› ›

Skyfall, a TWINE remake?

1235

Comments

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    @mcdonbb and @RC7

    That was sarcasm: quoting myself

    That's funny....I find Craig's performance in SF most embarrassing and his pain was atrocious.
    On the other hand, Craig looked like someone from Grey's Anatomy when he shed a tear for his mother....M.

    End sarcasm.

    If you can't take sarcasm or think my comments are bizarre, it's your problem and not mine.

    Trick is, if you're being sarcastic it helps if there's some context. @Thunderfinger, for example, can get away with it because the wider forum know his shtick. As a new member it's tricky walking in and immediately being completely vitriolic. You need to up your game in the irony stakes if you want people to buy in to your crazy 'banter'. Most of your posts come across as literal.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    RC7 wrote: »
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    @mcdonbb and @RC7

    That was sarcasm: quoting myself

    That's funny....I find Craig's performance in SF most embarrassing and his pain was atrocious.
    On the other hand, Craig looked like someone from Grey's Anatomy when he shed a tear for his mother....M.

    End sarcasm.

    If you can't take sarcasm or think my comments are bizarre, it's your problem and not mine.

    Trick is, if you're being sarcastic it helps if there's some context. @Thunderfinger, for example, can get away with it because the wider forum know his shtick. As a new member it's tricky walking in and immediately being completely vitriolic. You need to up your game in the irony stakes if you want people to buy in to your crazy 'banter'. Most of your posts come across as literal.

    I get it, you're right, if they are read as literal they can be misunderstood.
    I will tone down on sarcasm or label it.
    Thanks for the advice.
    That was not sarcasm...lol..
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,827
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Seriously they should have gotten the boot after TWINE.
    P&W had their time- after TWINE they should have been replaced.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    chrisisall wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Seriously they should have gotten the boot after TWINE.
    P&W had their time- after TWINE they should have been replaced.

    Definitely.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,254
    Posted by @Anthrax in a duplicate thread:
    Anthrax wrote:
    These are all the similarities I could find about these two films:

    Each film marks the third appearance of an actor as James Bond.
    Bond's shoulder gets damaged in the PTS.
    M is involved in the plot much more than in previous Bond films.
    The villain is connected to MI6 and wants revenge on M for what she has done to them previously in their lives.
    A woman is deathly frightened of the villain.
    The villain is physically damaged (Elektra's right earlobe, Renard's bullet inside his brain and Silva's jawbone).
    MI6 is attacked.
    Bond adjustes a piece of his clothing after doing a particular stunt in the PTS.
    Scotland and Turkey are featured.
    Bond nearly kills the villain with a gun, and then the villain nearly kills Bond much more dramatically. Both of these events takes place underground.
    Each film is a swan song for a beloved actor/character.
    A new Q is introduced.
    Bond’s American counterpart is noticeably absent after appearing in the last two films.
    Bond’s family history is subtly touched upon.
    The villain is impaled by a metallic object.
    Bond's car gets destroyed by a helicopter.
    This helicopter later gets destroyed by Bond through the use of gas.

    Credit to Deja Reviewer for finding these similarities. Some users on IMDB also helped me. If you can find more similarities, post them!

    P&W totally ripped themselves off!
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited January 2016 Posts: 4,116
    Bond bound to a chair in both films. Both feature extended London chase scenes.

    Both feature Tanner albeit different actors.

    Both feature less mainstream typical action directors although Apted had some thrillers under his belt. Mendes succeeded here IMO whereas Apted really let me down. Both films where the producers' attempt to elevate the series.

    Both films had a cemetery scene.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    It was such a piss poor execution of the premise the first time around (imho of course) that they had no choice but to redeem themselves with a superior remake. The rest as they say, is history, with the highest grossing Bond film in decades, and a critically acclaimed one at that, despite the few who dislike it here and elsewhere.

