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
Problem is bond film's can't have that pacing of other action franchise, especially when craig era is more story driven than action.
"No limits."
+1
But I think there is a unwritten border over which Bond does not cross. A 3 hour Bond film would feel overlong to me.
I think 2 hrs 40 is probably what they are going for with Bond 25, that would put it in line with The Dark Knight Rises and Infinity War.
That may be so but the runtime is relative to the story that they are attempting to tell. It will likely never happen, so I guess it's a moot argument, but if they had a worthy story that needed three hours to be told then I would be fine with it. I was fine with it for Avengers because it was time well spent.
There should not be a limit on it.
Most Bond movies only span over a set period of time lasting from a few days to a month or so. Bond is given his mission, gets sent abroad, spends a few days investigating, finds out about the villains plan, usually ends up captured, and spends about a day freeing himself and finally dispatching the villain and saving the world. Most Bond films only cover the space of a few days, and we only actually have to see the most exciting aspects of those few days. There's no reason why any director worth his salt can't tell that type of story in under 2 hrs 20 minutes. It's ridiculous how sloppy they are now, compared with how lean and fast-paced Bond films used to be. Spy Who Loved Me is just over 2 hours, and it feels like an exhilarating ride every time I watch it. SPECTRE on the other hand is a slog, especially the scenes between M and Denbigh, which don't seem to add anything in the end. We don't need pointless side-plots thrown in to add extra meat, non of Roger Moore's movies had these, and they are perfectly fine without it. What the audience wants to see is Bond on his mission solving things, and getting into scraps along the way. The tension, suspense and balls-out action are ultimately the selling point, so just cut to the chase, 1hr:45minutes to 2:15minutes should be more than enough to tell any story with James Bond. The average should be around the 2 mark, I think that is a healthy length for a 007 flick.
Absolutely. Well put.
It’s a James Bond film.
None of Fleming’s novels is very long. None, certainly, is as long as Seven Pillars of Wisdom, which is what Lawrence of Arabia is based on.
Fleming knew how to write a story that was short and tight enough not to outstay its welcome. He was writing entertainment, not War and Peace. He did not equate length with quality, so I don’t see why we should.
I knew this was coming. No, Bond isn't Lawrence of Arabia. Yes, James Bond is Ian Fleming, and the films have long since surpassed the novels.
My point is, if there's a story they want to tell, they should tell it. There's no reason to think a longer-form espionage story could exist, and could be compelling. If it happens to be a long story, so be it, and there are many tools they can use to tell a compelling story in a long amount of time.
Imposing a time restriction for a Bond film, or any film, is a very stupid idea, and won't happen anyways, so what's the point.
I massively disagree with that.
Fair enough.
While I think that side-plots, like in TLD, can be good, I agree that CR, SP and TB are probably the films that need most shortening (or a replacement of dull scenes with better ones). TWINE and FRWL (controversial opinion, probably) also feel long to me.
You're absolutely correct. Looking at Quantum of Solace, it's clear that a shorter running length is no guarantee for a quality film. ;)
I really do wonder how a conservatively edited, non-shortened version of QoS might look, but I'm rather sure I'd prefer it over the mess they turned it into (Disclaimer: "mess" is relative. It still is an average Bond movie for me, but it could have been good instead.)
Anyway, it is not TB as such that is too long, but the drawn-out and (by today's standards) tedious underwater scenes. And SP is not too long as such, but only due to the stupid Bloberhauser-stepbrother scheme. Replace failed and/or idiotic scenes with something better, and I don't mind if a Bond film lasts four or five hours.
I agree with you on principle, but a movie of that length would require an intermission, IMO.
For me, Spectre does not feel long. The Brofeld stuff is not good at all, but for me it doesn't make the film feel long; the Miami and Venice sequences in Casino Royale, on the other hand, make CR feel a little longer than it should. IMO of course.
I agree that while the Brofeld thing may be bad taste, it's not boring or uninteresting. But many other sequences in SP feel like that to me because they're so gloomy, and the action isn't gripping.
Sometimes I feel like it's safer just to make it abundantly clear. ;)
There was a great video that talked about the science behind those balloon supported structures and made reference to the CR sequence - it found that, while the film took liberties with the time-frame of the house's collapse and sinking into the canal, it got it reasonably right.
But the whole Miami airport scene just felt too Die Hard to me. Seen it all before. Even the sprinklers going off had been done in the first Die Hard.
It is a very well made scene though. My only problem with it is that it takes too long... I am not sure which segment I would cut though. It is quite thoroughly constructed the way it is
It certainly is too long, but i love the final part of it, just as the truck crashes through the police cars and Bond struggles to get it to stop.
Love his little peek up to see how close he was to hitting it!
There's a lot building through that sequence, I love it. Right up to the Flemingesque expiration of the bad guy via his own bomb. Very well done.