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
I can clearly hear the dramadirector Mendes say: "Let's cram the only huge action setpiece in the movie into the PCS, so we can get to the good part after the main titles."
Well for me - the PCS was the good part!
It what makes the world go round....we all see things differently.
if a Bond movie is all about action set pieces - then what do you want to see in story?... we've had plenty of the "lets cram as much action as we can into this film" for quite some time.. QOS, DAD, TWINE, TND.. thats pretty much 10 years of that... films like CR and SF are a refreshing change of pace - both are similar in that they don't need to fit the story around the action, they fit the action to the story - which works 10x better...
SF wasn't without it's action either... i guess, maybe for you - things need to explode and go BOOM! to highlight an action set piece - and need to last for 5 - 10 minutes.... but let's count...
1. the PTS
2. Bond's fight with Patrice
3. Bond's fight against the Casino goons
4. Silva's escape / Bond's pursuit
5. the siege on Skyfall
that seems plenty to me - and they were all built up the right way, executed perfectly.. and story drove each and every one of them, which made them more impactful scenes..
but to each his own i guess..
You are wasting your time mate. I've already outlined these action scenes to him earlier, and also reminded him of the sparse action scenes in the early Connery films.
So his new line of attack from that was the fact there are too many plot holes. Either way, he is becoming a broken record......
there is always DAD for fools like this one lol..
And jetsetwilly has already instructed those who dare to criticize SF to go back and watch "endless repeats of DAD", so I guess you are amongst friends.
Like I tried to explain to Jetsetwilly earlier there's a difference between an action scene and a action set piece.
Now is the gypsy war fight in FRWL an action set-piece, or an action scene?
Then came YOLT and Lewis Gilbert, who threw away most of the logic, reason and clever scripting from the earlier movies. But he compensated by creating an action set-piece spectable.
SF doesn't compensate for not having logic and reason. Fine with an overdose of wtf-moments that don't make sense, but then at least give me something else other than good acting.
Guess it makes sense that three bad guys, who have someone in a room that they want to kill, don't simply kill him on the spot, but fly in a hitman and pay him 4 million euro, so he can shoot this someone from a neighbouring skyscraper.
Guess it also made "total sense" that Silva's socalled "plan" - "years in the making" - consists of blowing the cover on his island lair, lose some of his men, lose the computer network he spent years building, Bond getting back to shape and catching up to him through Patrice and later Severine, blowing up MI6 and knowing they would move its headquarters underground where they would built a cage where they would connect its doors to their network so that he could later escape with the assist by Q and the explosives he had planted at the exact same place and time that he knew Bond would later catch up to him.
...so he can what? Release a deadly virus holding the world for ransom? Cause international stock-market panic?
No!
All so he can kill his metaphorical mother by walking in from the street storming a congressional oversight hearing at which she is present. (!!!)
Makes "total sense" I guess.
Like I said: Too many wtf?-moments for me.
If I read into all the Bond novel and movie plots, I would probably find similar glaring plot holes which would put me off the franchise altogether. Reading the GF novel again, I found loads of plot holes thoughout which didn't make logical sense.
Thankfully I can overlook this if the characterisation and scenes themselves stand up. Being inside Bond's head in the novels was always the major plus point for me, far more than the plot itself.
So at the end of the day your main complaint was a lack of action?
It certainly would have helped if Mendes had included either the chase on Silva's island , the presumed London rooftop-chase, or both.
I would not have said TMWTGG was a film grounded in reality. FRWL and LTK yes, but not TMWTGG.
This is the first I'm hearing of these supposed action sequences.
To paraphrase M, I would call this "precise intelligence."
The scene on Silva's island featured a rat hole and some sort of Indiana Jones-like chase using a wooden bridge. Don't remember the details from the rooftop chase, which was suppose to be around scene 105, IIRC.
EDIT: This is the closest I come googling:
"Director Sam Mendes will pay homage to the Indiana Jones rope bridge battles. 007 will have it out with a villain on a rickety affair like in Temple Of Doom."
Read more at http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/nailbiter111/news/?a=49867#xXAiTeLt55rbqmSG.99
Cheers. Thanks for the heads up on this.
I 200% agree. In Bond movies, action pieces should be the consequences of the plot, not leading the plot, the plot should not be an excuse for them. Bond movies are spy movies before being action movies.
And if Sam Mendes takes NBNW and Hitchcock as examples on how to make Bond movies, then he understands Bond, at least the cinematic Bond, much more than I thought when I learned he was going to direct (the then untitled) Bond 23. We need more Bond movies that look and feel like contemporary Hitchcock movies, not like some generic action movies. Mendes is not the new Terence Young, but he might be the best modern substitute. And this is from a guy who was sceptical about him at first.
Whilst I largely agree with your points, I have to say Zekidk is right with regard to the action.
Obviously another QOS would be awful with incomprehensible action crowbarred in every 5 mins but we are definitely missing another big set piece.
The PTS is fine as is the climax but in the 2hrs in between we have what? A 30 second fight in a skyscraper, a 2 minute fight with the dragons, a brief shootout in the inquiry room and a chase in the tube which while tense and exciting has as its signature stunts Bond jumping on the back of a train, sliding down the escalators and then a (model) train smashing through the wall. For a Bond film that's not really enough.
The tube chase in terms of stunts was very lacklustre. After the PTS I was expecting this to he the other big stunt fest of the film but it never really materialised. I get the impression that after Turkey Gary Powell was largely twiddling his thumbs rather than pushing the envelope as Bond films need to do.
The PTS should be close to the best action in the film but around the end of the second act there should also be a WOW stunt. TLD cargo net and GE tank chase are prime examples of films that balance their action scenes well.
Don't get me wrong I loved the film but I feel the 'bumps' that Cubby always spoke of just weren't bumpy enough for what is expected from a Bond film.
The fight scenes are hardly setpieces are they?
What's next? That gadgets will ever never return? Oh yeah... they don't "do" exploding pens and outrageous stuff anymore. Guess we'll have to settle for the latest Sony smartphone.
Here's my wishes for a director who respects and honors the template and the movies that came before, instead of mocking them.
There's a difference between an action set piece and an action scene. Both in duration and scale.
A two minute motorcycle chase that turns into a four minute fight on top of a moving train is an action set piece. A 30 second fistfight in some room somewhere is an action scene.
Quite. I would say apart from the motorbike chase, some of the stuff on top of the train and jumping onto the lift and tube there's practically nothing else in the film DC wouldn't be able to do himself (with obvious safety precautions).
I like having the actor in there but a big Bond action sequence should be too dangerous or skilled for the actor to even attempt.
Zekidk has it right:-
Action scenes smaller and DC in amongst it.
Action sequence a much bigger scale and a string of stunts linked together.
Whilst SF has plenty of the former it is rather deficient in the latter.
It's all about the balance - QOS was too action sequence heavy and you lose interest (particularly when it's poorly edited and not very inspiring action to start with.
In the respect of getting a good balance I would say TSWLM, FYEO, TLD, LTK, GE and CR get it pretty much right.