth00789Gareth00789
    Posts: 655
    I have seemed to get over the gun barrel thing. I think it was just because i wanted it so much at the start. But theres still what looks an amazing film to enjoy. I am still looking very forward to it, i just had a moment where i was focsing everything on the gb. I have now come to reality. lol Not long to go now.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    HASEROT wrote:
    hisqos wrote:
    Blanket statements of change for the sake of change and the like kind of makes arguments redundant since you haven't yet seen the film to make that determination. Sorry but I can't take seriously these comments based on knee jerk condemnation.

    i have no problem with where the GB is at at all in the film frankly, though i would prefer it at the start.....

    i'll echo @thelivingroyale 's comment about it being "change for the sake of change".... it really is when you look at it.... changing the look and placement of it adds really nothing to the plot or film itself, so why move it? - it was alright for CR, and i can understand the symbolism of having it at the end of QOS.... but as i've stated before myself, it's a cosmetic change that wasn't and isn't necessary...

    Thanks @haserot

    There's just no reason to move it.
  • PeterSmith007PeterSmith007
    Posts: 43
    You are right about it being anti-climatic. It was worse in QOS cos it was so fast it wasn't worth waiting for. I reckon it is going be another one of those "by the end of the film he's the Bond we know and love" moments. Really not necessary this time round.
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre
    Posts: 1,548
    Roll out the barrel! Seems like the barrel move is proving about as popular as Jimmy Saville in a girls secondary school! Personally I have no probs with it.
  • Gareth00789Gareth00789
    Posts: 655
    I have a feeling that the gun barrel will merge into the 50th logo still somehow, it would make perfect sence having it at the end then.
  • 00130013
    Posts: 1,817
    Each time when I watch a Bond movie (except with CR and QOS) I have such a feeling of the gunbarrel at the begining that says: this is not an ordinary action/thriller movie, this is a Bond movie (with capital B) and we are running this show for 50 years.
    It's like the opening crawl of Star Wars, the trumpet in the Godfather or the title sequence of Rocky with scenes of the previous movie...
  • Gareth00789Gareth00789
    Posts: 655
    i aggree, oh well. nothing we can do, it will sill be thrilling and feel bondy. lol
  • bondsumbondsum
    Posts: 3,333
    I'll add my tuppence worth to the topic and say it's a really stupid idea to tag the GB onto the end of the movie... yet again. It seems like the producers are determined to mess with audience expectations just for the sake of change. I just don't see why they think this is innovative and the way forward. It isn't!!
  • Gareth00789Gareth00789
    Posts: 655
    I dont think they are doing it deliberly to mess with fans. I dont see why they would do that, but it is funny that this has happened. Im not sure why the decided this but its wrong no matter what excuse. I have to just learn to live with it.
Sign In or Register to comment.