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
Bingo! Four films into the rebooted series, and they still can't stop fannying with the gunbarrel. What was it last time? Fading it out prematurely for "The dead are alive". Fleming have mercy. It isn't supposed to signal Bond now being a 00, or the state of his mind, or any other arty farty reason. Pure and simple, it is just like the header on headed note paper. Maybe with the next film they get it right, but I won't hold my breath. Directors should either play in the same sandbox as Young/Hunt/Glen etc.. and with the same toys, or stay away.
Make that TMWTGG and I would agree. I like TND, so breaking it down doesn't change my opinion. But TMWTGG has one of my favourite scores. I don't care who does the score for the next film, so long as they bring back the Bond theme in all it's glory, throughout the film.
I agree. Pissing about with it is sacrilege imo. I don't care how good the film is. What Maurice Binder did is a work of art. It's cinematic iconography at it's most original. I don't mind what tone the film takes, what tropes or ingredients they choose to employ, I don't care about them going out on limb with their storytelling, but when you remove that intro you sacrifice one of the great adrenaline pumping moments in cinema.
Putting the gunbarrel at the end is one of the most ridiculous ideas EON have ever entertained. Once you've clawed yourself through the relentless ads and the film certificate appears you're ready to go... seeing those white dots appear is epic and definitive. The orchestration gives you a little glimmer of tone and bam! You're entering Bond's world again, like it's the first time.
It cannot be beaten and it should not be f***** with again. Whether the ensuing film is decent is largely irrelevant, nothing compares to the hope and expectation you feel when Bond struts across the screen.
As good as SF may be, and as nicely lit and framed as the opening shot may be, it's the not the gunbarrel and Mendes isn't Binder.
As Bond fans we should be proud of this indelible moment in cinema. It's worth defending.
YES! Agreed 100%.
When I saw my first Bond film, there was no internet and no Bond on video or tv. Seeing that gunbarrel on the big screen was a chill inducing experience. I felt the same when it was finally back in SPECTRE.
This one's for you, @bondjames.
This is my favourite (I think it was the last iteration):
I was thinking the same thing. Always a good idea!
Well said. I agree about SF as I almost never pop it in due to the PTS missing that critical element. That absence leaves a complete void in what otherwise might have been one of my favorite PTS openings in the series.
Binder's logo is one of the most iconic images in film history. Up until the Craig era pretty much anyone who had ever been to a movie in their life would probably recognize that image. It really is a rush when seeing a new Bond film for the first time- that moment the Bond Theme and the white dots kick in. It's a huge cinematic experience that an entire ERA of the Bond series has missed. SP brought it back, but still didn't quite do Binder justice.
If I were rating the Bond films with four stars being the highest, both QoS and SF would get docked an entire star for putting the gunbarrel at the end. My feeling has always been that the ONLY Bond not to start with the GB should have remained NSNA for obvious reasons. I give CR a pass because it's reminiscent of DR NO in that it segues directly and seamlessly into the titles. Also symbolic as it represents Bond's first kill.
To me dismissing and tampering with this iconic Bondian image is like spitting on Maurice Binder's grave. Disrespectful and unforgivable.
Are audience's attention spans really that short that they can't sit thru 20 seconds of screen time for the gunbarrel? Effing A- even the Brosnan films sped the sequence up so we never got the full rendition the the Bond music for that sequence.
A Bond film without the gunbarrel is like Halloween without pumpkins (or candy). Christmas without a well decorated tree and so forth.
I can remember the times before VHS and DVD when television airings of the Bonds were the only way to see the films unless they were re-released or a new film was out. I can also remember being furious when the networks would omit the GB for commercial time.
Totally agree on all counts @GoldenGun. The Gunbarrel is an essential part of my enjoyment of a Bond film.....and this was my main gripe with the Craig ere pre-Spectre.
Spot on...mucking around with something as iconic as the gunbarrel is sacrilege and I have missed it immensely over the past 10 years +
If it aint broke ,don't fix it....especially with something so iconic and special in cinematic history.
+1
Hear hear!
I can't find a GIF of the UA intro that used to proceed the GB from the 60's and 70's, but it looked pretty much like this...
Makes me nostalgic, I think this was the one preceding the Dalton entries:
Young was a master of having Bond use tools, while still having those tools become grounded in a reality and that he didn't push on the character all the time. Hunt took it even further, and gave Bond nothing but a safe cracker for his film, yet another grounded device. Thankfully the more earnest manner of the Craig films once again did away with the crazy stuff, and returned to Bond either using nothing at all on his missions, or tools that were grounded or, in the case of the DB10, items that didn't get too fantastical.
At certain points in a Bond script you need to feel like Bond is truly outmatched, and helpless. Would the train scene with Grant be more effective if Bond had said "quick, look over there!" And then judo chopped Grant on the back of the head? No, the briefcase was used effectively here to showcase Bonds vulnerability rather than his invulnerability.
It just shouldn't feel obligatory or 'inserted' which is how the Omega felt throughout Brosnan's turn (because they had a blooming gadget on the watch in nearly every film).
Very true, @Mendes4Lyfe. That FRWL moment also adds a layer of doubt or suspense, as you see what Bond is trying to do with the offer of the gold coins for a cigarette, but you realize that for his plan to work he has to get Grant to not only retrieve the case but also open it the way he wants it. It's never a surefire thing that it's going to work, and the element of luck tells us that things may not go as expected.
The difference was the LALD croc sequence was tense, so I was on edge. The car chase wasn't and the Sinatra element was a gag.
There was something similar in GF, when the homer device was crushed along with Solo.
Was it crushed? It's hard to see how something that small could get crushed like that. I always thought the gaint magnet made the homer ineffective.