› ›

Would you rather run into Fields at the airport OR Paloma at a bar?

1…2526283031…148

Comments

  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited August 2023 Posts: 3,787
    echo wrote: »
    It's an issue with SP, not NTTD.

    Bond and the audience in OHMSS have seen Tracy's resourcefulness in saving his life and Bond's appreciation of her, so he and we understand that she is the one.

    The script in SP never gave us that chance, to see why Bond falls in love with Madeleine and decides to leave the service. The hotel scene with Madeleine drunk/lowering her guard was a nudge in that direction, but the script needed a lot more of that.

    In SP we have a markedly stronger actor playing Bond in a suddenly significant relationship than in OHMSS, but the acting doesn't matter if it's not on the page.

    NTTD does a much more credible job of showing us that relationship. It's the actors and the script and the direction, but also the song and score. Billie Eilish was an inspired choice. Her song is my favorite since at least You Know My Name.

    But NTTD paid for the price of the failure of SP, hence, it's all too quick and took too far for a relationship that's not much developed.

    Like how can I buy all such things like Bond having a child with her, cohabitating with her, if their relationship in the previous film failed to reason or prove their relationship by not giving a development?

    If SP had done a better job of developing their relationship, their deep romance in NTTD might be more reasonable and more convincing, but alas.

    In OHMSS, the romance was more developed and done well in just one film, the film showed a lot of reasons to prove Bond and Tracy's relationship (hence, Tracy's character; her being resourceful, saving Bond's life & etc., The montage scene), in SP & NTTD, the relationship was happened all of a sudden, came out of nowhere.

    Actually, like OHMSS (or maybe TLD), the relationship of Bond and Madeleine could easily be developed in just one film, but no it took two films, but both failed in proving or reasoning their relationship.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Well, it may’ve failed to you @SIS_HQ , but not for all of us.

    Fukunaga took the PTS, and within that time, corrected everything that wasn’t seen or felt in the previous film, IMO.

    By the end of NTTD’s PTS I was very much convinced that these two were in the throes of romantic passion…
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,205
    SIS_HQ wrote: »
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    I don't think the issue is so much with her delivery, as the line comes from out of nowhere. I mean, she has barely known him for more than 5 minutes. I don't know, maybe having a knife held to her throat is her kink.

    Well, at least it's only Lupe who fell for Bond (and Bond had clearly no feelings towards her), and considering the nature of her character (she's a hooker, a gold digger who would stick to every man just to get out of Sanchez's world), it's meant to be taken with that concept in mind (in short, not meant to be taken seriously), we've seen how she functioned as a character for the first and second act of the film (cheating on Sanchez by sleeping with another man and her liking Sanchez because he's rich), so that word, as for me, I take it as like out of depth or just an overwhelmed expression since she felt the security on Bond, she saw Bond as an opportunity.

    My problem with that was more on Talisa Soto's delivery of the line.

    Now, with Madeleine, her declaration of love for Bond (despite of her hating him and not knowing him that much), well she's not an opportunist or a gold digger like Lupe either but a professional, now that's rushed and literally came out of nowhere.

    What's worst, was Bond also fell in love with this woman despite of him not knowing her that much, their love came out of nowhere, and it's hard to buy, even their romance in NTTD, it's literally too far for these people that only got knew of each other for weeks or so?

    There's no development in that, so they've made out in the train and Bond fell in love with her, then Madeleine declared her love for Bond in Blofeld's lair then Bond retired, then they've started cohabitating in NTTD and they've had a child, like it's all too quick to happen.

    Then suddenly Bond dumped Madeleine because he thought she betrayed him? Trust issues? But that's the problem that Bond didn't saw coming in the first place, he put his heart on this woman without knowing her that much, only for Bond to dump her because Madeleine had some secrets that he didn't know? Then that makes Bond a bit stupid, right?

    The problem with Bond and Madeleine's relationship was it's meant to be taken seriously, but it's hard because of how rushed and poorly written it was.

    The problem with Lupe Lamora was Talisa Soto's acting (definitely worthy of Razzie), but in Madeleine and Bond, it's a problem of the script.

    In the Lupe Lamora character, I think it could be done better with a better actress, but in Madeleine and Bond's relationship, I doubt any actors/actress could've saved that script.

    I wholeheartedly agree with this, and it's one of the reasons why I can't get onboard with the notion of NTTD retroactively improving SP. I admire the big swings NTTD took, but it all has rocky foundations. If anything, the fact that the big emotional beats in NTTD don't land for me as well as they wanted them too just highlights how badly written the previous film was. There's just no getting away from it, as much as they tried.

