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
it just falls flat.
As for Grace Randolph, I like the girl, but seldom agree with much anything she says. She loved BvS, loved X-Men: Apocalypse, and in the former case she did compare how Snyder operated as director on set to Kubrick. That's when you know the piss is being taken. At this point, when I watch her videos I can surmise that whatever her opinion is, mine will be the exact opposite of that.
She wasn't saying Snyder was better, but that his work on the film was Kubrickian in nature, basically trying to argue that his auteur directing style was similar in approach to the legend in his involvement on set. I don't get this comparison at all, as Kubrick was involved in quite literally everything on his movies, while it seems like Snyder only spent all his time in the art department telling his artists how "cool" their designs were, or in the effects department helping the team make more destructo-porn toppling buildings. He didn't seem interested in story or pacing, so that rules out his involvement in script or editing, biggies for Kubrick.
Snyder is just a competent cinematographer who thought he could be a director, and not much more. His sloppy over reliance on action/violence is the equivalent of a kid smashing two Batman and Superman toys together until both of their heads pop off. It all feels messy and artificial.
The production budget for BvS was a reported $250m. I googled that as I watched the extended cut for the first time yesterday because it looked so damn good on blu ray (the money is definitely up there on the screen, directorial issues aside), so I was curious to learn how much it cost to make.
What I couldn't understand though, as I watched BvS and reveled in the spectacle, is how the hell SP cost $250m to $300m?
Between this and SP, and loads of other films, why so much money is used on car chases is beyond me, when there's so many other great uses for the money to do innovative things.
This all being said, the Bourne chase seems to fit in fine with the chases of all the past three, what with Jason racing in and out of casinos, plowing through doors and smashing things to shreds just like old times.
Snyder is heavily involved in nearly every aspect of production, so the comparison is warranted. There's an interesting interview I read with him - I think it was pre-Watchmen - where he states as much. The ironic difference is that Snyder might actually be a better director if he wasn't as involved in everything.
A big thing a lot of directors seem to overlook these days is music. I'm glad Greengrass pays attention to Powell as he's one of the best composers out there and I'm really looking forward to hearing his Bourne themes again. Supremacy is such a great score.
And this is exactly why I have serious issues with EoN. They've had decades of experience in how and where to allocate money to make the best entries and they still foolishly squander money like it grows on the trees in the gardens of Pinewood. The Bourne car chase in Vegas is reportedly 15 minutes of beautiful mayhem and now in principle, compare that to whatever the hell chase we got in SP. It's a joke. There's too much waste when it comes to Bond and when we're waiting 3 to 4 years at a time for mediocre at best and disappointing entries, then what's the point? That all important opening weekend number at some point is going to plummet if after years of waiting we end up with subpar entries.
EoN need to cut the crap and stop all this grandstanding they do just because it's Bond. Just being a 007 movie isn't going to cut it and in the past they got away with it for so long but the film landscape has changed. Audiences require and deserve more; after all, we're the one's paying to see the thing; not to mention we're getting better entertainment elsewhere.
EoN need to seriously think about the direction they want to take their films in...sensibly and then commit to that vision. Clean house; get rid of whatever existing writers and bring in 1 or a team of new writers who can create a fresh conversation. Bring in any director who's pitch can bring a new and exciting voice to the world of Bond that doesn't compromise on what makes Bond so great and exciting in the first place. Then, double down hard on the budget. Nothing that exceeds $200 million. There aren't any excuses, creatively that I can accept for the recent lacklustre Bond movies and movies going forward. If the producers aren't up to the task of making new and all important changes for things to evolve for the better, then they need to step aside in favour of those capable instead of hanging on to a good thing and doing poor job with it. Bond needs to be made great again.
The Bourne ........
Just to counter some of the Bond is crap v Bourne is so much better talk.
;)
I have to say though, I'm getting extremely excited for the new Bourne. Friday can't come soon enough!
Quite a packed cinema for a Wednesday night in a small town too. Audience all seemed engrossed.
Bourne is man of few words at the best of times but Damon has so few lines in this with having no character to accompany him plus a lot of screen time for Tommy Lee Jones and Alicia Vikander.
Will be interested to see how some people react to this one being Bourne out for revenge - avenging the genuine people whom murdered his father.
Great car chase in Las Vegas. Was it only me who'd mistakenly presumed from the trailers that it was Bourne riding the SWAT truck and trashing the traffic?
Nicely brutal and understandably emotional fight at the end.
The character of Heather Lee seems a great addition. That's one lady whom knows how to work her way to the top.
I'd felt that way too. How many more times could you feel sorry for Bourne on the run and deal with the CIA conspiracies but somehow this doesn't feel like a tired rehash.
It's less so the cat and mouse chases of the previous three films but there are still some very suspenseful scenes, chases and fights in typical Greengrass style.
Some fans might not like the sense of Bourne being a secondary character to the story between Robert Dewey and Heather Lee characters. Even more so with...
There was no real reason to bring Bourne back. The filmmakers know this and seem to have rushed into production and decided to try and make up a reason for Bourne's return as they go along in the movie.
Bourne as a character doesn't really have much to say or do in this movie. There are no stakes. He has turned into a superhero.
Remember that bit in Bourne Identity where he scales the wall outside the embassy? There's nothing like that here. He takes some serious knocks but just stays going. There's no sense of danger to any of the stunts he's involved in.
Tommy Lee-Jones just plays another inter-changeable suit. I find it ridiculous that they've retconned things to try and make his character important and force him to fit in with Bourne's backstory. If he was really that important surely he would have been mentioned in the previous movies.
Overall this movie is incredibly episodic. Nothing of merit happens in this that make it essential viewing for the franchise going forward. Jason Bourne had a wonderful character arc in his previous three movies and it was nicely wrapped up. Now that they've decided to turn into an unending franchise there is and will be no more closure for the character.
It's a shame to see a series that reinvigorated the spy genre turn so stale so fast.
Supremacy feels quite messy at times, I actually prefer Ultimatum, the station sequence is incredibly tense. That being said both sequels are very formulaic at least each DC Bond has an individual style regardless of it's problem and doesn't feel like a copy of each other.
Legacy was so mediocre and pointless, I was going to see Jason Bourne but I'll wait for it on the home format.
Still think CR bests all the Bourne films and probably SF as well.
We are going to see the Star Trek Beyond this weekend, thought that would be a film more deserving of the big screen treatment, cinema is just too expensive, the experience needs to be something special, JB seems like something that will work fine on my 40" 4K TV and doesn't warrant £10.29 each.
Bourne has a few fistfights, the one in the last act was quite good but overall there's nothing as innovative or exciting as the previous movies.
@shardlake It's definietly one to watch on the smaller screen.
In Supremacy, he did that legendary takedown of the CIA agent and his colleague whilst held at the airport and then the other fight was with the asset that killed Conklin (sp?) from the first movie.
Ultimatum had the fight at Waterloo station, the fight in the apartment just before Nikki shows up and then the fight with Desh in Tangiers.
...I need to see this film now.
That's disappointing to hear. I honestly thought this film was going to be a huge hit creatively but it seems quite divisive amongst audiences that have seen it.
I'm seeing this tonight and at the least hope I can enjoy it. If I can stomach this more than I can SP then I won't be entirely disappointed.
I get the impression it's completely watchable, but as my mate said (and I've noticed a similar sentiment in several reviews) it just doesn't match the quality of the previous three.