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
Bautista is fantastic casting and with his work in film and even what he's done with the WWE he's going to make an awesome henchman. Again, he's going to surprise a lot of people.
They have not been proven wrong as The Rock has not been cast. Yes, Bautista may be the henchman, but they did cast in the past people for their menacing appearance more than their acting skills, especially for the henchmen. And it worked, if the role was limited to fighting and looking mean. Heck, even in The Godfather the actor playing Luca Brasi was a former professional wrestler! And it worked beautifully.
Maybe I am wrong, but when people objected to The Rock, it has more to do with his status more than his wrestling background. The Rock, unlike Bautista, is famous (heck, I'd venture to say that he is more famous than Bardem was when he was cast in SF), and famous for lead roles in action movies that, well, may not have the same standing as Bond films.
I think you are very right there.
Some said he was too famous. Others said he was too bad an actor and acted like the Bond series was above him. Here's some quotes from the time
So people didn't just write him off because he was famous. They wrote him off because he was a one note actor famous for action films. Bautista is the same. Wrestler turned actor, did some B movie action flicks and is now starting to really break out into Hollywood.
Also, you say The Rock is famous for action movies that may not have the same standing as the Bond films. I've said this before and I'll say it again: Bond is at the end of the day an action/thriller film series. We've got some talented arty people making the films now but at the end of the day they're escapist action films and instead of acting like they're above other action franchises I think the people behind the films could learn a thing or two. The Rock is probably most famous for his role in the last two Fast And Furious films (the best ones). I don't know if you've seen them but the action scenes and fight scenes in those films blow anything in SF out of the water. Mendes should take notes.
Sjees, the fights in our precious Bond films are not "Fast & Furious-esque" enough. Daniel Craig fighting Patrice inside that Chinese skycraper was "boring".
Well, I can say one thing. I don't want to see "Bond 24" stripped off from its more stylistically, elegantly filmed fighting style. I myself loved the fighting scene in SF against that softly moving Jellyfish-background. It reminded me of George Lazenby fighting so violently, but doing it in a slimfit tuxedo, inside a wunderful luxury hotel. Again, the sheer contrast of it, the filming style, the lights.....made it work.
I do agree that naturally we will see more heavy fist fights in Bond 24, because a big henchman is in it. And I love it. But please don't forget that fighting scenes need to be seen in the context of the screenplay, the story. So SF indeed had less fights because the screenplay did not demand it (although guys, do we forget the underwater fight in Scotland? Or the entire PTS on that train? Are we.....blind). And I'm convinced that even Dave Bautista needs fighting choreography lessons, so his fighting style doesn't become too WWE-esque and is indeed more Bond-like.
But if we take "Fast & Furious" as an example and simply want more fist fights, regardless of the bigger context, the context of the screenplay and the story, than I'm getting worried.
Moreover, I don't want Sam Mendes to draw inspiration from the "Fast & Furious" franchise. Bond has 50 years of fighting experience himself. Bond is better than those fast and furious testosterone filled car racers. I love to see the F&F movies, especially the last three. And inspiration comes with every filmmaker.
Don't you worry. He's much to busy copying Nolan.
Best fight Craig ever had, IMO, was when fighting Slate in QoS. That was brutal.
So there are people in here who rather see Bond drawing inspiration from "Fast & Furious" than from Christopher Nolan. In all honesty, we're talking about fighting sequences.
Actually, I think it's to opposite. The Rock is above playing a small henchman role, no matter how prestigious the franchise.
The point is you use your fantasy a bit also? Instead of being presented everything in such a visually lazy and "all over the place" way to you. I also think it's a matter of taste. But saying that the fight with Slate in QOS is even better than the staircase fight in CR or the train fight in SF kind of escapes me really. Especially story-wise that Slate fight was kind of "there", without a context. But then again, that's your taste.
Which is also style over substance, it's not even necessary, just an excuse for a punch up. The Obanna fight is much better and at least has some narrative weight. He had to kill him.
Completely agreed. Like I said, a fight scene needs to be seen in the context of the story. Like you say "narrative weight".
The fights to some people in SF were insufficient. Nobody is saying we should get fights for the sake of it. What I do want is for the script to obviously(which goes without saying) call for fights when and as needed but you have to bear in mind the fact that these are still action movies. When other films and TV shows are besting Bond in the fight scenes department then there's a cause for concern; especially when the Craig era was off to such a great start in this area. Lazenby ' s fights in OHMS were/are infinitely superior to what ever we got in SF. OHMSS was in 1969 SF was in 2012; it's somewhat sad that such a comparison has to even be made because expectations of what we should be getting shouldn't be overshadowed by the execution of filming fighting from over 40 years ago.