    Excellent examples noted by everyone. Given all the similarities, it can't be coincidence, and there's no doubt P & W along with EON decided to attempt their vision again, more credibly this time.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited January 2016 Posts: 4,116
    bondjames wrote: »
    It was such a piss poor execution of the premise the first time around (imho of course) that they had no choice but to redeem themselves with a superior remake. The rest as they say, is history, with the highest grossing Bond film in decades, and a critically acclaimed one at that, despite the few who dislike it here and elsewhere.

    Excellent examples noted by everyone. Given all the similarities, it can't be coincidence, and there's no doubt P & W along with EON decided to attempt their vision again, more credibly this time.

    Agree but I can somehow hear EoN denying any similarities if ever asked.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Getafix wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I understand you're no fan of GE but do you REALLY think its one of the worst films ever made? If so thats pretty laughable.

    I don't normally watch bad movies. I am loyal to Bond, which is the only reason I was able to endure GE, TND, TWINE and DUD. They are definitely the four worst movies I have ever actually watched from end to end.

    Agreed.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    Not to mention...

    "I can protect you... Do you understand? I can protect you!
    Not from him!"

    "How much do you know about fear?
    All there is.
    Well, not like this, not like him"
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    jake24 wrote: »
    Not to mention...

    "I can protect you... Do you understand? I can protect you!
    Not from him!"

    "How much do you know about fear?
    All there is.
    Well, not like this, not like him"

    Good one.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    I really enjoyed TWINE the last time I watched it. It's solid.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    RC7 wrote: »
    I really enjoyed TWINE the last time I watched it. It's solid.

    I enjoy it too. Not so solid for me but I still like it.

    I like all the films ...even the ones I hate.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    RC7 wrote: »
    I really enjoyed TWINE the last time I watched it. It's solid.
    Still one of my favourites. Along with SF.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    Wait...do some of you truly think that Brosnan's four films as Bond are THE four worst films ever made? DAD, I can understand getting a horrible rep, but to say the other three make up the worst films ever seems outlandish. There's so much awful crap out there, I find it hard to believe someone would think something like GE is one of the worst movies ever made. Worst Bond movie, sure, but GE is worse than Adam Sandler, or 'Paul Blart,' or 'The Adventures of Pluto Nash'? Come on.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Wait...do some of you truly think that Brosnan's four films as Bond are THE four worst films ever made? DAD, I can understand getting a horrible rep, but to say the other three make up the worst films ever seems outlandish. There's so much awful crap out there, I find it hard to believe someone would think something like GE is one of the worst movies ever made. Worst Bond movie, sure, but GE is worse than Adam Sandler, or 'Paul Blart,' or 'The Adventures of Pluto Nash'? Come on.

    Agreed. I've watched some utter horse ****. Every Bond film brings something to the table and they're all produced to a standard way above the ones you mention above.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    @RC7, exactly. I can accept that people don't like Brosnan and don't view GE in the way that I do, that's totally fine, but what I have a hard time believing is that someone would view nearly any of Brosnan's films as the worst of all time. There's some true garbage out there that definitely deserves the spot much, much, much more.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,723
    Even with the Bond movie I rank last (DAD) I get a total blast watching it. And all 24 Bond films will always be a first choice on what to watch against even the very best I can think of (Saving Private Ryan, The Godfather, Raiders of the Lost Ark, etc).
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Regarding TWINE vs. SF: what they did properly the 2nd time around imho is to get a director like Sam Mendes. He can tell a story like that well. He smartly laid off the action (not his strong suit) and focused on character, relationships and story. That avoided direct comparisons to films like MI-GP, which were superior action vehicles imho.