    It all ends up being admirable but ultimately unsatisfying and that would be why I'd choose LTK every day of the week. It's a film that doesn't take as many big swings as NTTD does, but it lands the ones it does take.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,460
    NTTD didn’t really retroactively improve SP for me, but it did - and still does - stand out as a way better movie.
  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Being chauffeured by Tibbett
    edited August 2023 Posts: 667
    SIS_HQ wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    It's an issue with SP, not NTTD.

    Bond and the audience in OHMSS have seen Tracy's resourcefulness in saving his life and Bond's appreciation of her, so he and we understand that she is the one.

    The script in SP never gave us that chance, to see why Bond falls in love with Madeleine and decides to leave the service. The hotel scene with Madeleine drunk/lowering her guard was a nudge in that direction, but the script needed a lot more of that.

    In SP we have a markedly stronger actor playing Bond in a suddenly significant relationship than in OHMSS, but the acting doesn't matter if it's not on the page.

    NTTD does a much more credible job of showing us that relationship. It's the actors and the script and the direction, but also the song and score. Billie Eilish was an inspired choice. Her song is my favorite since at least You Know My Name.

    But NTTD paid for the price of the failure of SP, hence, it's all too quick and took too far for a relationship that's not much developed.

    Like how can I buy all such things like Bond having a child with her, cohabitating with her, if their relationship in the previous film failed to reason or prove their relationship by not giving a development?

    If SP had done a better job of developing their relationship, their deep romance in NTTD might be more reasonable and more convincing, but alas.

    In OHMSS, the romance was more developed and done well in just one film, the film showed a lot of reasons to prove Bond and Tracy's relationship (hence, Tracy's character; her being resourceful, saving Bond's life & etc., The montage scene), in SP & NTTD, the relationship was happened all of a sudden, came out of nowhere.

    Actually, like OHMSS (or maybe TLD), the relationship of Bond and Madeleine could easily be developed in just one film, but no it took two films, but both failed in proving or reasoning their relationship.

    I have to agree. I just never got the sense of what it was that Bond saw in her. I guess I just expect him to fall for women with a bit more pluck and wit. Someone who can give it back to him and not be so passive. To be fair, Madeleine has her moments of grit, but somehow it just feels forced with her, whereas with Tracy and Vesper (and several other Bond girls) it just felt so natural and appropriate for their characters.
    peter wrote: »
    By the end of NTTD’s PTS I was very much convinced that these two were in the throes of romantic passion…

    I was too. I just didn't find it very satisfying with those two actors and the writing.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    I was too. I just didn't find it very satisfying with those two actors and the writing.

    That’s a genuine shame for a fan like me. Obviously I’d like to fill everyone up with my love for this film, the risks it took, and to me the admirable execution. I think Craig continued to push the role (even when he wasn’t as effective, as I felt, in Spectre).

    But in the end, it’s a film, and it’s all subjective.
  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Being chauffeured by Tibbett
    Posts: 667
    peter wrote: »
    I was too. I just didn't find it very satisfying with those two actors and the writing.

    That’s a genuine shame for a fan like me. Obviously I’d like to fill everyone up with my love for this film, the risks it took, and to me the admirable execution. I think Craig continued to push the role (even when he wasn’t as effective, as I felt, in Spectre).

    But in the end, it’s a film, and it’s all subjective.

    That's very admirable. I'm glad it worked for you.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Thanks @George_Kaplan !

    It swept me off my feet, and I’ve seen it an embarrassing amount of times, 😂. My wife finally fell in love with a Bond film (she’s been a loyal soldier, but she’s never connected with James Bond; during NTTD she was in tears, she was moved and she connected to Craig as Bond (she always liked him as an actor, found him attractive, liked him the best in the role, but, in the end, Bond was forgettable entertainment for her; all three of my kids were moved by NTTD, especially my boy (whose love for Bond was seemingly murdered during his first, and only, viewing of Spectre)).

    NTTD is now a family affair in my household, 😂.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,394
    Wonderful job with much insight! Love the thoughts people have for both films and I can feel the passion. Also love the respectful back and forth.

    For me this is a hard one as I don't have either ranked very high. I like NTTD up to the climax, I enjoy LTK but find it to be very unBondian in nature. Not sure who to give credit to but at times it feels like a nineties action movie with Bond in as a cameo.

    But in the spirit of the game I will choose LTK as the ending of NTTD could have been better. I never bought the urgency or got emotional with the ending. I have only watched NTTD twice and both times were in the theatre. I have in my collection but will likely not watch for a while.

    Okay lets move on to another would you rather. Since we have covered all the debuts and finales of the actors. We shall dive into a bit of fun. Having recently watched MR and FYEO I came to see that we have different villains lairs. Some are large and fantastical, see YOLT, Spy, MR, TND, etc. and others are more grounded in the villain lair see DAF, LALD, FYEO, TWINE, etc.

