The James Bond Debate Thread - 336 Craig looks positively younger in SP than he does in SF.

1139140142144145190

Comments

  • Posts: 5,634
    Yes it could use being trimmed down a little. A cut on the often banal underwater sequences, where it can be difficult sometimes to see who is who and what is what, that go on far longer than they should. If we could reduce that significantly, it would be a much better release for it
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 418
    I love Thunderball. The only thing that i would change (if i could), would be to make some of the underwater sequences a little shorter, and replace them with more scenes featuring Fiona Volpe :-)
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,250
    No, not really. QoS should be cut shorter though.




    ok, kidding. DAD then. The swordfight I like. It would've been a very, very short film though.

    Ok, seriously, no. I don't think any of the films should've been cut shorter. Some could've used a bit more time. I like TB's pace, and for the times those underwater sequences were extremely impressive. The tension of those bombs not beeing found and underway to their target is quite exhillerating.
    thinking about it, if any film could've used a bit more pace and cut here and there it's DAF.
  • Posts: 12,526
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 246</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>Of all the Bond films, TB would benefit most from a shorter cut.</b></font>

    I like it as it is to be honest, maybe the whole Shrublands sequence goes on a little too long? But overall I am happy with it. So would disagree with this thesis.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited August 2013 Posts: 13,355
    I also like Thunderball as it is and find little wrong with it. Disagree.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,173
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 247</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>DAF, as it was made, would have been the wrong film to introduce a new actor in the role of Bond.</b></font>
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 247</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>DAF, as it was made, would have been the wrong film to introduce a new actor in the role of Bond.</b></font>

    Disagree. It should have been Roger's first Bond film. He even said so. ;)
  • Posts: 1,310
    I personally think that Sean Connery's DAF would have been better than Roger Moore's DAF.

    As for the thesis, I don't think I agree. If they were going for a change of tone, then DAF did it for better or for worse and introducing a new actor in the role would have made sense.

    Once again though, I think Sean Connery pulled off DAF and his performance is certainly better than his YOLT performance.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    I agree with the thesis. Certain changes to the script would have to be made. I don't think that having another new Bond and another new Blofeld would have worked for example. Also, it's a particularly weak vehicle to launch a new Bond's career with.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,173
    One might ask whether DAF's success came from the film's overall quality or merely from Connery's return to the role. Perhaps a familiar face, like Moore, would have allowed for a successful film too.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 3,494
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 247</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>DAF, as it was made, would have been the wrong film to introduce a new actor in the role of Bond.</b></font>

    Nothing against Sir Roger, who I think could have done a good job with the film, but I would disagree with thesis. I remember the times from 1969 forward very well. People were extremely happy when Lazenby announced he wouldn't be returning and the public demand for Connery's return was overwhelming and immediate. UA and David Picker heard the outcry loud and clear and obviously agreed, from there history tells us the rest of the story.

    I remember that after Sir Sean said "never again", it just wasn't a big deal going forward. I don't know if that was an indictment or not on the film, or Sean's lackluster performance, maybe a bit of both, but I can definitely say that most everyone including my family was resigned to change.



  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 247</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>DAF, as it was made, would have been the wrong film to introduce a new actor in the role of Bond.</b></font>

    Agreed. It was totally meant as a "last hurrah" for Connery and works best that way. I can't see it working as well with either Roger Moore or John Gavin(who was signed to play the role prior to Connery's return).

  • Posts: 5,634
    Yes I think that's fair enough. Diamonds are Forever was a great pull because they managed to coax Connery back one last time, albeit for a then astronomical paycheck. Moore was a little too early and 1973 was the right time for the introduction, Lazenby could have (and should have) returned that year, but then he wouldn't have been a "new" actor to play the part. Connery was a damn disappointment in '71. Took the salary and rode off into the sunset leaving the series in a near state of collapse or disarray after that years disaster, but in hindsight, he was maybe appropriate for the part in coming back one last time as he still had crowd potential and put rears on seats
  • Posts: 12,526
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 247</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>DAF, as it was made, would have been the wrong film to introduce a new actor in the role of Bond.</b></font>

    Agree with the thesis partly. GL should have been given the part as he had just lost his wife. The way it looked was that he was over his grief after the PTS!
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 3,494
    @RogueAgent- Lazenby would have been preferable because Hunt would have come back too and then the script would have been much more serious regarding revenge and grief. The grief aspect they got right some 37 years later for QOS. No Ilsa Steppat as Bunt though unless they recast, and they considered that for a time but I think they never wanted to do that out of respect. Tracy was "Bond's wife" by the way, and not a specific actor's. And George had contractually been given the part, he had a 2 picture deal, and he didn't want DAF nor even the big 7 film contract they waved under his nose. I always got the impression that he would have been given another shot despite the strong negative response towards him and the movement regarding bringing back Sir Sean no matter what it cost.
  • Connery played the role of an ageing, lecherous horndog perfectly in DAF. Neither Laz nor Moore could've done better.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited September 2013 Posts: 24,173
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 248</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>Mendes would be wise to turn Bond 24 into something other than SF² if he wants to repeat SF's success.</b></font>
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited September 2013 Posts: 16,351
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 248</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>Mendes would be wise to turn Bond 24 into something other than SF² if he wants to repeat SF's success.</b></font>

    Agreed. To outdo himself, He has do something very opposite from Skyfall. A non personal adventure for Bond. Bond with some light humor and charm, a women for the ending and so on. We need more of a Casino Royale 2 with no emotional baggage.
  • retrokittyretrokitty The Couv
    Posts: 380
    Well, considering Skyfall was essentially an advert for Bond 24 and how "things are about to change"... it would seem that it will be different. And that would be a good thing.

