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
+1
Standalone is aways better than serialized. All these popular TV shows these days are so heavily serialized but tell me when was the last time you saw any of them being shown in reruns on your local TV channel showing reruns of older shows? Where’s the SOPRANOS? Where’s LOST? Where’s 24? Nowhere! Because these shows don’t play well in rerun format. People want to sit down and relax and catch one episode of something without having to watch the entire series! When I was growing up I was watching reruns of I LOVE LUCY, ANDY GRIFFITH SHOW, HAWAII FIVE-O, MAGNUM PI, COLUMBO, THE A-TEAM, KNIGHT RIDER, etc. Those same shows I watched in reruns 20-30 years ago are still being shown in reruns today! Why? Because it’s an easy watch. Standalone plays better on repeat viewings.
Nice what there did with Molery M and ''Death person'' is stil here element.
Proofs Eon stil playing with mirrors, whyle it look like whas mean to be Daniel Craig last one.
Also i spot a Skyfall maintitle moment that look like there give us a closer look, that i haven't seen in trailer with almoost same shot. Mabey it is more of a reference to (what i said i have seen before) Bond home Spectre: Ghost House. In other words: Bond stands in front of miniture of a house.
That is some seriously good sh*t they smoke in Amsterdam.
Sorry but saying The Soprano's does not stand up to repeat viewing compared to those other shows you mention means you are either having us on (hopefully) or your opinion is utter tosh and should be ignored at all costs!!
@ringfire211 makes total sense. I love The Sopranos but he is absolutely right.
I don’t think he is at all but I get the feeling you’ll just criticise me if I dare to explain why.
M does pop up overseas quite a few times. He turns up in a plane over Gibraltar in TLD and in Miami in LTK.
I'm sorry, weren't you the guy advocating that I should switch off my tv and not watch it? Now you're using tv reruns as an argument?
They rarely do.
I love THE SOPRANOS (as I do 24!), and think he's talking absolute nonsense, as per. The analogy he's using (to compare shows vs films) is ill-advised, for a start.
But I find the first three Craig films to have high repeat value, so I guess that's a key difference here.
Of of course online is extremely important but when you're planning a campaign a year in advance and you know the trailer gonna go into cinemas, it's far easier to earmark a film it will be with in cinemas as a rough estimate for when you'd drop it online, than pluck an online date out of thin air. That's why without fail, everyone who releases films in cinemas the traditional way still plans online trailer launches around this.
And you want to also keep momentum going and keep that footage as fresh as possible by getting it out to cinemas around the same time, paired with an appropriate release to maximise impact.
I think @ringfire211’s analogy with those two brilliant shows was a misfire and it ended up destroying a very valid argument. But his point was not moot. I too think a narrative contained in itself has more rewatchability. And I believe that continuity is good for trilogies and such, but 25 films with the same continuity the Craig era had, would simply not survive, unless they had plenty of source material or the best writers of each generation behind it all.
All and all, we need better writers because if they want continuity they’ll have to create a valid and well thought up plan. And if they want single endeavours, well, then we need people who understand the source material and are creative and quality artisans.
Nah, I’ll probably love reading your post. And I’ll find validity in it, I’m sure. And maybe you’ll even change my opinion.
I think he’s saying you can’t catch a random episode in the middle of Sopranos run and enjoy it out of context the same way you can catch an episode of Knight Rider and enjoy it out of context. Same applies to Breaking Bad (randomly watching S3 E8 in syndication, you wouldn’t have any idea of what was going on) yet Breaking Bad is some of the best television ever made.
(Sorry mods, just had too. Damn frustrating with all OT)
It all comes back to whether NTTD works better as a film that connects other films, or as a standalone film... there is no NTTD news so there’s nothing otherwise to discuss...
But to bring back this analogy to Bond.....
The Craig films are shown on television all the time. Rarely a weekend goes by without ITV showing them. So I don't think the argument has much merit if you had to apply the same thought process to Bond that you applied to those shows.
The analogy to Bond is that if someone's watching random Bond films on TV, they'll start watching QoS or Spectre and think "Who the hell is Vesper?" "Who is Mr. White?" "Why have they hung a little photo of Javier Bardem up in the ruined MI6 building?"
More than at any other time in the franchise, you need all the Craig Bond films to derive total understanding of some of the Craig Bond films. It's not absolute, you can still enjoy Quantum of Solace and Spectre if they're your two very first Bond films, but again, more than at any other time in the franchise do they depend on information gained from other entries in the franchise. Just like a random episode of the Sopranos or Breaking Bad essentially require you to have seen every single previous episode to derive any enjoyment/understanding of the story at all. @ringfire211 I think this is what you were getting at.
Hah well there's no helping these people.
I think Bond is quite immune to things like this, to be honest. And I still don't think that has any negative effect on whether the films have repeat value or not, which I believe was his original tangent. I'm sure NTTD, as long as it's more in line with CR or SF in quality, will have the same repeat value as those films do. It's fine to not like narrative threads, but to throw things like "they don't have rewatch value" out there because of it, when reality points to the contrary, is a bit daft.
I see the point, I just think it's poorly made.
And I'd rather the producers took some risks and not simply make something that is an "easy watch", personally. But that's just me.
...and while I understand the desire for the Craig-era to have been more 'narratively coherent' lets say, we need to remain aware of the outside influences that each of these films has had. With Quantum of Solace we had the scriptwriter's strike which caused problems throughout the whole production, Skyfall had to deal with MGM's bankruptcy which delayed the film, and the industry had responded so well and had been so influenced by Nolan and The Dark Knight, that it became natural for Skyfall to do what it did. Then Spectre had the script leaks with the pressure of creating a worthy follow-up to Skyfall, and now No Time to Die has had it's own set of problems, and the industry has changed again, so they need to respond, which altogether along with many other things, have created a slightly messy era of the James Bond franchise, but to be honest, I still love it and consider at least half of this era to be some of the best James Bond films we've had...
...and to keep on topic, I do think No Time to Die will be joining those ones I love so much, but we'll see. I hope we get some kind of clip trailer like I suggested the other day :)
Very good points, and I too am on the side of taking risks rather than making "easy watches".
Bernard Lee's M showed up in Bond's London flat, even.
Regarding Fiennes M and based on Spectre, I don't have any reason to expect "Bond will keep disrespecting" him. That's not what was going on.
More likely is M still venting frustrations on OO7 about outraged chefs and humiliated tailors and such.
That’s not the same thing at all then. With those TV shows you have serials which really won’t make much sense: these a feature films which are easily understandable. If you can’t pick up that Vesper was his late girlfriend then you’re going to have trouble working out that the little old lady is his boss! :)
Has anybody on here actually had any trouble understanding a Bond film because some of its story elements come from the film before? If not then this is just all hypothetical and not actually a real concern.