    I know many disagree, but from my perspective, when you want to make a film like SP, you get someone like Martin Campbell, and not someone like Sam Mendes. A more action oriented director would have addressed some of the issues inherent in SP, including laying off the personal angle, which was not necessary for this particular film, unlike with SF.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Wait...do some of you truly think that Brosnan's four films as Bond are THE four worst films ever made? DAD, I can understand getting a horrible rep, but to say the other three make up the worst films ever seems outlandish. There's so much awful crap out there, I find it hard to believe someone would think something like GE is one of the worst movies ever made. Worst Bond movie, sure, but GE is worse than Adam Sandler, or 'Paul Blart,' or 'The Adventures of Pluto Nash'? Come on.
    Heck, I even like DAD.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,723
    @bondjames I thought Spottiswood also made a very good job at making a fun flat-out action movie with TND. The script could have been a bit tighter (I think there were many problems and delays during production), but on the entertainment factor, TND is quite good IMO.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    bondjames wrote: »
    I know many disagree, but from my perspective, when you want to make a film like SP, you get someone like Martin Campbell, and not someone like Sam Mendes. A more action oriented director would have addressed some of the issues inherent in SP, including laying off the personal angle, which was not necessary for this particular film, unlike with SF.

    Mendes crafted the film, though. Had the film been developed at EON independent of him that may have been an option.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2016 Posts: 23,883
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    @bondjames I thought Spottiswood also made a very good job at making a fun flat-out action movie with TND. The script could have been a bit tighter (I think there were many problems and delays during production), but on the entertainment factor, TND is quite good IMO.
    I agree, @DaltonCraig007. TND is excellent at what it wants to be - an all out action fest Bond. It was tonally balanced throughout.
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I know many disagree, but from my perspective, when you want to make a film like SP, you get someone like Martin Campbell, and not someone like Sam Mendes. A more action oriented director would have addressed some of the issues inherent in SP, including laying off the personal angle, which was not necessary for this particular film, unlike with SF.

    Mendes crafted the film, though. Had the film been developed at EON independent of him that may have been an option.
    That's true, and this is where I think they made a mistake waiting for him. They should have just moved along with other options and we would have got our film one year earlier and it might in fact have been superior to what we finally received.

    In the end, probably due to the script issues, studio opinions, & budget, SP seems like a film that is torn between two corners, tonally and otherwise. Like TWINE imho.

    Like with TWINE, I ask, is it primarily an action oriented Bond film? Then why is the action so dull relatively speaking? Why does it seem tacked on like in that earlier film?
    Is it primarily a character driven Bond film? Then why are the character interactions so unmeaningful (to some anyway, including myself) like in that earlier film?

    I think Mendes thought he was being asked back to make SF 2, and they twisted him to make standard Bond along the way. Perhaps Apted was torn as well, due to what MGM wanted from him vs. what he wanted to make. At least with SF, Mendes gave us the Bond film I'm certain he wanted to make.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    I wonder what Mendes put into SP that didn't make it into SF, since he initially said he would return due to some unused ideas he really wanted to utilize in SF, but didn't have the chance to. I wonder if there are some certain scenes or action set pieces in general that he wanted in SF instead.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    He wanted Blofeld.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    He wanted Blofeld.

    True. He wanted him in SF.

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    I wonder how that would've played out in SF, then, if he had the chance.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I wonder how that would've played out in SF, then, if he had the chance.
    The author of pain scenario would have likely been introduced sooner perhaps?

    Regarding Mendes saying he wanted Blofeld in SF, did he say that after SF came out or before it was made? I'm curious to see if this is a retroactive statement to add credibility to his retcon idea in SP or if it was a genuine desire at the time.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    He said it after SP was completed, but remember that Logan said Bond should always fight Blofeld. I think they had him in mind the whole time, and were just hoping the legal issues would be sorted out sooner rather than later. They must have had a Plan A and a Plan B.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    He said it after SP was completed, but remember that Logan said Bond should always fight Blofeld. I think they had him in mind the whole time, and were just hoping the legal issues would be sorted out sooner rather than later. They must have had a Plan A and a Plan B.

    I agree. I believe he was always in their thinking, back before SF.
Sign In or Register to comment.