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
There's only one way to find out !
Me too. I think his machine gunning was yet another product of the time. That was what 90's action was. Moore wasn't a tough guy either, but they felt no need to give him a machine gun in the 70's.
Except in TSWLM.
I clearly missed the e-mail stating the rules on when and where a Bond actor can use a machine gun.
For what it's worth I can live with it in GE (although could lose the use of it in the archives) but TND's from finale is utterly awful.
TND is a cracking action romp but the final reel is pedestrian Seagal/Lundgren/Statham dross of the highest order.
My point is that it wasn't a staple of his tenure as it was with Brosnan's.
He also used one in OP. In both cases the scenario was similar to Brosnan's uses, a battle had broken out so he picked one up.
If Bond was using a machine gun in the gunbarrel or running around with one constantly I'd understand but I never had a problem with Brosnan's use of it. I liked it actually. That he could improvise and was an expert with a few weapons added to his credibility, made him seem more highly trained.
I like Brosnan's use of machine guns as well. I was never trying to say anything against it, I was just pointing out that Brosnan's frequent use of them was a product of the time period in which his films were made; machine guns being popular in 90's action movies.
Roger's films were often pretty silly in terms of their humour, but they nearly always had a sense of Britishness about them. The humour of Roger's films (strangers looking on in shock) was also popular in British comedies at the time. If any Americans showed up, they were usually deliberate stereotypes or parodies. Brosnan's filmspandered to US audiences too much.
I think so too. One should also keep in mind the influence that films such as Mission Impossible had on the franchise throughout the 90s.
Indeed.
To be fair, I think this "Americanisation" was in LTK a bit too. It was just upped in the Brosnan films to the point when American-isms were part of the dialogue.
To be fair, American cinema had always influenced the Bond franchise since the Roger Moore era:
Live and Let Die (Blaxploitation)
Moonraker (Star Wars)
Licence to Kill (Miami Vice)
Brosnan era (American action movies such as Mission impossible)
Quantum of Solace (Bourne)
Skyfall and Spectre (Nolan's Batman films (at least visually))
'Time for a station break' for example. So appalling a sentence for a British character to utter it's actually offensive.
"Next time I'll take the elevator"
Or when Natalya asks him another word for bottom and he responds " What?!"
Those hoping for a renaissance have another thing coming.
There was enough to appeal to American audiences but the films on the whole felt like they were made in the UK.
I know it's kind of ironic considering the producers were American, but the films always had an English style about them. They gently mocked American culture rather than putting it on a pedestal.