Controversial opinions about Bond films

15051535556707

Comments

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    RC7 wrote:
    There will probably be a day when it's not considered a 'PC move' as so many people insist on calling it, but a simple casting decision. Not for a while though, I surmise.
    There will come a time when most of the inhabitants of this planet will be a medium-dark tan colour, and this discussion will not be able to be had.
    One more comment, when they were making the X-Men, if they had cast a white woman as Storm, I never would have watched it. Storm is black. I wouldn't have cared HOW good or great the white actress might have been in the role.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    SaintMark wrote:
    Murdock wrote:
    QoS is better than all the Bourne movies. ;)

    No it is a poor copy with shadows of better moments from much better done pieces in the 007 series, and the Bourne franchise seems to be the Craigs muse when it comes to his movies especially QoB which borrows everything from the competition including some key personal. In the hands of a seasoned director the movie might have been a more original vehicle Forster however prefered visual flair and vision over the content of an actionmovie.

    The Bourne movies have all been pretty good in all aspects, they even top the use of foreign locations which used to be something nobody did better than the 007 movies. The action in the Bourne series is excellent, and the fightscenes are really believable brutal. And the characterbuilding was very well done.

    In saying that QoB is better than the Bourne movies you seem to let your frustration about the lack of quality of this Bondmovie cloud your judgement.

    No I find the Bourne movies to be painfully dull and Boring. QoS may have borrowed certain elements but it sure worked in it's favor and made it Bond>Bourne as it should always be.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    [quote="Sir
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,161
    chrisisall wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    There will probably be a day when it's not considered a 'PC move' as so many people insist on calling it, but a simple casting decision. Not for a while though, I surmise.
    There will come a time when most of the inhabitants of this planet will be a medium-dark tan colour, and this discussion will not be able to be had.
    One more comment, when they were making the X-Men, if they had cast a white woman as Storm, I never would have watched it. Storm is black. I wouldn't have cared HOW good or great the white actress might have been in the role.

    I agree with @chrisisall. I'm willing to allow the Bond films the indulgence of change but not without stint. There's a streak of madness in trying to alter Bond's skin colour. A black Moneypenny or Felix Leiter is hardly a matter of great portent in my book. They are secondary characters and carry neither Bond's weight nor fame as cultural symbols. Bond, however, has white, womanising, old-school Brit imprinted on him like a tattoo. It's not about being PC or not, it's not about being open-minded or not, it's about being able to differentiate between the importance of leaving Bond entirely 'in tact' versus doing so with other characters. There's a limit to what we can do with M, MP, Q and Leiter as well - of course - but I think most of us have never struggled with the notion of a female M, a black Leiter, a really young Q, ... Most of us would, however, struggle with significant changes to Bond's appearance or personality.

  • Posts: 686
    DarthDimi wrote:
    struggled with the notion of a female M

    I did because she never really established any credibility like Lee, Brown, or Fleming-M.
  • SharkShark Banned
    edited August 2013 Posts: 348
    pachazo wrote:
    Race is about far more than skin color. It's about the culture and behavior that, overwhelmingly in the main, correlate with race. And black culture and behavior do not accord with the posh, Anglo world of Fleming's creation. That is why changing Bond's race is so different from changing his hair color that the comparison is absurd on its face.
    You have a very narrow minded point of view if you assume that everyone of a certain race acts accordingly to some set of behavior rules that you have established for them.

    I said no such thing. But if you cannot see the obvious, namely that there are general cultural forms and patterns of behavior that cohere around race and ethnicity, then you are willfully blind.

    But surely with Bond being an individual, and not a caucasian amalgam - that shouldn't matter? Idris Elba or Paterson Joseph aren't walking racial stereotypes - why there should their Bond be? They're not going to demand the writers to replace Fleming's scrambled eggs with watermelon, for cryin out loud!

    FWIW, I don't support a black Bond, but I'm just playing devil's advocate here.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Shark wrote:
    Idris Elba or Paterson Joseph aren't walking racial stereotypes - why there should their Bond be?
    The same reason you wouldn't have cast Richard Kiel or Bruce Lee as Bond is why I wouldn't cast them; they don't look right for the part.
  • RC7 wrote:
    [quote="Sir

    I wonder what happened here?
  • Posts: 6,396
    RC7 wrote:
    [quote="Sir

    I wonder what happened here?

