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
Cinematography wise, I don't see any problems regarding it in the Brosnan Era, sure not as beautiful as say OHMSS or Skyfall, but they're not as cheap looking as LTK or FYEO or even AVTAK.
That's why I consider them a step up from the 80's Bond films, filmmaking wise and in terms of cinematography.
The fight scenes in TND are not as badly shot as those in QoS.
Please explain to me how TND has better fight sequences than Quantum?
EDIT: PM me so we don't bung-up this thread
I prefer to explain it here, so everyone would have the chance to see my side 😊
The QoS fight scenes are more visceral and brutal for sure, but what keeping those from being great are the editing, it's very frenetic, that's what I'm trying to say that the fight scenes in the Brosnan Era for all of the problems regarding the believability in the fight scenes, are better shot than QoS, and especially, they're not cheap looking, let alone horrendously poor, they're not.
The fight scenes in QoS are actually a step down from CR regarding of the shots.
So regarding the filmmaking in terms of technicality, I don't see any problem with the Brosnan Era Bond films, especially the cinematography, those may not be as beautiful directed as OHMSS, SF, MR or even TSWLM, but it's a step up from the cinematography of the films made in 80's like LTK, FYEO or AVTAK, not cheap looking.
Well, not going to argue with your opinion.
I personally want to feel Bond’s in actual danger when in an altercation, and I certainly feel that more in Quantum, whereas I never, ever, think Brosnan’s in trouble in TND.
And I’m also one of the people that can’t stand the Kaufman scene. As written, it’s awesome, but to me, it was executed and played for laughs by an actor doing a cartoonish accent. Never once did I think he had a chance at blowing Bond away.
And the struggle for the gun, the shaking of the weapon, and the grit-jaw line delivery (on Bond’s part), felt more pantomime than it did “acting in the moment”.
QoS had a little chaos of what unarmed combat brings and I’d rather have that grounded approach vs a Saturday morning cartoon.
No shaky cam!!!
I love the axe fight and how unhinged Amalric plays it. His role is underwritten but his portrayal is great.
I agree @echo , I thought he was fantastic in every scene. He was completely unhinged and raging in that climax. He was a greasy rat that was cornered by a bobcat (Bond), and he just went all out psycho.
Usually I don’t like it whenever Bond easily one ups the villain without any trouble/difficulty in some of these movies because it takes away from the threat/danger of the bad guy if Bond can easily dispatch him, but I do like the fight between Bond and Greene as an exception to that rule. Greene was such a twerp for a Bond villain that seeing Craig run circles around him to the point of having Greene hit his own foot with an axe is great. Then dangling him over a ledge holding him by only his hair is another brutal but great touch.
I often think that Amalric could have been a great Le Chiffre. Not that there's anything wrong with Mikkelsen of course, I just think Amalric could have been great too.
I think Amalric could’ve made a great Blofeld myself. He’s got a quirkiness that reminds me a lot of Donald Pleasence. Plus something about his eyes and how wicked they can look sometimes makes him engaging to watch.
Lets move off our double bills, though we may come back to that one with some different combos.
How about we focus on chases. Bond is always getting chased or being chased. In some cases our hero grabs a random vehicle, in other cases he has a Q vehicle at his disposal. I want to focus on those rare occasions where Bond is strictly on foot. No vehicle to help, merely a man running or a man being chased.
In a few rare times Bond has been in a rather tight spot during a chase. I think of the TB chase though the junkanoo, shot with glow in the dark blood. Or in OHMSS when he ends up in the small town holding the festival. I kind of liked those foot chases and the tension that they bring as Bond is usually in close quarters. You aren't sure how he will make it out alive or free. Even YOLT with the roof top chase on the docks might qualify here.
In more recent films Bond has engaged in a foot chase and done the chasing. In CR when he chases the bomber, he's like a bull in a china shop. He bashes through things and he's focused on one thing. In QOS when he chases the turned agent. These are frenetic, they are big and bold. Bond is doing the chasing and usually gets his man.
This brings us to our would you rather!
Would you rather a foot chase where Bond is being chased OR a foot chase where Bond is chasing his enemy?
Which one works better for you? What type of chase brings more tension or allows for more suspense?
Whereas with the books it's the other way around, because you get to read Bond's inner monologue the tension of whether he's going to escape and how is much more palpable when he's the one being chased.
And he had a broken leg at the time! :)
Bond chasing the enemy, makes Bond too confident and cemented his status as the most fearsome agent.
So, for this, I'd liked to see Bond being chased by the enemies.
I think I would like to see a Bond being chased sequence in a future film.
Okay lets move off that and talk about the Bond universe, or at least some things that have been bandied about in these forums.
We are told it's all about content! We have Marvel and Star Wars being mined for material with movies and series about some minor characters. We have limited TV series and in some cases films that don't feature any of the "main' characters.
Some on here have espoused that Amazon may ask EON to produce some similar content for Amazon Prime. Think a series starring Felix, or a series about other double-o agents. Heck you could even have a series about the Mi6 gang!
On the other hand there is a youth market. EON did something for the younger fans back in the 90's. It was a cartoon series called James Bond Jr. A cartoon of some cheesiness, hey it was a different time. James Bond Jr. was the nephew of Bond and seemed to have some similarities with his famous uncle. While it has gained a cult status among certain fans it represents the last time EON really did anything substantial with a different media. Since then we had a book series of Young Bond. The books were successful and have their fans.
This leads to our would you rather question:
Would you rather EON produce a Bond universe for Amazon Prime OR they develop a Young Bond series for Amazon?
Choose one and tell us why! A series for the younger fans? Or a whole universe of characters from the Bond movies? Which would you rather see brought to life.
But, if I had to choose, I'd say expanding the Bond movies into a universe is the bigger risk so I'd go for a Young Bond series, but make sure it has no connection to the continuity of the current era or any of the past ones. The best way to do this in my eyes would be to adapt Charlie Higson's novels and keeping them as period pieces to cement that this is a separate world and not the origins of whoever the current Bond will be.
You say that but deep down in the list of members on this website sits two massive James Bond Jr. fans awaiting a complete series release on Blu-Ray…
Christ 😦
I still find it incredibly weird that EON sanctioned off on that show actually. I actually wouldn’t be surprised if EON feels quite ashamed of it these days.