Sam Mendes doesn't understand James Bond

135

Comments

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Zekidk wrote:
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

    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.
    You can have long fist fights/chases that traverse various terrain too. People are making a big deal about a lack of so called set pieces in Skyfall, yet Casino Royale didn't have much either, going by your definition, and that film is near perfection.
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 12,837
    Skyfalls fist fights weren't that long though. They weren't set pieces.

    Casino Royale had the free running/embassy bit (you could even maybe split those up into two), the miami airport bit and the finale. So one more set piece than SF, and the fist fights inbetween were longer (and more brutal).

    I'm not trying to bash SF, I actually think it's better than CR, but I think @Zedidk is right when it comes to the action, there's not many set pieces at all.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Zekidk wrote:
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

    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.
    You can have long fist fights/chases that traverse various terrain too. People are making a big deal about a lack of so called set pieces in Skyfall, yet Casino Royale didn't have much either, going by your definition, and that film is near perfection.

    CR had many more action set pieces and absolutely spectacular ones at that. The chase with Molaka, Miami Airport and The sinking house, are all better set pieces than we see in SF. I'm not having a go at SF as it does other things better than CR but for out and out set pieces CR trumps SF. Oh and fighting Patrice is not an action scene. It's an incidental fight, the Obanna stairwell scrap is better.
  • Posts: 3,278
    Zekidk wrote:
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

    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.
    You can have long fist fights/chases that traverse various terrain too. People are making a big deal about a lack of so called set pieces in Skyfall, yet Casino Royale didn't have much either, going by your definition, and that film is near perfection.
    Correct, CR actually only had two (I'm not including the sinking Venice house), and that's my only complaint about this wonderful movie. If there would have been some sort of action setpiece, maybe a car chase, before Bond crashed his Aston Martin, it would be the perfect Bond movie for me.

    But CR had something SF didn't have: a story that really drew me in, a much better script, and actual screentime for the villain and Bond girl. I think Campbell understands the brand much better than the dramadirector Mendes.
  • Posts: 1,870
    I just thought it was interesting that Menses was using NBNW as a reference point. The Man from U.N.C.L.E. used NBNW as the bases for their "innocent of the week thrown into the world of spies" format. Though this idea is not part of SF there will always be a connection between U.N.C.L.E. and 007 because Fleming was involved with creating "The Man from U.N.C.L.E.". That said, rocket firing Autogyros, undersea bases with the goal of starting world war three and Lucianna Paluzzi as an enemy agent were several thing seen on U.N.C.L.E. before they arrived in Bond's universe.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Skyfalls fist fights weren't that long though. They weren't set pieces.

    Casino Royale had the free running/embassy bit (you could even maybe split those up into two), the miami airport bit and the finale. So one more set piece than SF, and the fist fights inbetween were longer (and more brutal).

    I'm not trying to bash SF, I actually think it's better than CR, but I think @Zedidk is right when it comes to the action, there's not many set pieces at all.

    I wasn't referring exclusively to Skyfall.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    It's why I fear QoS has ruined me, in a way. I love the grittiness of fist fights, and the one between Bond and Slate was so entertaining and brutal, yet the film was compared so heavily to a Jason Bourne movie.

    Now, I'm not saying that all Bond films should be like this - please no - I'm just saying that I liked it, and I hope it didn't spoil it for me with fist fights. The fight between Bond and Patrice in the Shanghai tower was so phenomenal, with the gun firing off from time to time to light up their faces for a brief moment.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    I don't compair QoS to Bourne because I never cared to watch the Bourne films. I watched the ending of one and it looked like a lame movie.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Murdock wrote:
    I don't compair QoS to Bourne because I never cared to watch the Bourne films. I watched the ending of one and it looked like a lame movie.

    You barely watched. You can't judge an opinion on such a miniscule part of a film. You really are missing out too. Brilliant films the whole lot of them.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited November 2012 Posts: 16,359
    Murdock wrote:
    I don't compair QoS to Bourne because I never cared to watch the Bourne films. I watched the ending of one and it looked like a lame movie.

    You barely watched. You can't judge an opinion on such a miniscule part of a film. You really are missing out too. Brilliant films the whole lot of them.

