Controversial opinions about Bond films

1571572574576577707

Comments

  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,619
    As much as I like Quentin Tarantino, I would have only wanted to see QT’s CR adaptation. God forbid he would ever try to adapt LALD in his style! Spike Lee would have the ultimate fit! I would trust Christopher and Johnathan Nolan as writers, at least. We all know that CN would want to direct. As DV, I would trust him, but wait until after Dune is and see how big his name gets. EON won’t hire him if he gets too big, name wise. No matter where and who with next time James Bond goes, let’s just hope they don’t bring Neal Purvis and Robert Wade with them! When Martin Campbell did CR, he tried to fire them, for not strong material. Paul Haggis did the script as we like it.
  • edited June 2020 Posts: 9,846
    I realized i posted in the wrong forum but here are some of mine I am sure I posted before hand


    Dalton is honestly my favorite but that is largely due to him not going against type like Craig did in the Mendes duology

    Craig's entire tenure should of not only been based in fleming but had fleming titles for each of the films as well

    Mendes was a mistake for the Craig era...

    Tom hardy would be a good bond

    I hate when the novels are period peices I want to know what bond is doing now

    The video games were underrated

    The Hildebrand Rarity could of worked and still could work as the title of a bond film
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    suavejmf wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    They probably didnt need to have Leiter appear at all at the end. Could of had someone just saying he was doing well, and Q could have delivered the line that M was looking for Bond to come back!
    As it is however, I dont mind the ending at all, coming as it does after a superb film!

    It’s still a superb Bond film as you say.

    Personally, I had to wait 17 years to be that impressed again.

    Arbitrary shade thrown at the entire Brosnan era? Check.

    :P

    It was entertaining, but I didn’t love it. The low point of the franchise for me.

    I don’t don’t deny it’s popularity and success. Just a personal opinion.

    Worse than 2008 - present?
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,131
    suavejmf wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    They probably didnt need to have Leiter appear at all at the end. Could of had someone just saying he was doing well, and Q could have delivered the line that M was looking for Bond to come back!
    As it is however, I dont mind the ending at all, coming as it does after a superb film!

    It’s still a superb Bond film as you say.

    Personally, I had to wait 17 years to be that impressed again.

    Arbitrary shade thrown at the entire Brosnan era? Check.

    :P

    It was entertaining, but I didn’t love it. The low point of the franchise for me.

    I don’t don’t deny it’s popularity and success. Just a personal opinion.

    Worse than 2008 - present?

    A lot worse to me personally. SPECTRE was a tad average (and the Step Brother plot was awful). But I still prefer the Craig era by far. Especially the perfect Casino Royale and enjoyable QoS and SF.

    I loved LTK and GE and the other films were a drop in what I deem as quality.

    I can’t deny Brosnan’s popularity with the general public and fans at the time (and now) though.
  • Posts: 1,394
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Controversial opinion:

    I like Felix's happy go lucky cheerful demeanor at the end of LTK.

    I dont.He lost his wife AND his leg.He should be depressed and/or suicidal.I understand that the creators wanted the film to have a happy ending
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I realized i posted in the wrong forum but here are some of mine I am sure I posted before hand


    Dalton is honestly my favorite but that is largely due to him not going against type like Craig did in the Mendes duology

    Craig's entire tenure should of not only been based in fleming but had fleming titles for each of the films as well

    Mendes was a mistake for the Craig era...

    Tom hardy would be a good bond

    I hate when the novels are period peices I want to know what bond is doing now

    The video games were underrated

    The Hildebrand Rarity could of worked and still could work as the title of a bond film

    Its not controversial to say Dalton is your favourite.He has a lot of fans here.

    Dunno about Craig era based in fleming,either way his tenure has gotten worse over time ( hows that for a controversial opinion ).

    Well the Goldeneye game is certainly not underrated.Its considered one of the best ever.

    Agree about Hidebrand rarity ( Be difficult to make a song about it though! )
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited July 2020 Posts: 7,546
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Controversial opinion:

    I like Felix's happy go lucky cheerful demeanor at the end of LTK.

    I dont.He lost his wife AND his leg.He should be depressed and/or suicidal.I understand that the creators wanted the film to have a happy ending

    That's what makes it a controversial opinion, isn't it. ;)

    They'll have to wait until after Craig is done to use Hildebrand Rarity, which won't be much of an issue now of course.