    "I think he got the point" ;-)
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote:
    [quote="Sir

    I wonder what happened here?

    Sorry. 3G connection dropping during posting seems to do this. I've had it happen a few times.
    @RC7- I agree in principle that there are many fine black actors, Brits included, who could play a Bond type of spy role. Perhaps someone should create such an opportunity if there is demand for it, because hijacking the character of James Bond in the name of cultural progress isn't necessary nor wanted.

    To answer, this is just my point. If it's deemed a case of hijacking the character, it's completely pointless. I'm not interested in casting Bond based on a cultural experiment. This isn't about demand for a black spy character either. The topic at hand is the appropriateness of a black man playing Bond. I'm not pro-black Bond per se, but I certainly don't see the problem with it. Someone like Elba would bring with him none of the 'cultural baggage' others seem to suggest a 'black man' would. Just to confirm I'm not out with my banner saying 'Make Bond Black', but given that Elba is basically a black Connery, I wouldn't have said no to his appointment. Why would I? For sheer suaveness, ruthlessness and elegant brutality he knocks Craig into a cocked hat IMO.
  • Posts: 2,483
    Shark wrote:
    pachazo wrote:
    Race is about far more than skin color. It's about the culture and behavior that, overwhelmingly in the main, correlate with race. And black culture and behavior do not accord with the posh, Anglo world of Fleming's creation. That is why changing Bond's race is so different from changing his hair color that the comparison is absurd on its face.
    You have a very narrow minded point of view if you assume that everyone of a certain race acts accordingly to some set of behavior rules that you have established for them.

    I said no such thing. But if you cannot see the obvious, namely that there are general cultural forms and patterns of behavior that cohere around race and ethnicity, then you are willfully blind.

    But surely with Bond being an individual, and not a caucasian amalgam - that shouldn't matter? Idris Elba or Paterson Joseph aren't walking racial stereotypes - why there should their Bond be? They're not going to demand the writers to replace Fleming's scrambled eggs with watermelon, for cryin out loud!

    FWIW, I don't support a black Bond, but I'm just playing devil's advocate here.

    The problem--one of them, anyway--is that a non-white Bond simply introduces too much cognitive dissonance, needlessly, and probably for all the wrong reasons. Bond, to a significant degree, is a symbol of pre-multiculti England. Some people love this, some hate it, but it is what it is. That England had a very specific culture, and no non-white actor can emblematize that culture because they all spring from very different cultures. Broadly speaking, Asian culture is different from Islamic culture, just as white culture departs from Hispanic culture. Introducing a black Bond into the olde English cultural milieu would be as foolish as having an actor from the Trobrian Islands play the role of a Russian tsar.

  • edited August 2013 Posts: 12,837
    No thats an opinion.

    I'll be fair and say know it was just an opinion and I shouldn't have written that bit, I was just getting frustrated at that point.

    Yes when I say faithful to Fleming I mean in a CR 06 type way. Flemings Bond but more modern.

    I understand where you're coming from but I don't see changing Bonds skin colour as that big of a leap forward, especially after how much the character has changed over the years (I'm talking appearance and personality now).

    I'd say Pierce Brosnan is closer to Flemings Bond appearance wise than Daniel Craig but then out of those two, which one is praised for being faithful to Fleming?

    Yes it'd be more faithful to Fleming if he was white. Just like it'd be more faithful to Fleming if Daniel Craig had black hair.

    If Daniel Craig was black, would that mean Roger Moore was more Flemingesque in your eyes? I don't think Bond's appearance matters and changing his skin colour would at the end of the day only be changing his appearance.
    Race is about far more than skin color. It's about the culture and behavior that, overwhelmingly in the main, correlate with race. And black culture and behavior do not accord with the posh, Anglo world of Fleming's creation. That is why changing Bond's race is so different from changing his hair color that the comparison is absurd on its face.

    There is no specific "black culture and behaviour". There are plenty of posh black blokes who went to Eton and it's entirely possible for a black man in 2013 to work for MI6 and to have had the same upbringing as Bond did.

