Controversial opinions about Bond films

1521522524526527707

Comments

  • Posts: 15,110
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Or, that could have been the one where the audiences came around.

    Maybe, but at that point I think people wanted Connery. Even a Connery out of shape, getting old and playing a caricature of Bond in a spoof.
    Revelator wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I'll repeat a controversial opinion I placed here before : a second Bond movie with Lazenby, either with the same approach and quality as OHMSS or as he DAF we've had, would have killed the franchise.

    I think there are too many variables involved to make a confident prediction. OHMSS's own promotion and reception were colored by Lazenby's departure from the role and estrangement from the producers. Had he stayed onboard and played ball, he would have received far more promotion and the film might have done even better at the box office (as many have noted, OHMSS was not a commercial or critical flop). All of that might have ensured that his second film would be received well. On the other hand, both Moore and Dalton's second films under-performed, despite their debuts having matched or surpassed the grosses of their predecessors' last films.

    Well there are many variables, and of course it's entirely speculative. I don't say this happily though: I don't like DAF one bit.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,534
    The only things that I would change about QOS:
    •Put the gunbarrel at the beginning.
    •Slow down the editing a bit during the Mitchell chase so it doesn't look like M gets shot.
    •Include a couple scenes with Guy Haines and include the original ending with Mr. White's death, ending the Quantum storyline.

    Seems kinda controversial.
  • Posts: 7,414
    Remington wrote: »
    The only things that I would change about QOS:
    •Put the gunbarrel at the beginning.
    •Slow down the editing a bit during the Mitchell chase so it doesn't look like M gets shot.
    •Include a couple scenes with Guy Haines and include the original ending with Mr. White's death, ending the Quantum storyline.

    Seems kinda controversial.

    Not really. Someone already re-edited here, and showed how the gunbarrel would have worked At the beginning
    The editing in the sewer chase part and the shooting af M is the only areas I have trouble with it
    And yes, we could have done with more of Guy Haines
    But I think the ending is perfect as it is!
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    edited April 2019 Posts: 1,534
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Remington wrote: »
    The only things that I would change about QOS:
    •Put the gunbarrel at the beginning.
    •Slow down the editing a bit during the Mitchell chase so it doesn't look like M gets shot.
    •Include a couple scenes with Guy Haines and include the original ending with Mr. White's death, ending the Quantum storyline.

    Seems kinda controversial.

    Not really. Someone already re-edited here, and showed how the gunbarrel would have worked At the beginning
    The editing in the sewer chase part and the shooting af M is the only areas I have trouble with it
    And yes, we could have done with more of Guy Haines
    But I think the ending is perfect as it is!

    @Mathis1
    I know those actual changes wouldn't be controversial. The fact that that's ALL I would do differently is somewhat controversial as I hear the theme, the rest of the editing, the plot, Greene, and even the location card font get a lot of criticism.

    I love the ending as it is myself. However, I hate how they used Mr. White in SP so better off to just kill him here lol.
  • Posts: 16,153
    Remington wrote: »
    The only things that I would change about QOS:
    •Put the gunbarrel at the beginning.
    •Slow down the editing a bit during the Mitchell chase so it doesn't look like M gets shot.
    •Include a couple scenes with Guy Haines and include the original ending with Mr. White's death, ending the Quantum storyline.

    Seems kinda controversial.

    I like those ideas very much.
    One thing I might add is perhaps a short dialogue bit between Bond and Mathis where Rene relates an anecdote of a failed relationship akin to the QOS short story. Maybe even just a couple lines of dialogue so that the film at least has some connection to the short story.
  • Posts: 15,110
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Remington wrote: »
    The only things that I would change about QOS:
    •Put the gunbarrel at the beginning.
    •Slow down the editing a bit during the Mitchell chase so it doesn't look like M gets shot.
    •Include a couple scenes with Guy Haines and include the original ending with Mr. White's death, ending the Quantum storyline.

    Seems kinda controversial.

    I like those ideas very much.
    One thing I might add is perhaps a short dialogue bit between Bond and Mathis where Rene relates an anecdote of a failed relationship akin to the QOS short story. Maybe even just a couple lines of dialogue so that the film at least has some connection to the short story.

