› ›

Indiana Jones IV vs. Die Another Day (Bad vs. Bad)

1235»

Comments

  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Thats where, thinking about it, I agree. They could have just had a simple line like "you're lucky to be alive after a fall like that". It would have made it a little more believable.

    It could have been anything. The bridge could have been lower so that you actually believed that he might have survived. Just something, anything to make it faintly plausible. Even Conan Doyle felt he had to explain to fans how Holmes survives the Reichenbach falls and that was after he'd deliberately tried to kill the character off to the extent he could never bring him back. Infact the SF fall is very similar. You think - he must be dead, but okay he's Bond so we know he's not going to die, but what ingenious, entertaining, smile-inducing explanation are they going to think up? Answer - nothing.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited February 2013 Posts: 11,189
    As someone else said I suppose he does talk about "the less vital organs" but that doesn't really explain the fall.

    I think a simple line like "you're lucky to be alive - most people would have been killed" would have sufficed.

    In FRWL Fleming had INTENDED to kill the character off but due to popular demand was brought back in Dr No. Also, don't forget that Bond is shot at the START of the film so, unlike Fleming or Conan Doyale, we know he is going to survive
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited February 2013 Posts: 9,117
    Getafix wrote:

    What's most depressing is the number of fans who are saying, 'oh, but it's only a Bond film' as if bad writing and direction is what you should expect when you watch a Bond movie. That's an insult to Maibaum and great scripts he crafted.

    You mean great, crafted scripts that feature:

    DN - A monkey as the main villain (initial draft)
    GF - The villain going at great length to explain his plan to the hoods and murder Mr Solo when hes going to kill everyone anyway.
    TB - A film that relies on pure coincidence to drive its plot (If SPECTRE put Mr Angelo up in a different hospital Bond never sees his face and goes to Canada with Group Captain Pritchard. How sloppy is that on your P&W writing scale?)
    DAF - Tiffanys character turning from sassy broad into a joke halfway through, elephants winning at slots, the water balloons, moon buggies, Blofeld in drag - how did this script not win an oscar?
    TMWTGG - Why does Bond need to get the Lazar bullet from Saida when he has one in his hand in the opening scene? Teenage girls kicking ass, the tension in the climax being driven by the gormlessness of Goodnight and her fat arse, the final henchman fight turning into a joke - more good examples of great craftsmanship.

    I could go on.

    And how many of these great crafted scripts did Maibaum write alone? Zero. So if we like to slag P&W for DAD but give Haggis and Logan the credit for CR and SF why is Maibaum untouchable? Perhaps all of his initial drafts were awful but the other writers licked them into shape?

    We have all had it hammered into our skull that you dont like SF but by being unable to restrain your SF hate you just end up making a statement totally bereft of logic.

    No Bond film has ever come close to winning an Oscar for best script and SF is no different. But dont start pretending that the days of volcanoes, moon buggies and space shuttles are some sort of Shakespearean era of writing that we should look back on through rose tinted glasses because thats just ridiculous.

    Yes SF has plot holes and suspension of disbelief moments but no more than the the average for a Bond film and a lot less than many.




  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    TheWizardOfIce wrote:
    Getafix wrote:

    What's most depressing is the number of fans who are saying, 'oh, but it's only a Bond film' as if bad writing and direction is what you should expect when you watch a Bond movie. That's an insult to Maibaum and great scripts he crafted.

    You mean great, crafted scripts that feature:

    DN - A monkey as the main villain (initial draft)
    GF - The villain going at great length to explain his plan to the hoods and murder Mr Solo when hes going to kill everyone anyway.
    TB - A film that relies on pure coincidence to drive its plot (If SPECTRE put Mr Angelo up in a different hospital Bond never sees his face and goes to Canada with Group Captain Pritchard. How sloppy is that on your P&W writing scale?)
    DAF - Tiffanys character turning from sassy broad into a joke halfway through, elephants winning at slots, the water balloons, moon buggies, Blofeld in drag - how did this script not win an oscar?
    TMWTGG - Why does Bond need to get the Lazar bullet from Saida when he has one in his hand in the opening scene? Teenage girls kicking ass, the tension in the climax being driven by the gormlessness of Goodnight and her fat arse, the final henchman fight turning into a joke - more good examples of great craftsmanship.

    I could go on.

    And how many of these great crafted scripts did Maibaum write alone? Zero. So if we like to slag P&W for DAD but give Haggis and Logan the credit for CR and SF why is Maibaum untouchable? Perhaps all of his initial drafts were awful but the other writers licked them into shape?

    We have all had it hammered into our skull that you dont like SF but by being unable to restrain your SF hate you just end up making a statement totally bereft of logic.

    No Bond film has ever come close to winning an Oscar for best script and SF is no different. But dont start pretending that the days of volcanoes, moon buggies and space shuttles are some sort of Shakespearean era of writing that we should look back on through rose tinted glasses because thats just ridiculous.

    Yes SF has plot holes and suspension of disbelief moments but no more than the the average for a Bond film and a lot less than many.




    Wizard I couldn't have put better myself, all this Skyfall script is terrible talk yes it has plot holes yes it has leaps of logic but seriously it's got some of the best dialogue in a Bond film period, yes as good as god Maibaum is purported to be by some in their rose tinted specs among us.

    I personally prefer the dialogue in this to any of the Dalton films, yes I said it.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    Shardlake wrote:
    I personally prefer the dialogue in this to any of the Dalton films, yes I said it.
    You are dead to me.