    How Skyfall was so successful is beyond me. It was good ... but it was so spoon fed that I feel a bit hesitant about the next one. At the very least, I'll go with low expectations and be pleasantly surprised. A turnaround from Skyfall where I went expecting something grand with a story and script to match CR and was let down.

  • Yes agreed. Can't believe anyone would want Mendes to repeat himself for the next film. Could only lead to failure if it happens.
  • edited September 2013 Posts: 12,526
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 248</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>Mendes would be wise to turn Bond 24 into something other than SF² if he wants to repeat SF's success.</b></font>

    Agree absolutely! I would like to see him deal with Quantum from the word go. In fact it could begin with the file that Mallory handed him right at the end of Skyfall?
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    I agree with the thesis but remain skeptical on what he will actually do.
  • edited September 2013 Posts: 3,494
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 248</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>Mendes would be wise to turn Bond 24 into something other than SF² if he wants to repeat SF's success.</b></font>

    Very much agree. As @Murdock says, we now need a business as usual adventure without personal issues, so hopefully Moneypenny stays at her desk while they're at it or at least isn't doing any more field work as far as being in the action. I hate Mendes' musing that she could do that. We need classic Bond with all the trimmings meaning no more messing with the gun barrel placement and the Bond girl in the end. With it supposedly being a two part sequel, I shudder to think how it could go wrong as it seems the idea is too convenient as far as excuses to keep tinkering with the formula. I can't even begin to think what they are planning this far out, and am tired of them making me look like a monkey guessing so it's not worth serious consideration. I only know that I like my cliches and am increasingly resentful of not getting them. The cliches I mentioned are part of what makes a Bond film like no other.

  • DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 247</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>DAF, as it was made, would have been the wrong film to introduce a new actor in the role of Bond.</b></font>

    As it was I think DAF would have been a very poor film to introduce a new actor.

    It basically coasts on having Connery back and to be honest he is pretty poor in it as he is in NSNA, basically both comeback performances are lacking for me.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited September 2013 Posts: 12,480
    #246: Thunderball better if cut.
    Agree. Not my favorite film and it does drag for me.

    #247: Agree DAF should not have had a new actor for Bond.

    #248: Agree, but I am not too concerned about Mendes. However, I DO want similarity in quality cinematography (Deakins!), a smoldering Bond girl (one who lives this time), a great not-too-subtle villain, and a memorable theme song. But other than that, break it wide open and I hope bring in Quantum, too. And NOT start the film with Bond leaving M's office, last shot of Skyfall.
  • #246: Thunderball better if cut.
    Agree. Not my favorite film and it does drag for me.

    #247: Agree DAF should not have had a new actor for Bond.

    #248: Agree, but I am not too concerned about Mendes. However, I DO want similarity in quality cinematography (Deakins!), a smoldering Bond girl (one who lives this time), a great not-too-subtle villain, and a memorable theme song. But other than that, break it wide open and I hope bring in Quantum, too. And NOT start the film with Bond leaving M's office, last shot of Skyfall.

    They messed up the clothing continuity between CR and QOS, so I hope if this is the case they have at least learned a lesson b-(
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,250
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 248</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>Mendes would be wise to turn Bond 24 into something other than SF² if he wants to repeat SF's success.</b></font>

    With the death of Dench's M, the blowing up of the ancesteral home and far worse the destruction of the old DB5 there is no possibility of a SF2. And anyway, Mendes is a huge Bond fan and he's shown us he knows how to tell a Bond-story. So I have no doubt he'll come up with a good old Bond adventure, no SF2 intended.

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,173
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 249</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>DAF could have kept the exact same script had Roger Moore starred in it as Bond.</b></font>
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 249</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>DAF could have kept the exact same script had Roger Moore starred in it as Bond.</b></font>

    Not exactly. The references to Bond's "holiday" and the "we do function in your absence, Commander" comment during the briefing scene with M and Sir Donald Munger seem to be references to Connery's one-picture absence. As written, I could see the PTS (which serves as a re-introduction for Connery's Bond) easily serving to introduce audiences to a new Bond actor. However, I'd miss Connery doing the great dialogue with Jill St. John in the "Peter Franks" meets blond/brunette/redhead Tiffany scene(my favorite Bond meets Bond girl scene).

  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    I would have to disagree with this thesis. Overall it probably could have worked but there are certain things that would have to changed. As @PrinceKamalKhan pointed out, the references to Connery's absence need to be omitted. I don't think that they would have had Bond slap Tiffany either. Also, is it just me or wouldn't having a third new Bond and a third new Blofeld in a row have been a bit ridiculous? With Blofeld having plastic surgery we might think the same of Bond!
Sign In or Register to comment.