  • Posts: 7,415
    I always thought they would never use Quantum of Solace as a title!!, so it is possible they might use The Hildebrand Rarity though i still think it sounds too Robert Ludlum!!
  • Posts: 1,917
    Not that we need yet another title with die, kill or gold/golden, but I am just not turned on at all by The Hildebrand Rarity. It sounds too much like a Merchant/Ivory highbrow film you'd see the Criterion Collection putting out as a special edition DVD.
  • Posts: 7,507
    The Hildebrand Rarity is horrible title for a modern day action film! I am all for Fleming purism, but to just shoehorn in some of his titles just to please a few fanboys? No, please...
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    BT3366 wrote: »
    Not that we need yet another title with die, kill or gold/golden, but I am just not turned on at all by The Hildebrand Rarity. It sounds too much like a Merchant/Ivory highbrow film you'd see the Criterion Collection putting out as a special edition DVD.

    You only say that now, but if it gets picked it’ll eventually be normalized and seen as “Bondian” just by association. Much like so many other Fleming titles.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,026
    jobo wrote: »
    The Hildebrand Rarity is horrible title for a modern day action film! I am all for Fleming purism, but to just shoehorn in some of his titles just to please a few fanboys? No, please...
    After what they made out of "The Spy Who Loved Me", and quite frankly also of "Moonraker", and of what was once "From[!] a View to a Kill", not to mention "The Man with the Golden Gun", everything is possible in terms of shoehorning.
  • Posts: 2,917
    The Hildebrand Rarity would not as bad a title as Quantum of Solace. I still can't believe they picked that...and didn't even bother to explain it in the movie. Even Fleming called it "a rather high-sounding title."

    If the producers want a Fleming title, there are still plenty of chapter titles that would suffice.
  • Posts: 7,507
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    The Hildebrand Rarity is horrible title for a modern day action film! I am all for Fleming purism, but to just shoehorn in some of his titles just to please a few fanboys? No, please...
    After what they made out of "The Spy Who Loved Me", and quite frankly also of "Moonraker", and of what was once "From[!] a View to a Kill", not to mention "The Man with the Golden Gun", everything is possible in terms of shoehorning.

    The fact that it is possible does not mean it should be done... The world survived WW2. I still don't want it to be repeated...
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,026
    jobo wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    The Hildebrand Rarity is horrible title for a modern day action film! I am all for Fleming purism, but to just shoehorn in some of his titles just to please a few fanboys? No, please...
    After what they made out of "The Spy Who Loved Me", and quite frankly also of "Moonraker", and of what was once "From[!] a View to a Kill", not to mention "The Man with the Golden Gun", everything is possible in terms of shoehorning.

    The fact that it is possible does not mean it should be done... The world survived WW2. I still don't want it to be repeated...

    Absolutely no contest. Just saying that the producers are rather flexible in that regard.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    Honestly, it wouldn’t matter if they used it. People still went to see a movie called “Quantum of Solace”, they can also go see “The Hildebrand Rarity”.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,546
    Honestly, it wouldn’t matter if they used it. People still went to see a movie called “Quantum of Solace”, they can also go see “The Hildebrand Rarity”.

    I only say not because the term already exists in the Craig continuity. Once he's done though, fair game.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    I always thought they would never use Quantum of Solace as a title!!, so it is possible they might use The Hildebrand Rarity though i still think it sounds too Robert Ludlum!!

    Bar ‘007 in New York’ any Fleming title is good with me.
  • Posts: 15,114
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    I always thought they would never use Quantum of Solace as a title!!, so it is possible they might use The Hildebrand Rarity though i still think it sounds too Robert Ludlum!!

    Bar ‘007 in New York’ any Fleming title is good with me.

    Same here. And I agree that The Hindebrand Rarity is a good title. Quantum of Solace too, regardless of what one may think of the movie itself. Beside, it would not be too difficult making the fish an element of the plot, if only as MacGuffin.
  • edited July 2020 Posts: 16,154
    I actually see more potential in the travelogue 007 in New York was published in, Thrilling Cities as a Bond film title. I could either see Bond's assignment being called Operation: Thrilling Cities, or that name given to the villain's caper.
    Still, while not particularly a great title, I'd prefer it over 007 in New York.

    Still I eagerly await the day Risico makes it to the screen. That and The Property of a Lady.
  • Posts: 7,507
    I honestly don´t understand the hangup on titles. Simply using a Fleming title will not make the film more Flemingesque. It is nothing more than a gimmick, and a gimmick that only carries any significance to the hard core fans of which we are in the minority. Why is that gimmick worth shoehorning in plotpoints? The focus should be on creating good stories in the spirit of Fleming that would be suitable for 21st century action film, perhaps, if conveniently, use some of Fleming´s remaining story material. The titles I couldn´t really care less about.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited July 2020 Posts: 5,131
    jobo wrote: »
    I honestly don´t understand the hangup on titles. Simply using a Fleming title will not make the film more Flemingesque. It is nothing more than a gimmick, and a gimmick that only carries any significance to the hard core fans of which we are in the minority. Why is that gimmick worth shoehorning in plotpoints? The focus should be on creating good stories in the spirit of Fleming that would be suitable for 21st century action film, perhaps, if conveniently, use some of Fleming´s remaining story material. The titles I couldn´t really care less about.