    Besides, we're not in Flemings world anymore. Bond is different now and I actually think that's a good thing. If the franchise stayed stuck in the 50s, in Flemings "posh Anglo world", then it would've died long ago.

    @SirHenryLeeChaChing First of all, why rule out Northen Ireland?

    Secondly, yes I'm black, but I'd like to think that I'd hold the same POV if I was white.
    But in that same line of thought, an Asian or Indian born in the UK could say exactly the same thing regarding their ethnicity. Are you advocating for that too? Sorry, I call BS on that. Please read on.

    Sorry, when you said India and Asian, I thought you meant actually from India or Asia. My mistake there.

    You make a good point here. I think Indian or Asian comes with a bit more cultural baggage than a black Bond would. In my experience, people except a black man as British much easier than they would san Asian or Indian.

    Although I wouldn't really mind and I certainly wouldn't stop watching the films if it happened.
    RC7 wrote:
    I think it's just that there are clearly non-Caucasians who would consider themselves culturally very similar, almost identical, to their Caucasian counterparts. The only distinct difference being their skin colour.

    Exactly.
    RC7 wrote:
    The same way I don't particularly see anything about the modern Bond that suggests he couldn't be played by a black man.

    Very well said. This is a point that lots of people here seem to be missing.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 3,494
    @thelivingroyale- thanks for seeing where I was coming from. The rest, it's fair to say that I am diametrically opposed to a Bond who isn't white and British, and again, I see absolutely no reason whatsoever to hijack the character for the sake of pleasing other ethnicities that he clearly is not. Is nothing sacred anymore? I pray I'm dead long before I ever see anyone else in the role. We'll have to agree to disagree.

    Since you bring up Northern Irish, if a potential candidate from there has an Irish lilt like Brosnan's then I also don't see that as a good fit. His accent didn't ring of authenticity for me. The rest I will be redundant on, it's well known that my reaction to Brosnan is and was luke warm at best in his first two films and one that resembled horror in the end. I'd prefer someone ethnically white and of AS descent from the island of Britannia. Lazenby's Aussie accent didn't quite work for me either.

    Just how I feel. Hope you understand.

    @Khan- I could not possibly agree more with your last post.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    I wouldn't rule out the Northern Irish as they're from the UK as well. I'd like to think someone from there could do just as well.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 12,837
    @SirHenry I understand :)
    Since you bring up Northern Irish, if a potential candidate from there has an Irish lilt like Brosnan's then I also don't see that as a good fit. His accent didn't ring of authenticity for me.

    What if they did an English accent? Most Welsh and Scottish actors would have to do this too if their accent was fairly thick.
    RC7 wrote:
    but given that Elba is basically a black Connery, I wouldn't have said no to his appointment. Why would I? For sheer suaveness, ruthlessness and elegant brutality he knocks Craig into a cocked hat IMO.

    I think it's a real shame that Elba will probably be too old and famous for Bond by the time Craig leaves. One of the coolest people on the planet.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited August 2013 Posts: 17,789
    I think it's a real shame that Elba will probably be too old and famous for Bond by the time Craig leaves. One of the coolest people on the planet.
    Since seeing him in Pacific Rim, I so agree that he's like Connery in terms of acting stature. Hey, why not cast him as 008 and give him his own movie series?
    Idris Elba as Ian Chrisisall's Brandon Clarke, 008 in NEVER LOSE AIM!
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 3,494
    Samuel001 wrote:
    I wouldn't rule out the Northern Irish as they're from the UK as well. I'd like to think someone from there could do just as well.

    Look, I don't want to politicize this thing or take sides, it really doesn't concern me as an American or even as one proudly of full or mostly Irish descent living here for many generations that is Catholic and supports unification with Ireland. A half Scotch-Irish great grandfather is as close as I get. And does that even count as being a wee bit Irish? I'm mostly German-Lithuanian and a bit of an ethnic mutt when you throw in that, Swedish, Welsh, and some AS ancestry as in continental German. But from a neutral point of view, it seems to me that many Northern Irishmen have long resisted being a part of the UK and favor unification, and the main Irish government doesn't seem to want them.