    So I ask you would you rather the Bond villain have a fantastical lair OR be in a more grounded lair?
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,969
    How much time elapsed between TB and YOLT? Thwarted by Bond, Blofeld goes to Japan and builds a launchpad inside a dormant volcano. Seems like a lot of excavating requiring a lot of equipment and manpower. How was all the equipment transported there without the apparent knowledge of anyone. Where did all those employees come from without nary a spilled bean? At least in Dr. No the lair was disguised as a bauxite mining operation. The lairs are fun, but too often quite silly.

    Bond has always walked the line between somewhat realistic and preposterous. I like it when the films don't cross the line. I lean toward grounded.

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    @CrabKey , how do we know that Blofeld, and Spectre, hadn’t been building the volcano lair for a decade before the events of ‘67?

    In my Bond time line, I never had the lair being built between Operation Thunderball and YOLT… it seems like Spectre always has several plates spinning (just listen to all of their operations during the Spectre meeting in TB; these guys don’t do one project at a time).
  • delfloriadelfloria
    Posts: 1,858
    For me, fantastic lairs ARE just........................more fun and imaginative!
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,394
    @CrabKey good point! Don't get me started on how Drax got his space station up and built without anyone noticing. LOL!

    There is a suspension of disbelief that comes with the fantastical. Some can look past it and others can't. It is what makes the world go around. I tend to like the large lair as a finale to the film.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Depending on the story, I like both. Give me a great big volcano lair that the little boy inside of me can marvel over. And then in other stories, I don’t mind something more grounded…. I think the meeting room in TB was grounded and it felt sinister and appropriate…. I suppose it’s all up to the story.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,272
    It's all in the lighting.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    echo wrote: »
    It's all in the lighting.

    Or in the hips (Happy Gilmore reference. I’ll show myself out…)
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,709
    Fantastic lair. One of my favourite bits from SP was the Rolls Royce and the crater base scene. Although it was ultimately a let down by the time Bond and Brofeld started to talk… But I love the fantastical element to it when it’s done right.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,394
    Yes we should have a "wasted opportunity" thread because that whole sequence is one. There were echoes of DN. But the "author of all your pain" and the sequence with the screens really wasted what promised to be a wonderful final act.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,969
    peter wrote: »
    @CrabKey, how do we know that Blofeld, and Spectre, hadn’t been building the volcano lair for a decade before the events of ‘67?

    In my Bond time line, I never had the lair being built between Operation Thunderball and YOLT… it seems like Spectre always has several plates spinning (just listen to all of their operations during the Spectre meeting in TB; these guys don’t do one project at a time).

    I'm not seeing construction beginning in 1957, especially as the first manned flight by a Russian didn't occur until 1961. Whenever it was started, the equipment and manpower going apparently unnoticed for years makes me laugh. So much in Bond films requires a suspension of belief. But of course that is part of their charm. Don't think too deeply about these things.

  • UnivexUnivex
    edited August 2023 Posts: 6,709
    thedove wrote: »
    Yes we should have a "wasted opportunity" thread because that whole sequence is one. There were echoes of DN. But the "author of all your pain" and the sequence with the screens really wasted what promised to be a wonderful final act.

    A final act all spent there, with a lot more gravitas and intelligence imbued into the character of Blofeld (getting rid of that idiotic cucu dynamic), better writing and overall sense of suspense, alienation and danger, and SP would’ve ended beautifully. That, a better song, a tiny tone down on the yellow hues, and SP would be on my top 10 Bond flicks for sure.

    We should definitely open up that topic, @thedove, old friend.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,008
    thedove wrote: »
    So I ask you would you rather the Bond villain have a fantastical lair OR be in a more grounded lair?
    In my ideal Bond future, we are talking about period pieces close to the novels. But since this is not going to be, I wish they would find someone to conceive villain-lair concoctions in huge proportions alike to those Ken Adam masterpieces. Trouble is, Ken Adams is dead, and in spite of good tries none of his successors has even come close to Ken's genius in constructing a "lair". But for me that's the way forward in this regard. So, let it be fantastical provided someone can deliver.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    CrabKey wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    @CrabKey, how do we know that Blofeld, and Spectre, hadn’t been building the volcano lair for a decade before the events of ‘67?

    In my Bond time line, I never had the lair being built between Operation Thunderball and YOLT… it seems like Spectre always has several plates spinning (just listen to all of their operations during the Spectre meeting in TB; these guys don’t do one project at a time).