    I’m obsessed with having Fleming titles and every last plot point and character should be ‘mined.’

    I’ll counter with saying that historically, the Fleming titled films are the better films.
  • Posts: 16,154
    suavejmf wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    I honestly don´t understand the hangup on titles. Simply using a Fleming title will not make the film more Flemingesque. It is nothing more than a gimmick, and a gimmick that only carries any significance to the hard core fans of which we are in the minority. Why is that gimmick worth shoehorning in plotpoints? The focus should be on creating good stories in the spirit of Fleming that would be suitable for 21st century action film, perhaps, if conveniently, use some of Fleming´s remaining story material. The titles I couldn´t really care less about.

    I’m obsessed with having Fleming titles and every last plot point and character should be ‘mined.’

    I’ll counter with saying that historically, the Fleming titled films are the better films.

    I agree with that.

    Controversial opinioon:

    I like OHMSS far more than I like DAD.
  • Posts: 1,917
    While Quantum of Solace was a dicey title, at least it had name recognition in that the film's villains were, surprise, Quantum and Bond was seeking Solace for his loss of Vesper. A stretch, but it made sense in a rather twisted into knots way.

    The screenwriters would have to come up with a character called Hildebrand and concoct something to become the Rarity. Property of a Lady sounds more promising although it was used in OP.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    Ludovico wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    I always thought they would never use Quantum of Solace as a title!!, so it is possible they might use The Hildebrand Rarity though i still think it sounds too Robert Ludlum!!

    Bar ‘007 in New York’ any Fleming title is good with me.

    Same here. And I agree that The Hindebrand Rarity is a good title. Quantum of Solace too, regardless of what one may think of the movie itself. Beside, it would not be too difficult making the fish an element of the plot, if only as MacGuffin.

    It wouldn’t even have to be a fish. You could simply change what the title refers to. Just as Moonraker was originally about a missile and then the movie changed it to a space shuttle.

    Gotta join in on the bafflement @Revelator had over QOS never even bothering to explain the title. You could have had Mathis coin that term. In fact, I actually expected it to be him to do that before seeing the movie and was surprised that it never happened.

    Actually, the most baffling thing was naming the organization Quantum. That was just stupid, because it inadvertently confuses the title of the film where you can now read it as TERRORIST ORGANIZATION OF COMFORT. Seemed like nobody at EON thought anything through. And the naming of the villains “Quantum” must have happened late into production because they originally started shooting before the film even had a title. That probably explains why the only two instances a character says “Quantum” was ADR. Although there’s the “Q” lapel pins, I dunno how far into production that was.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited July 2020 Posts: 7,546
    I thought quantum of solace was a British phrase, lol. Also it fits the theme of the movie pretty well when describing how revenge isn't as satisfying as you hope it'll be, like it only provides "a small amount of peace". Honestly the explanation of the law of the quantum of solace in the short story is a little more confusing to me.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    I thought quantum of solace was a British phrase, lol. Also it fits the theme of the movie pretty well when describing how revenge isn't as satisfying as you hope it'll be, like it only provides "a small amount of peace". Honestly the explanation of the law of the quantum of solace in the short story is a little more confusing to me.

    If it is only Fleming used it. Ha ha ha. Personally, I loved the title for the film.
  • Posts: 1,394
    Wasnt something called Hildebrand shown during Spectres climax?
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,546
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Wasnt something called Hildebrand shown during Spectres climax?

    Hildebrand's Antiques and Rarities was an MI6 safehouse.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,546
    suavejmf wrote: »
    I thought quantum of solace was a British phrase, lol. Also it fits the theme of the movie pretty well when describing how revenge isn't as satisfying as you hope it'll be, like it only provides "a small amount of peace". Honestly the explanation of the law of the quantum of solace in the short story is a little more confusing to me.

    If it is only Fleming used it. Ha ha ha. Personally, I loved the title for the film.

    Lol Fair enough!
  • Posts: 7,507
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    I honestly don´t understand the hangup on titles. Simply using a Fleming title will not make the film more Flemingesque. It is nothing more than a gimmick, and a gimmick that only carries any significance to the hard core fans of which we are in the minority. Why is that gimmick worth shoehorning in plotpoints? The focus should be on creating good stories in the spirit of Fleming that would be suitable for 21st century action film, perhaps, if conveniently, use some of Fleming´s remaining story material. The titles I couldn´t really care less about.

    I’m obsessed with having Fleming titles and every last plot point and character should be ‘mined.’

    I’ll counter with saying that historically, the Fleming titled films are the better films.

    I agree with that.

    Controversial opinioon:

    I like OHMSS far more than I like DAD.

    That is not a worthy comparison. OHMSS was based on a full novel. That is completely different.
Sign In or Register to comment.