    @thelivingroyale- I suppose if an actor from Northern Ireland could do a full on Brit accent, I'd give him a chance to impress me. But would the British stand for it is the bigger question. Hell, while I am somewhat impressed that Hugh Laurie and Renee Zellweger can pull off the switch, I'd never want Bond to sound like me or Irish or Aussie either. It just doesn't compute with my ideals I guess.

    @chrisisall- I dig Elba and wouldn't mind a bit seeing him as a 00 whether it's in a Bond film as a guy working with Bond or as a spinoff. He's physical and has acting chops too. Eye and hair color changes have happened, some are put off, but changing skin color or sexual orientation is a much larger leap that I cannot abide.

  • Posts: 2,483
    No thats an opinion.

    I'll be fair and say know it was just an opinion and I shouldn't have written that bit, I was just getting frustrated at that point.

    Yes when I say faithful to Fleming I mean in a CR 06 type way. Flemings Bond but more modern.

    I understand where you're coming from but I don't see changing Bonds skin colour as that big of a leap forward, especially after how much the character has changed over the years (I'm talking appearance and personality now).

    I'd say Pierce Brosnan is closer to Flemings Bond appearance wise than Daniel Craig but then out of those two, which one is praised for being faithful to Fleming?

    Yes it'd be more faithful to Fleming if he was white. Just like it'd be more faithful to Fleming if Daniel Craig had black hair.

    If Daniel Craig was black, would that mean Roger Moore was more Flemingesque in your eyes? I don't think Bond's appearance matters and changing his skin colour would at the end of the day only be changing his appearance.
    Race is about far more than skin color. It's about the culture and behavior that, overwhelmingly in the main, correlate with race. And black culture and behavior do not accord with the posh, Anglo world of Fleming's creation. That is why changing Bond's race is so different from changing his hair color that the comparison is absurd on its face.

    There is no specific "black culture and behaviour". There are plenty of posh black blokes who went to Eton and it's entirely possible for a black man in 2013 to work for MI6 and to have had the same upbringing as Bond did.

    Besides, we're not in Flemings world anymore. Bond is different now and I actually think that's a good thing. If the franchise stayed stuck in the 50s, in Flemings "posh Anglo world", then it would've died long ago.

    @SirHenryLeeChaChing First of all, why rule out Northen Ireland?

    Secondly, yes I'm black, but I'd like to think that I'd hold the same POV if I was white.
    But in that same line of thought, an Asian or Indian born in the UK could say exactly the same thing regarding their ethnicity. Are you advocating for that too? Sorry, I call BS on that. Please read on.

    Sorry, when you said India and Asian, I thought you meant actually from India or Asia. My mistake there.

    You make a good point here. I think Indian or Asian comes with a bit more cultural baggage than a black Bond would. In my experience, people except a black man as British much easier than they would san Asian or Indian.

    Although I wouldn't really mind and I certainly wouldn't stop watching the films if it happened.
    RC7 wrote:
    I think it's just that there are clearly non-Caucasians who would consider themselves culturally very similar, almost identical, to their Caucasian counterparts. The only distinct difference being their skin colour.

    Exactly.
    RC7 wrote:
    The same way I don't particularly see anything about the modern Bond that suggests he couldn't be played by a black man.

    Very well said. This is a point that lots of people here seem to be missing.

    The fact that a very small percentage of blacks meld into upper crust, aristocratic, white British society is largely beside the point. That small percentage simply does not represent black society/culture in the eyes of movie-goers, and hence the cognitive dissonance.

    And while it is no longer the 1950s, cinematic Bond, in the main, has remained as faithful as reasonably possible to Fleming's ancient archetype. It is that faithfulness which renders Bond distinct and attractive to the audience. Violating the spirit of Fleming's Bond so radically by changing his race would certainly be in keeping with the elite 21st-century zeitgeist, but it would also annihilate much of what he symbolizes, alienate a high percentage of Bond's most ardent fans, and in so doing, quite possibly damn the series.

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited August 2013 Posts: 9,117
    No thats an opinion.

    I'll be fair and say know it was just an opinion and I shouldn't have written that bit, I was just getting frustrated at that point.