As for Bautista, he's a professional wrestler just like Peter Maivia (the rock's gramps)who squared off against Connery in Osato's office. Obviously he's going to need training and choreography assistance for the movie, you do realise that's what professional wrestling is all about right? So Bautista more than fits the role for this henchman and his experience as an animalistic fighter excites because it's a strong indication the fights are going to be more brutal than not just the underwhelmingness of SF but that of what we've seen so far for the Craig era.
You want standard, half arsed potato punch ups? Go watch Roger Moore. I prefer to watch a film that conveys fist fights in a more credible and entertaining fashion and the fist fights in the last to FF movies are nothing to look down upon just because they're in a typical action popcorn vehicle. You can have all the glowing jellyfish backgrounds you want but at the end of the day, said jellyfish us more memorable than the lacklustre fight; location doesn't matter that much. We the it's I'm a toilet, hotel room, sewer, stairwell; the most important thing is that the fight is memorable, entertaining and in line with the nature of what Bond does for a profession. He's a hit man, an assassin and he's going to get into lengthy, vicious fights. Let's see it!
Huh? The fight in Shanghai was necessary? And in the "context of the story"? Are you kidding me? The only reason why they were fighting on top of the skyscraper to a "cool looking" CGI background, was because it would be cool to have Bond fighting a henchman on top of a skyscraper to a cool looking background. Patrice's presence there makes no sense, plotwise.
Go skype with me then! You know what I mean then. I think I reflect my points perfectly, with arguments that have substance. Quote my stuff or else don't react man. I try and analyze your arguments. But all you do is starting your arguments, which are your opinions off course, with lines that make me sound like a stupid twat. Don't expect me to react then. I think I was damn clear in what I was saying.
Again, who starts the comparisons here. And again, this is YOUR opinion dude. If you think Paul Walker's fight scene is superior over many fight scenes in SF, so be it then. I respect that. But I can disagree with that, state my own arguments why I disagree. But ALWAYS have respect man, and stop making me ridiculous by saying this:
It's like you are sighing constantly when I post stuff, as if you are constantly irritated by me. Well then, take a hike dude!
Bond fans come in all grades and all shades of grey. There are guys who get inspired by one particular Bond film, others by other films. You can always disagree with me...and with my love for certain movies. But don't twist it in such a way that you make certain fans look like retards.
You put that sentence out of the context. If that sentence was typed solely, without any context, then I can understand that people are angry. But really what I wanted to say is very plain: Fantasy needs to be used to actually enjoy that fighting scene in the Chinese skycraper. I'm not attacking that person for its entire behaviour on the forum!
Exactly. I respect also other people if they want a more "Fast & Furious-like" style of fighting. But I think one can disagree with that. It's something else if you put a person's entire posting behaviour in dispute. That's not nice.
Regards the fights - the reason the Obanna fight works is that it has the raw energy of the train fight in FRWL. It's two men scrapping, in the way two men would genuinely fight for their lives, not like video game or comic book characters, but like real men. Fights now are far too choreographed, too balletic, too precise (the edit has a big impact on this) even when they are supposed to be brutal, they're undermined by sheer volume and frequency. I'd like any fights we see in B24 to be hard hitting, but natural. Oh, and I don't think they need any more than two fights. One where Bond gets the living daylights kicked out of him and one where he almost does, but wins purely thanks to his wits.
As a final point - I'd argue Craig comes across as much more of a hard b****** in the final scene of QoS than he does at any point during his fight scenes in that film. So more bad ass, measured Craig and less roid-rage Craig, please.
Brilliant post @RC7, you summed up my thoughts exactly. I prefer a couple of short, brutal fights an entire film full of carefully planned fight sequences when it comes to Bond. Let's not forget Bond's background is in boxing and judo, not kung-fu /:)
Nice post @RC7. I can't agree more.
Why would I quote you when my response encapsulates everything you've recently written, which ozs your familiar and traditional hogwash. If you think I'm making you sound like a stupid twat then that's your problem. I don't believe I'm making you sound like one but if that's how you feel...
Give it a rest already. Everything I say is obviously an opinion, stop stating what doesnt need to be stated as if it's a relevant rebuttal to an erroneous claim. Agree or disagree it's not, never has and nor should be a problem. If you're feeling ridiculous then maybe you should consider that you're doing that all by yourself with your full blown diva - like overreactions.
Nope not at all but maybe you should take your own advice.
And when did you come to this enlightenment? Again, I refer you to take your own advice because you are notorious for failing to accept that many Bond fans don't share your opinions on what makes for a great Bond film or casting and crew eligibility and where you claim to accept a difference of opinion, you're conspicuously passive aggressive in your approach.
I sent you a private message @doubleoego. Perhaps better if we continue there, instead of here? I welcome a good, fierceful chat or discussion. In real. Because I think on a forum things could get a bit too messy at times. I'm not that notorious like you say now.
Talking about contradiction!
I very rarely say/write this,but I happen to agree with every single letter in this post.
People accuse me for posting way too much lengthy nonsense at times. But these kind of oneliners kind of need some elaboration no?