    That conversation is the big thing missing from the movie. That and maybe a few more quieter moments to allow the story to "breathe".

    My controversial opinion: regardless of how it was handled, QOS is a great title for the movie and a great title in its own right.
  • Posts: 17,753
    Ludovico wrote: »
    My controversial opinion: regardless of how it was handled, QOS is a great title for the movie and a great title in its own right.

    I like QoS as a title too. It certainly beats Jason Bourne, McClane and other completely uninspired titles.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Ludovico wrote: »
    My controversial opinion: regardless of how it was handled, QOS is a great title for the movie and a great title in its own right.
    I like QoS as a title too. It certainly beats Jason Bourne, McClane and other completely uninspired titles.
    +1
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    Daniel Craig is Ian Fleming's James Bond in Ian Fleming's BOND
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,534
    Ludovico wrote: »
    My controversial opinion: regardless of how it was handled, QOS is a great title for the movie and a great title in its own right.
    I like QoS as a title too. It certainly beats Jason Bourne, McClane and other completely uninspired titles.
    +1

    +2. Love it.
  • Posts: 16,153
    Ludovico wrote: »
    My controversial opinion: regardless of how it was handled, QOS is a great title for the movie and a great title in its own right.

    I like QoS as a title too. It certainly beats Jason Bourne, McClane and other completely uninspired titles.

    Damn those titles are dull. I always liked QoS as a Bond title.
  • edited April 2019 Posts: 17,753
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    My controversial opinion: regardless of how it was handled, QOS is a great title for the movie and a great title in its own right.

    I like QoS as a title too. It certainly beats Jason Bourne, McClane and other completely uninspired titles.

    Damn those titles are dull. I always liked QoS as a Bond title.

    Those titles (JB/McClane) feels like they've been chosen close to a deadline or something.
    "Damn, we need a title for this thing! Ah. screw it, let's just call it McClane!"
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,024
    Bond 25: "Bond, James Bond"
    Bond 26: "Commander James Bond"
    Bond 27: "Ohhhhh, James"
    etc.
  • Posts: 17,753
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Bond 25: "Bond, James Bond"
    Bond 26: "Commander James Bond"
    Bond 27: "Ohhhhh, James"
    etc.

    I got to admit that I like "Ohhhhh, James" as a title – just a little bit :))
  • Posts: 15,110
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Bond 25: "Bond, James Bond"
    Bond 26: "Commander James Bond"
    Bond 27: "Ohhhhh, James"
    etc.

    I got to admit that I like "Ohhhhh, James" as a title – just a little bit :))

    At least including the 007 in the title would be easy.
  • Posts: 17,753
    Ludovico wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Bond 25: "Bond, James Bond"
    Bond 26: "Commander James Bond"
    Bond 27: "Ohhhhh, James"
    etc.

    I got to admit that I like "Ohhhhh, James" as a title – just a little bit :))

    At least including the 007 in the title would be easy.

    0
    0hhhhh, James
    7

    ?
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,024
    ...and when the producers and distributors get desperate:
    Bond 28: "James Herbert Bond"
    Bond 29: "James Herbert Bond 2"
    Bond 30: "Herbert with a Vengeance"
  • Posts: 16,153
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    My controversial opinion: regardless of how it was handled, QOS is a great title for the movie and a great title in its own right.

    I like QoS as a title too. It certainly beats Jason Bourne, McClane and other completely uninspired titles.

    Damn those titles are dull. I always liked QoS as a Bond title.

    Those titles (JB/McClane) feels like they've been chosen close to a deadline or something.
    "Damn, we need a title for this thing! Ah. screw it, let's just call it McClane!"

    I hate to admit my shallow narrow mindedness, but JASON BOURNE as a title was the main reason I skipped that entry and have never seen it. If the next Die Hard movie ever gets made (I'm as doubtful as I am of another Indiana Jones film) and McCLANE is in fact the final title, I may skip that one as well and just pop in the original.
  • Posts: 17,753
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    My controversial opinion: regardless of how it was handled, QOS is a great title for the movie and a great title in its own right.

    I like QoS as a title too. It certainly beats Jason Bourne, McClane and other completely uninspired titles.