    Yes when I say faithful to Fleming I mean in a CR 06 type way. Flemings Bond but more modern.

    I understand where you're coming from but I don't see changing Bonds skin colour as that big of a leap forward, especially after how much the character has changed over the years (I'm talking appearance and personality now).

    I'd say Pierce Brosnan is closer to Flemings Bond appearance wise than Daniel Craig but then out of those two, which one is praised for being faithful to Fleming?

    Yes it'd be more faithful to Fleming if he was white. Just like it'd be more faithful to Fleming if Daniel Craig had black hair.

    If Daniel Craig was black, would that mean Roger Moore was more Flemingesque in your eyes? I don't think Bond's appearance matters and changing his skin colour would at the end of the day only be changing his appearance.
    Race is about far more than skin color. It's about the culture and behavior that, overwhelmingly in the main, correlate with race. And black culture and behavior do not accord with the posh, Anglo world of Fleming's creation. That is why changing Bond's race is so different from changing his hair color that the comparison is absurd on its face.

    There is no specific "black culture and behaviour". There are plenty of posh black blokes who went to Eton and it's entirely possible for a black man in 2013 to work for MI6 and to have had the same upbringing as Bond did.

    Besides, we're not in Flemings world anymore. Bond is different now and I actually think that's a good thing. If the franchise stayed stuck in the 50s, in Flemings "posh Anglo world", then it would've died long ago.

    @SirHenryLeeChaChing First of all, why rule out Northen Ireland?

    Secondly, yes I'm black, but I'd like to think that I'd hold the same POV if I was white.
    But in that same line of thought, an Asian or Indian born in the UK could say exactly the same thing regarding their ethnicity. Are you advocating for that too? Sorry, I call BS on that. Please read on.

    Sorry, when you said India and Asian, I thought you meant actually from India or Asia. My mistake there.

    You make a good point here. I think Indian or Asian comes with a bit more cultural baggage than a black Bond would. In my experience, people except a black man as British much easier than they would san Asian or Indian.

    Although I wouldn't really mind and I certainly wouldn't stop watching the films if it happened.
    RC7 wrote:
    I think it's just that there are clearly non-Caucasians who would consider themselves culturally very similar, almost identical, to their Caucasian counterparts. The only distinct difference being their skin colour.

    Exactly.
    RC7 wrote:
    The same way I don't particularly see anything about the modern Bond that suggests he couldn't be played by a black man.

    Very well said. This is a point that lots of people here seem to be missing.

    The fact that a very small percentage of blacks meld into upper crust, aristocratic, white British society is largely beside the point. That small percentage simply does not represent black society/culture in the eyes of movie-goers, and hence the cognitive dissonance.

    And while it is no longer the 1950s, cinematic Bond, in the main, has remained as faithful as reasonably possible to Fleming's ancient archetype. It is that faithfulness which renders Bond distinct and attractive to the audience. Violating the spirit of Fleming's Bond so radically by changing his race would certainly be in keeping with the elite 21st-century zeitgeist, but it would also annihilate much of what he symbolizes, alienate a high percentage of Bond's most ardent fans, and in so doing, quite possibly damn the series.

    So we're still doing this are we? Any chance of the mods getting us back on topic?

    Anyway very astute post Khanners that pretty much sums it up.
    No thats an opinion.

    I'll be fair and say know it was just an opinion and I shouldn't have written that bit, I was just getting frustrated at that point.

    Yes when I say faithful to Fleming I mean in a CR 06 type way. Flemings Bond but more modern.

    I understand where you're coming from but I don't see changing Bonds skin colour as that big of a leap forward, especially after how much the character has changed over the years (I'm talking appearance and personality now).

    I'd say Pierce Brosnan is closer to Flemings Bond appearance wise than Daniel Craig but then out of those two, which one is praised for being faithful to Fleming?

    Yes it'd be more faithful to Fleming if he was white. Just like it'd be more faithful to Fleming if Daniel Craig had black hair.

    If Daniel Craig was black, would that mean Roger Moore was more Flemingesque in your eyes? I don't think Bond's appearance matters and changing his skin colour would at the end of the day only be changing his appearance.

