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
Perhaps controversially, I contend that there would have been no place for Craig experimentation in the 00's without the financial box office foundation which was established during the Brosnan years, and most notably with GE.
Agreed.
I've been a bit perplexed as to how general audiences have taken to Craig's interpretation, which is far closer to Dalton's than any others, but the public was probably more accepting of it coming after the success of the Brosnan era and the Bourne films. Dalton was ahead of his time.
Dalton didn't have that luxury imho. I believe the market still wanted a light hearted jovial Bond in the mid to late 80s. Moreover as Connery himself once said, and I'm paraphrasing, Dalton sort of forgot the humour mix.
He was definitely ahead of his time though.
I like your succinct summation of GE. I felt exactly the same way at the time - I just saw it as a nasty cheap rip off of Bond.
As you say it felt like it had been made by people who'd read about what a Bond film should be but never actually watched one themselves.
If the main character didn't happen to be called Bond it would have been seen as the generic 90s action flick that it is.
I had a recurring dream after first seeing GE where Bond had been reduced to TV-movie status.
However you and @bondjames correctly point out that Brosnan left Bond in a sound financial position. And yes indeed Craig sort of went back to Dalton territory but probably wouldn't have had that opportunity without the Brosnan commercial success.
I still contend that the Brosnan films didn't have to be as bad as they were though to make money.
Kathryn Bigelow was around. Even perhaps James Cameron or Ridley Scott. I know EON has this absurd thing about not using American directors but it seems a shame they didn't seemingly even try to up the quality.
Was Ridley Scott ever considered? I always feel the 90s were just this lost decade for Bond. So much good music around as well and we got mainly mediocre and forgettable title songs.
I'm not sure if those directors would even be an option today. The producers of the Bond films have always insisted on ultimate control and have always hired directors who knew their place. They would never hire someone who already knew everything about making a great action film, had made their name doing so, and thus expected a measure of creative autonomy. Instead they hire folks who either got their start on Bond and are team players (John Glen, Peter Hunt), skilled journeymen (Martin Campbell, Terence Young), or middlebrow drama directors who are unfamiliar with action films and therefore prone to rely on the producers' guidance (Michael Apted, Marc Forster, Sam Mendes).
Strong-willed directors like Bigelow, Cameron, and Scott would insist on doing everything their way and expect the producers to do nothing more than cut checks. And we all know that the Bond producers like to be hands-on. For better or worse they have always been that way, and one could argue that the series wouldn't have survived without being controlled and guided by strong-willed producers.
Yes he does. I'm wondering if on a fundimental level he maybe lacks warmth.
Re GE: Despite my own nostalgic feelings towards it I'm beginning to see what people mean when they say it looks like a 90s tv film in places - particularly towards the end of the film in Cuba. The cinematography in the film though ok rarely screams epic. I'd say it's a step up though from the rather crummy look of LTK.
I think where the film works though is in its editing. It's an energetic, lively film and a film I've always subsequently enjoyed.
And yes...GoldenEye was the Goldfinger of my generation (come to think of it that film never had particularly great cinematography other than Ken Adam's sets of course).
Whatever you may think of the writing in his films he does have panache as a director.
A Bond homage does not make a Bond movie.
They already tried that twice with Mendes a recipe for disaster. Cameron is far better as an action director.
This-- T1 was great. However;
Alien (by R. Scott) was an exercise in suspense and master-filmmaking; Aliens was awesummmmm porn, dude...
T2 doesn't compare to its predecessor (just coz it's bigger, don't make it better)...
TRUE LIES was saved by the leads...
TITANIC was Disney on steroids (the closest I have ever been to purchasing a gun (to murder my TV) (thank Dog I saw this crap at home))...
AVATAR was a beautiful cartoon, with terrible characterizations and worse story-telling...
Personally I'm a huge fan of T1, T2, Aliens and True Lies. I don't like any of the other films he's made.
But it’s fun porn, and Weaver elevated Cameron’s childishness.
I preferred Cameron's film when I was younger (found Alien boring then) but as I've gotten older I see there's really no comparison. As you say, it's still a lot of fun. Basically an 80's style war movie in space.
Cameron doesn’t have the skill to even touch the original film.
And I know a guy who was a stunt coordinator on TITANIC... Cameron is an abusive megalomaniac (I could almost excuse that behaviour— almost— if he was Kubrick... but Titanic was grade three level story-telling... plus I'm told it’s his brother, John, who is the tech innovator— not James....)
I haven't seen True Lies for years but if you're going to do an action flick - which is what the Brozza films we're, then why not get a good action director.
Any way it's all water under the bridge.
Re the Alien vs Aliens debate its Alien all the way. Something of a horror classic. Aliens is entertaining but comparitvely lightweight.
Problem is he would have never agreed to do a PG13 movie.
Just imagine Verhoevens version of Goldeneye... How would Xenias slaughter of the Severnaja base have looked like? Bond shooting an AK at hordes of russian soldier, or the Tank chase through St. Petersburg lol... I think the dominant color in his movie would have been RED. It would have made Total Recall look like a Disney Production.
And he would have LOVED Xenia, and made her probably even more crazy and rapey than she already was.