    :)) just kidding bro
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I love Skyfall's dialogue. Some really deep stuff that we have been lucky to see more and more of as Dan's era goes by, a great mix of funny and yet dark or serious content. I am sounding like a broken record at this point, but that Tennyson scene is a Bond masterpiece! That one section alone lifts this film even higher for me. Every time I see Bond running to save M while she recites Ulysses and Newman's score plays, my heart pumps, the emotions pour out and I say with great joy and confidence: THAT is James Bond! In that one moment alone I have never been more proud of him, or more blessed to be a fan of this series that EON, Dan and great directors, cinematographers and so many more have lifted up with their talent and eloquence again.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    Every time I see Bond running to save M while she recites Ulysses and Newman's score plays, my heart pumps, the emotions pour out and I say with great joy and confidence: THAT is James Bond!
    Failing M in the end. #-o
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    TheWizardOfIce wrote:
    TMWTGG - Why does Bond need to get the Lazar bullet from Saida when he has one in his hand in the opening scene?

    Clearly it's working on some level, because I've never thought of this once, and I notice little things like plot holes.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    Agent007391 wrote:
    TheWizardOfIce wrote:
    TMWTGG - Why does Bond need to get the Lazar bullet from Saida when he has one in his hand in the opening scene?

    Clearly it's working on some level, because I've never thought of this once, and I notice little things like plot holes.
    Isn't it for a comparison?
    Detective stuff?
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    chrisisall wrote:
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    Every time I see Bond running to save M while she recites Ulysses and Newman's score plays, my heart pumps, the emotions pour out and I say with great joy and confidence: THAT is James Bond!
    Failing M in the end. #-o

    What?
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    What?

    What what? He didn't save her.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    chrisisall wrote:
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    What?

    What what? He didn't save her.
    Oh, you're one of those that thinks saving her was the mission and since she died he failed? I can see you really analyzed the climax! (sarcasm) It goes so much deeper than any of that.
  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    Posts: 3,327
    Agent007391 wrote:
    TheWizardOfIce wrote:
    TMWTGG - Why does Bond need to get the Lazar bullet from Saida when he has one in his hand in the opening scene?

    Clearly it's working on some level, because I've never thought of this once, and I notice little things like plot holes.
    Plenty of other plot holes need looking at though. And as for outrageous unrealism, you need look no further than DAF and Blofeld being multiplied 100% perfectly, and also the voice altering contraption by Q.

    The fingerprint gadget by Q is also a little too neat and convenient too.

    In FYEO we sudenly have an indoor ice hockey match were the guys turn on Bond. Who are they exactly, do they come after him again once Bond has knocked them all out? And who is putting the scores up on the scoreboard.

    Yup! Maibaum was a genius, but even he had his flaws.

  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    chrisisall wrote:
    Shardlake wrote:
    I personally prefer the dialogue in this to any of the Dalton films, yes I said it.
    You are dead to me.


    :)) just kidding bro

    To be honest the one thing about the TD era I have no dispute about his Tim himself I was an advocate from day one but the films he's in I'm not so sure, TLD is just a film that could have starred Rog and has been slightly tinkered with to suit Dalton's style which he does admirably but some of it jars with his interpretation.

    As for LTK it's Dalton's film no doubt he's great in it and it does have some great Bondian moments but CR & SF feel more all round like Bond films and the dialogue is better in SF, yes Craig has had better resources but that's just the way the cookie crumbles I'm afraid.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Yes and while we're praising Maibaum and hammering P&W let's remember he had an untapped mine of Fleming to plunder. P&W may have done a lot better if they weren't scratching around for the few nuggets of Fleming that were left. CR is a pretty faithful adaptation of the novel and the gambling scenes are well written (although no doubt this is all due to Haggis and the director).
  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    Posts: 3,327
    TheWizardOfIce wrote:
    Yes and while we're praising Maibaum and hammering P&W let's remember he had an untapped mine of Fleming to plunder. P&W may have done a lot better if they weren't scratching around for the few nuggets of Fleming that were left. CR is a pretty faithful adaptation of the novel and the gambling scenes are well written (although no doubt this is all due to Haggis and the director).
    And considering Maibaum had the luxury of using DAF, LALD, TMWTGG and MR as source material to tap into, yet we ended up with campy romps with very little acknowledgement to the books they were supposed to be based on, other than the odd character reference or location.



  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    jetsetwilly wrote:
    TheWizardOfIce wrote:
    Yes and while we're praising Maibaum and hammering P&W let's remember he had an untapped mine of Fleming to plunder. P&W may have done a lot better if they weren't scratching around for the few nuggets of Fleming that were left. CR is a pretty faithful adaptation of the novel and the gambling scenes are well written (although no doubt this is all due to Haggis and the director).
    And considering Maibaum had the luxury of using DAF, LALD, TMWTGG and MR as source material to tap into, yet we ended up with campy romps with very little acknowledgement to the books they were supposed to be based on, other than the odd character reference or location.



    Your forgetting Jetset though some of these guys want that kind of thing again and would rather go on about implausibility of Bond's fall in SF to justify their criticism when you consider the cheesy nonsense that Maibaum was responsible for.

    To be honest that type of Bond out ways any of the more serious entries yet you'd think that we'd not had enough and darker Bond was the dominant one in the series.
Sign In or Register to comment.