    So lets take your ridiculous hypothesis to its logical conclusion shall we?

    So as long as the performance is more 'Flemingesque' then you would consider a one legged, Chinese, lesbian dwarf with red hair to be a better Bond than Moore or Brosnan?

    I think it's a real shame that Elba will probably be too old and famous for Bond by the time Craig leaves. One of the coolest people on the planet.

    So is Jose Mourinho. So was Henry Winkler in the 70's. Are they on your list of potential Bonds too? I didn't realise that that was the only criteria. I'd say walking off the street and blagging the biggest role in cinema in 1968 was pretty damn cool but there are plenty of people who think Laz was a shit Bond. And he was white.
    Look, I don't want to politicize this thing or take sides, it really doesn't concern me as an American or even as one proudly of full or mostly Irish descent living here for many generations that is Catholic and supports unification with Ireland. A half Scotch-Irish great grandfather is as close as I get. And does that even count as being a wee bit Irish? I'm mostly German-Lithuanian and a bit of an ethnic mutt when you throw in that, Swedish, Welsh, and some AS ancestry as in continental German. But from a neutral point of view, it seems to me that many Northern Irishmen have long resisted being a part of the UK and favor unification, and the main Irish government doesn't seem to want them.

    I'm steering clear of this one. Over to you Draggers.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 12,837
    Any chance of the mods getting us back on topic?

    Well it's an opinion and as almost everyone disagrees with me I'd say it's fairly controversial, so I think we are on topic.
    So lets take your ridiculous hypothesis to its logical conclusion shall we?

    So as long as the performance is more 'Flemingesque' then you would consider a one legged, Chinese, lesbian dwarf with red hair to be a better Bond than Moore or Brosnan?

    No because you're changing the character completely. Unlike you I don't consider these changes (aside from the hair colour) to be anything like making him black and neither of us are changing eachothers minds so I think we should just agree to disagree really.
    So is Jose Mourinho. So was Henry Winkler in the 70's. Are they on your list of potential Bonds too? I didn't realise that that was the only criteria. I'd say walking off the street and blagging the biggest role in cinema in 1968 was pretty damn cool but there are plenty of people who think Laz was a shit Bond. And he was white.

    I didn't say it was the only criteria did I? He's a fantastic actor that's cool, suave, can play tough guys well and is interested in the role.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 3,494
    a one legged, Chinese, lesbian dwarf with red hair

    I think we've met! Her straight twin sister that is ;)
  • Posts: 6,396
    a one legged, Chinese, lesbian dwarf with red hair

    I think we've met! Her straight twin sister that is ;)

    You've perfectly described mummy...
  • a one legged, Chinese, lesbian dwarf with red hair

    I think we've met! Her straight twin sister that is ;)

    You've perfectly described mummy...

    Oh dear heavens.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited August 2013 Posts: 12,480
    Any chance of the mods getting us back on topic?

    Well it's an opinion and as almost everyone disagrees with me I'd say it's fairly controversial, so I think we are on topic.
    So lets take your ridiculous hypothesis to its logical conclusion shall we?

    So as long as the performance is more 'Flemingesque' then you would consider a one legged, Chinese, lesbian dwarf with red hair to be a better Bond than Moore or Brosnan?

    No because you're changing the character completely. Unlike you I don't consider these changes (aside from the hair colour) to be anything like making him black and neither of us are changing eachothers minds so I think we should just agree to disagree really.
    So is Jose Mourinho. So was Henry Winkler in the 70's. Are they on your list of potential Bonds too? I didn't realise that that was the only criteria. I'd say walking off the street and blagging the biggest role in cinema in 1968 was pretty damn cool but there are plenty of people who think Laz was a shit Bond. And he was white.

    I didn't say it was the only criteria did I? He's a fantastic actor that's cool, suave, can play tough guys well and is interested in the role.


    Well, I agree with @thelivingroyale. His points are well taken. I have no issue with a black Bond that fits the style, attitude, Britishness, etc. of James Bond. His being British and having the same main style, attributes, attitude, etc. is what I need from Bond. And Elba has all that, including acting chops from what I have seen. I simply don't feel Bond being black is a strong disconnect; I just don't.