    Damn those titles are dull. I always liked QoS as a Bond title.

    Those titles (JB/McClane) feels like they've been chosen close to a deadline or something.
    "Damn, we need a title for this thing! Ah. screw it, let's just call it McClane!"

    I hate to admit my shallow narrow mindedness, but JASON BOURNE as a title was the main reason I skipped that entry and have never seen it. If the next Die Hard movie ever gets made (I'm as doubtful as I am of another Indiana Jones film) and McCLANE is in fact the final title, I may skip that one as well and just pop in the original.

    Although I wouldn't necessarily skip watching a film based on the title alone, there is something half-hearted going through the trouble of producing a film, and just end up with a plain title like these two. That's not saying I don't like films which titles are the main characters name, but it's a bit different when long-running film series does the same. At least try to come up with "The Bourne (something)" and "Die Hard: (something)". How difficult can that be?

    Have yet to watch Jason Bourne myself, even though I have a copy of it. Just haven't been in the mood to watch it yet.
  • Posts: 7,653
    Do watch it as it is a decent actioner and thriller and Matt Damon does deliver once more, even if the title is perhaps a wee bit boring.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    The whining about Skyfall is silly.

    There, I said it.
  • Posts: 7,507
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    The whining about Skyfall is silly.

    There, I said it.


    Totally agree! I feel like it is held to a different standard to any other Bond film.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    edited April 2019 Posts: 14,567
    Whining about it is silly, but hardly controversial.
  • Posts: 17,753
    SaintMark wrote: »
    Do watch it as it is a decent actioner and thriller and Matt Damon does deliver once more, even if the title is perhaps a wee bit boring.

    Will do so when I'm in the mood for it! Bought it for a reason. ;-)
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    QBranch wrote: »
    Whining about it is silly, but hardly controversial.

    Some of the "complaints" are in the sense that they are there just to find something to complain about.

    His beard, the shaving scene, "he's not playing James Bond but only the character in name"... "It's not a Bondmovie"...

  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,567
    Yeah, it's weird. SF's was a different take on a Bond film, but that doesn't make it any less of one. Also weird how there's this trend here that if you like SF you can't like QOS and vice versa. I love both.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    QBranch wrote: »
    Yeah, it's weird. SF's was a different take on a Bond film, but that doesn't make it any less of one. Also weird how there's this trend here that if you like SF you can't like QOS and vice versa. I love both.

    That is all too weird indeed.

    As a movie I prefer SF over QOS, but the latter still has Craig's best peformance I think.

    But CR will always be my number 1. :-)
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,567
    Yeah, CR was next-level. Love everything about that film, right down to the editing choices.
  • Posts: 19,339
    DC has had a lot of pressure with his films purely because its nearly impossible for him to match CR since.
  • Posts: 15,110
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    My controversial opinion: regardless of how it was handled, QOS is a great title for the movie and a great title in its own right.

    I like QoS as a title too. It certainly beats Jason Bourne, McClane and other completely uninspired titles.

    Damn those titles are dull. I always liked QoS as a Bond title.

    Those titles (JB/McClane) feels like they've been chosen close to a deadline or something.
    "Damn, we need a title for this thing! Ah. screw it, let's just call it McClane!"

    I hate to admit my shallow narrow mindedness, but JASON BOURNE as a title was the main reason I skipped that entry and have never seen it. If the next Die Hard movie ever gets made (I'm as doubtful as I am of another Indiana Jones film) and McCLANE is in fact the final title, I may skip that one as well and just pop in the original.

    Although I wouldn't necessarily skip watching a film based on the title alone, there is something half-hearted going through the trouble of producing a film, and just end up with a plain title like these two. That's not saying I don't like films which titles are the main characters name, but it's a bit different when long-running film series does the same. At least try to come up with "The Bourne (something)" and "Die Hard: (something)". How difficult can that be?

    Have yet to watch Jason Bourne myself, even though I have a copy of it. Just haven't been in the mood to watch it yet.

    My issue with such titles is that it's taking movie like sausages: here's a Hygrade, here's a Stockmeier, here's an Oscar Mayer. It becomes meaningless.
Sign In or Register to comment.