    I'll give them a watch soon. Christmas Break is coming around and I'll have a few weeks to kill so I'll give them a chance :)
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Murdock wrote:
    Murdock wrote:
    I don't compair QoS to Bourne because I never cared to watch the Bourne films. I watched the ending of one and it looked like a lame movie.

    You barely watched. You can't judge an opinion on such a miniscule part of a film. You really are missing out too. Brilliant films the whole lot of them.

    I'll give them a watch soon. Christmas Break is coming around and I'll have a few weeks to kill so I'll give them a chance :)
    I will be plowing through films myself. I can't wait!
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    Murdock wrote:
    Murdock wrote:
    I don't compair QoS to Bourne because I never cared to watch the Bourne films. I watched the ending of one and it looked like a lame movie.

    You barely watched. You can't judge an opinion on such a miniscule part of a film. You really are missing out too. Brilliant films the whole lot of them.

    I'll give them a watch soon. Christmas Break is coming around and I'll have a few weeks to kill so I'll give them a chance :)
    I will be plowing through films myself. I can't wait!

    Mister Plow. oh that's my name, that name again is Mister Plow! :))
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    RC7 wrote:
    Zekidk wrote:
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

    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.
    You can have long fist fights/chases that traverse various terrain too. People are making a big deal about a lack of so called set pieces in Skyfall, yet Casino Royale didn't have much either, going by your definition, and that film is near perfection.

    CR had many more action set pieces and absolutely spectacular ones at that. The chase with Molaka, Miami Airport and The sinking house, are all better set pieces than we see in SF. I'm not having a go at SF as it does other things better than CR but for out and out set pieces CR trumps SF. Oh and fighting Patrice is not an action scene. It's an incidental fight, the Obanna stairwell scrap is better.

    I vehemently agree with this.
  • Bond films shouldn't be action movies they are spy thrillers.

    Skyfall is IMO the best Bond film since OHMSS. A Bond movie with a brain. Exciting, atmospheric . Mendes should come back for sure.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Bond films shouldn't be action movies they are spy thrillers.

    Skyfall is IMO the best Bond film since OHMSS. A Bond movie with a brain. Exciting, atmospheric . Mendes should come back for sure.
    You win all the internets.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    Bond films shouldn't be action movies they are spy thrillers.

    Skyfall is IMO the best Bond film since OHMSS. A Bond movie with a brain. Exciting, atmospheric . Mendes should come back for sure.

    Best post I've read all day. :)
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    Bond films shouldn't be action movies they are spy thrillers.

    Skyfall is IMO the best Bond film since OHMSS. A Bond movie with a brain. Exciting, atmospheric . Mendes should come back for sure.

    :-bd completely agree.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Bond films shouldn't be action movies they are spy thrillers.

    Skyfall is IMO the best Bond film since OHMSS. A Bond movie with a brain. Exciting, atmospheric . Mendes should come back for sure.

    Your first point is a good one, they should theoretically be spy thrillers. The only problem is, it's only really FRWL that delivers that. Real spy's don't fight on trains or have cars kitted with machine guns. I get your point but Bond will always have expectations for delivering action as well as a thrilling spy story. Remember, he's the least spy-like spy ever. He's fantasy and that's why we love him, right?
  • maybe james bond doesnt understand sam mendes ?
  • Posts: 1,870
    Creasy47 wrote:
    It's why I fear QoS has ruined me, in a way. I love the grittiness of fist fights, and the one between Bond and Slate was so entertaining and brutal, yet the film was compared so heavily to a Jason Bourne movie.

    Now, I'm not saying that all Bond films should be like this - please no - I'm just saying that I liked it, and I hope it didn't spoil it for me with fist fights. The fight between Bond and Patrice in the Shanghai tower was so phenomenal, with the gun firing off from time to time to light up their faces for a brief moment.

    Go back to the fights in OHMSS and see where the intense fight editing really started way before Bourne.

  • Posts: 7,653
    delfloria wrote:
    Go back to the fights in OHMSS and see where the intense fight editing really started way before Bourne.
    Watch the Trainfight in FRWL that was the start easily, or the fight in the elevator in DAF that one is far more intens than any fight in OHMSS. Connery knew how to kick.....