    I'm not seeing construction beginning in 1957, especially as the first manned flight by a Russian didn't occur until 1961. Whenever it was started, the equipment and manpower going apparently unnoticed for years makes me laugh. So much in Bond films requires a suspension of belief. But of course that is part of their charm. Don't think too deeply about these things.

    Wait, what? Did you tell me not to think too deeply about these things? I was just giving an alternative theory to yours (that it would be impossible to build the lair after TB), 😂!

    And perhaps they didn’t build the lair only to hijack space crafts but just as, you know, a great flipping hiding spot that no one would find or suspect… The hijacking came after the construction of their new HQ…

    😂
  • DwayneDwayne New York City
    Posts: 2,837
    While I don’t want the Bond villain’s center of operations to be a corner deli (“Would you like extra cheese on that Mr. Bond …”), it must serve the plot. Having an elaborate lair just for the sake of it, is a bit silly. For example, the volcano lair of YOLT was unforgettable and sparked the imagination, while the large set pieces of SP fell flat (IMO).

    As for the real-world plausibility of most of these set pieces … see my take on the scientific accuracy of MR: https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/3016/attempting-re-entry-moonraker-appreciation-thread/p18
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,969
    peter wrote: »
    Wait, what? Did you tell me not to think too deeply about these things? I was just giving an alternative theory to yours (that it would be impossible to build the lair after TB), 😂!
    😂

    It was a general statement. Not directed to you personally.

  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,097
    It really depends of the lair. I love both, when done properly and if they work with the plot. The Ice Palace in DAD I never liked the look of it and found it far too public for my taste. But Crab Key, SPECTRE Island, they're great. And I love the boat of Blofeld in FRWL and St Cyril's Monastery.

    But I don't think there's always a clean cut between the two. Is Janus' train a fantastical or a grounded lair? How about Piz Gloria? And SPECTRE's Paris offices with the hidden conference room? Or Goldfinger's ranch when his billiard room turns into a model presentation of Operation Grand Slam?
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,272
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    thedove wrote: »
    So I ask you would you rather the Bond villain have a fantastical lair OR be in a more grounded lair?
    In my ideal Bond future, we are talking about period pieces close to the novels. But since this is not going to be, I wish they would find someone to conceive villain-lair concoctions in huge proportions alike to those Ken Adam masterpieces. Trouble is, Ken Adams is dead, and in spite of good tries none of his successors has even come close to Ken's genius in constructing a "lair". But for me that's the way forward in this regard. So, let it be fantastical provided someone can deliver.

    ^This.

    It's like asking another artist to paint a Monet (or whatever artist you prefer).

    Ken Adam is gone. Trying to copy his genius is not a great idea.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,394
    Sadly with CGI and the cost savings, I doubt we will ever see a Ken Adams type again. Easier to have actors in front of green screens than in a physical set.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited August 2023 Posts: 3,787
    I liked both, but it only depends upon the design of the lair.

    * When it comes to the fantastical lairs, I liked the likes of Piz Gloria (OHMSS), Olympatec Meditation Institute (LTK), Drax's Space Shuttle (MR), and Scaramanga's Island (TMWTGG), for example.

    * But I'm not also a fan of Safin's lair (looked kinda dull, it's meant to be a Garden of Death from You Only Live Twice book, but failed), same for Blofeld's lair in SPECTRE (looked ordinary), and the Ice Palace in Die Another Day (too much cartoonish, almost unrealistic in appearance).

    * When it comes to the non fantastical, I really liked Silva's Abandoned Island in Skyfall, St. Cyril's Monastery in For Your Eyes Only, and the Crab Key in Dr. No, and Kananga's San Monique Cave Island in Live And Let Die.

    * When it comes to the ones I'm not a fan of, it would be Largo's Disco Volante in Thunderball, the same for Williard Whyte Building in Diamonds Are Forever (again, looked a bit dull), and Dominic Greene's Perla De Las Dunas in Quantum Of Solace (looked bland).

    So, I think it depends upon the design.

    And some villains do not have a lair like Trevelyan (unless one may count his Goldeneye satellite center in Cuba), and Le Chiffre (unless one may count the torture room 😅), and Elliot Carver doesn't have a lair either (unless one may count that stealth ship as his lair), the same for Elektra King/Renard (is it the tower or Elektra's house?), The same for Max Zorin (unless one may count his Manor in France), or Brad Whittaker (unless one may count his headquarters full of miniatures and figures).
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,272
    That reminds me that the next Bond era needs to stop with the CGI abandoned islands already.

    Seriously.
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,709
    echo wrote: »
    That reminds me that the next Bond era needs to stop with the CGI abandoned islands already.

    Seriously.

    Yes, I agree.

    Villeneuve usually likes to have enormous sets built. And Nolan likes practical effects. So maybe…
Sign In or Register to comment.