    So many of us will have differing opinions on that and that will continue, but that's okay with me. Not trying to hit people over the head for their different opinion, but I just wanted to be clear on mine, too.
  • NicNac wrote:
    Some times, late at night, I wonder how controversal my Bond opionions are .
    Depends how controversial you intend to be.
    ' Doun't think you'll get the chance !. ' ~ Moneynickel, in Skyfall . ;;)
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Well, I especially liked your very elegantly put last sentence:

    "Please God let it finally be gone now that Silva has blown it to shit."
    Agreedy . ;;)
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 7,653
    Murdock wrote:
    SaintMark wrote:
    Murdock wrote:
    QoS is better than all the Bourne movies. ;)

    No it is a poor copy with shadows of better moments from much better done pieces in the 007 series, and the Bourne franchise seems to be the Craigs muse when it comes to his movies especially QoB which borrows everything from the competition including some key personal. In the hands of a seasoned director the movie might have been a more original vehicle Forster however prefered visual flair and vision over the content of an actionmovie.

    The Bourne movies have all been pretty good in all aspects, they even top the use of foreign locations which used to be something nobody did better than the 007 movies. The action in the Bourne series is excellent, and the fightscenes are really believable brutal. And the characterbuilding was very well done.

    In saying that QoB is better than the Bourne movies you seem to let your frustration about the lack of quality of this Bondmovie cloud your judgement.

    No I find the Bourne movies to be painfully dull and Boring. QoS may have borrowed certain elements but it sure worked in it's favor and made it Bond>Bourne as it should always be.

    The Bourne movies were an effective wakeup call for teh EON franchise and QoB went to far into the direction of copying and then did a very poor job.

    But a blind preference for the Bondmovies is no flaw imho, but don't compare with better made movies when you really talk about the poorest effort of the whole franchise. Even EON & Craig admitted that QoB did require a lot more work and that the writers strike did hurt the movie. And in my view so did the choice of Forster as a director. John Glen would have blindfolded rung in a better effort.

    Of course my opinion are not facts, well except for the creative force and the exciting actionscenes that the Bourne mvies have offered. Something QoB did not have for the most of it and tried to hide it behind a flurry of unexplainable edits. And most of the actionscenes in QoB have been done better in the history of the franchise, and less CGI was then involved.

  • The World is Not Enough would be five or ten spots higher if Bond had ended the film alone.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited August 2013 Posts: 12,480
    Or at least had a different ending scene with her, and definitely not those lines. Ugh.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    Well, I agree with @thelivingroyale. His points are well taken. I have no issue with a black Bond that fits the style, attitude, Britishness, etc. of James Bond. His being British and having the same main style, attributes, attitude, etc. is what I need from Bond. And Elba has all that, including acting chops from what I have seen. I simply don't feel Bond being black is a strong disconnect; I just don't.

    So many of us will have differing opinions on that and that will continue, but that's okay with me. Not trying to hit people over the head for their different opinion, but I just wanted to be clear on mine, too.
    I agree with this as well. I understand both points of view and I'm not advocating that the next Bond should be black but if the actor is right for the part then I don't care what his skin color is. I can't believe that people would even suggest that casting a black man as Bond would be done to satisfy the PC crowd. I also find it most contradictory that people have no problems with a black Leiter and Moneypenney but scoff at the idea of a black Bond. Surely Fleming didn't envision either of those two characters not being white. I will leave it at that as many are tired of hearing this now.

    The World is Not Enough would be five or ten spots higher if Bond had ended the film alone.
    I agree. They played it safe and tacked on a most cliched ending. Bond needed a little time to deal with his grief and it would have given Elektra's betrayal and death more weight.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 57
    The World is Not Enough would be five or ten spots higher if Bond had ended the film alone.
    TWINE is a bit of an odd one for me, in that it's the only Bond film I can think of that manages to be less than the sum of its parts. There's a lot of stuff I really like in there. Robert Carlyle is great as Renard, and Sophie Marceau's pretty good. There are some awesome scenes in the film as well, like when Bond first meets Renard and when he kills Electra at the end. But on the whole... I just can't really get into the end product.
Sign In or Register to comment.