  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Pity DAF is otherwise an embarrassing load of toss and OHMSS leaves it standing, Connery might have known how to kick but he looked like he should kept off the pies before accepting his last mission with EON Bond.

    At least George looked like he could do some damage as opposed to Connery disgraceful looking build for NAF.
  • Posts: 15,229

    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.[/quote]

    Campbell is far superior to Mendes when it comes to action scenes, no doubt, but I never thought the action scenes in Skyfall were poor. The tube chase was no French Connection, but it was not meant to be. The skycraper fight is meant to be short and at a time when Bond is in poor shape. Yes there is room for improvement. But I think the improvement is more about the quality of some of the action pieces/scenes than in the quantity of them.
  • I really liked the approach to action in Skyfall, one of my issues with CR is that the set pieces were a little long and exhausting. The Madagascar chase was great, the Miami airport one was decent, but by the time we get to the Venice one, I'd started to lose interest in the action. I was actually a little irritated that it went back into a huge setpiece at that point. For me, Skyfall got it just right.
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 3,278
    Bond films shouldn't be action movies they are spy thrillers.

    Skyfall is IMO the best Bond film since OHMSS. A Bond movie with a brain. Exciting, atmospheric . Mendes should come back for sure.
    But Mendes clearly said that every Bond movie should have "three to four huge action set pieces." I have no idea why he ended up scaling back on the action and scrapping set pieces that was in the orginal script. Maybe it was the budget costs or because he decided on a more dialogue-heavy entry. I think that most fans would agree that SF lacked a mid-center action set piece, if looking at it objectively.

    And I actually forgot to leave my brain when entering the theatre for once. Sadly. So I became annoyed with the complete absence of logic in the movie. There are just so many parts that don't make any sense what so ever.

    But I respect that you want the action removed from the Bond movies. Like I respect that some want war-scenes out of a war movie.
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 3,327
    Zekidk wrote:
    Bond films shouldn't be action movies they are spy thrillers.

    Skyfall is IMO the best Bond film since OHMSS. A Bond movie with a brain. Exciting, atmospheric . Mendes should come back for sure.
    But Mendes clearly said that every Bond movie should have "three to four huge action set pieces." I have no idea why he ended up scaling back on the action and scrapping set pieces that was in the orginal script. Maybe it was the budget costs or because he decided on a more dialogue-heavy entry. I think that most fans would agree that SF lacked a mid-center action set piece, if looking at it objectively.

    And I actually forgot to leave my brain when entering the theatre for once. Sadly. So I became annoyed with the complete absence of logic in the movie. There are just so many parts that don't make any sense what so ever.

    But I respect that you want the action removed from the Bond movies. Like I respect that some want war-scenes out of a war movie.

    I think Zekidk, the one thing I agree with you on in your criticism of SF is that it could have done with one more action set piece. I'll go along with that too. I feel it could have had at least one more, to satisfy the fans who come to a Bond film to expect lots of action.

    But I'm hazarding a guess that the budget was a lot tighter on this one after all the financial probelms EON had getting this film off the ground, so settled for more on characters and drama in the script, with Oscar winning actors, in the hope this would push the film with more sales by getting glowing reviews.

    If that was the case, you have to say hats off to them. The plan worked!
  • Posts: 1,870
    I could have still done with a mano e mano fight between Bond and Silva in the Chapel before getting to the knife.
  • Zekidk wrote:
    By keeping the action at a bare minimum and scrapping action set pieces from the storyboard?

    I can clearly hear the drama-director Mendes say: "Let's cram the only huge action set-piece 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!
    Well, you sound as though you'd enjoy the Die Hard movies or an Arnold Schwarzenegger movie -- perhaps The Expendables 2, something where the whole point of the movie is to justify the use of large over-the-top fantasized action scenes.

  • delfloria wrote:
    I could have still done with a mano e mano fight between Bond and Silva in the Chapel before getting to the knife.
    I honestly think that would have really weakened, rather than strengthened, the end of the movie.

  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    Perhaps the action was scaled back because of the big budget cut Skyfall had received.
Sign In or Register to comment.