Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
In this Discussion
When has practicality and realism gone to far?
HASEROT
has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
curious...
i was wondering what everyone's opinion on this topic would be.. because just a couple days ago, a couple of my buddies and myself got into a discussion of Nolan's Batman films, and the subject of "too much realism" came up.. i asked my friend to elaborate, and he went on about how while he likes the movies, he feels that they shifted too much away from feeling like a comic book movie. As he put it, there was less sense of fantasy and mystery surrounding Batman, by having him grounded in reality where every little gadget or gizmo needs to be explained or else it doesn't make sense... i quickly cut in and said, well if you go too much the other direction you get neon lights and bat nipples.. after a bit of a laugh, he mentioned that in the end, he felt Batman Begins had the perfect balance of both realism and that comic book sense of fantasy, where some suspension of disbelief would need to happen... and i couldn't help but to agree, as i've felt the same way..
is there too much practicality and realism in films nowadays? - do you see it getting worse, or better? why or why not? - what effect does this have on enjoying movies in the future, but also going back and watching older films? does it make it harder to watch older films that don't necessarily spoon feed you all your information?
i pose this question to all..
i was wondering what everyone's opinion on this topic would be.. because just a couple days ago, a couple of my buddies and myself got into a discussion of Nolan's Batman films, and the subject of "too much realism" came up.. i asked my friend to elaborate, and he went on about how while he likes the movies, he feels that they shifted too much away from feeling like a comic book movie. As he put it, there was less sense of fantasy and mystery surrounding Batman, by having him grounded in reality where every little gadget or gizmo needs to be explained or else it doesn't make sense... i quickly cut in and said, well if you go too much the other direction you get neon lights and bat nipples.. after a bit of a laugh, he mentioned that in the end, he felt Batman Begins had the perfect balance of both realism and that comic book sense of fantasy, where some suspension of disbelief would need to happen... and i couldn't help but to agree, as i've felt the same way..
is there too much practicality and realism in films nowadays? - do you see it getting worse, or better? why or why not? - what effect does this have on enjoying movies in the future, but also going back and watching older films? does it make it harder to watch older films that don't necessarily spoon feed you all your information?
i pose this question to all..
^ 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
Not all movies need to be realistic or even have perfect continuity. However the fan boys of these movies, and comics, make it impossible for writers and directors to be totally free in their work.
Your friend, like me, who reads comics will probably know only to well how much of a hard time the comic producers have trying to explain every little detail to these fan boys. Star Trek and Star Wars also have this problem in abundance.
This is why we have so many re-boots in movies these days and even more in the comic world, which has re-boots all the time.
It just seems to me that the idea of a film being a form of escapism has died and films are now almost documentary like in there appearance and substance.
CR being a prime example, with the ins and outs of poker being explained during the film like we are all 5 year olds. As we live in the age of the internet why cant people look things up after the movie rather than it being explained in great detail, just in case you miss something? What happened to watching movies a few time to get the 'gist' of it?
I just hope action becomes an important thing again.
Does that seem possible in the foreseeable future
It needs to drive the plot or compliment it at the very least, not just be a piece of fluff, shoehorned in. As long as it's innovative I'm happy for them to pump up the action stakes. While it was lensed beautifully, there wasn't an awful lot of genuine ingenuity in SF.
There was not a genuine sense of well...... fun in the action in Skyfall. Action in Skyfall was just for the sake of it. My no.1 concern is no one bothered complaining about it
Casino Royale and Quantum Of Solace had beautifully orchestrated action.
I am sad because as an action fan my self I find it saddening to see action take the back seat nowadays :(
Well some of us raised issues, but if your number one concern is 'others not complaining' maybe you need to look at what you really seek in a movie.
I think you'll be seeing it soon. For instance take a look at all of the movies we have at the moment. We have action movies but they're grounded, because it's suiting the wants of the times. There is a cry for realism, probably started around (2005ish, maybe?) Where shakey cams became popular because it gave viewers a glimpse of what it was like to be in the movies. You have The Dark Knight, Casino Royale, The Bourne Trilogy, The Hurt Locker, Taken, etc, etc... The goal is to have more realistic styled action.
But just look at 1994-2005ish. There was a big Martial Art's stylized craze. People wanted to see stuff they hadn't seen before. Bigger and more dangerous stunts, bigger explosions. They wanted the 80's action movie interjected with the carefree attitude of the 90's. That's where you have your Face/Off's, The Rock, Rumble in the Bronx, Last Action Hero, etc... Look at The Matrix, came out in 2001 and the Martial Arts was cited as good, but now it looks dated.
The 80's was the same, more action, but they wanted it gritty in tone (kind of like today, with less emphasis on realism). A lot of people say that it was Miami Vice syndrome - just look at License to Kill, perfect example of what was wanted in the 80's, although that came a little late to the game. In the 80's the darker one man army action was in - Terminator, Cobra, Under Siege, Die Hard, etc..
Like I said, just give it five to ten years or so. It will cycle out of the realism and movie towards something else. Bond is actually a great snap shot of movie trends of the time. Just look at the three movies LTK, TND, CR those kind of defined those periods. The next thing you'll probably see is grounded action begin to become over the top. Or a movie with everyone fighting grounded except the hero, who is presented a cut above - a lean towards 80's styled action. The realism movies have been around for a while I think escapism will start their charge soon, maybe with The Avengers even leading the way.
If people complain that the action is not up to par, then I am assuming, the folks at EON will try to rectify it in the forthcoming instalments. But since that was not the case with Skyfall I just don't see that happening
:-S
Unfortunately in the days of message boards and social media complaining gets drowned out by the masses. There are too many people shouting too many different things - everyone has an opinion. The only people that have real sway now a days are critics with clout - not just some startup blog or YT reviewer - and awards. Despite the complaints on SF the fact is it's well received by most, posts on a message board isn't going to change that. I say just be patient and try to enjoy what comes out even if it's not to your complete liking, what you want will naturally come back - and then it will be time for another new batch of people to complain about Bond going in the wrong direction.
Appreciate it!
You have no idea how much I needed that glimmer of hope, I was talking to an acquaintance the other day and this thought popped up about how the times are changing and we may see a return to action.
But I hope you know what I am speaking off. I love the shaky cam action , I find it magnificent only because it gives that sense of danger and thrill and all round excitement.
My take on it is what started in 2005 ended in 2010ish , If you notced movies like Bourne with its high paced action was praised back in 2007 but nowadays movies with action just gets criticised. look how badly Die Hard 5 is received in comparison to Any of the previous instalment because the critics 'want emotional depth'.
Its a popcorn flick for god sake we don't need emotional depth we just want to enjoy the action have a good time with our friends.
Skyfall is what fears me the most . Bond competes with Bourne, Die Hard, Taken and every other action thrillers. Now look at it through the competitions eyes, Skyfall had bad action but it fared extremely well since the critics praised it, so why should we care about raising the action. Skyfall I fear is the beginning of a trend of bad action only to be replaced by drama. Would love to know your take on this ;)
Cheers.
I do apologise if this seems a bit arrogant from my side, but my personal take on it is why not just have 'good action' along with the drama. I have no problem with drama whatsoever but when it is time, let the action go in full swing with all the drum rolls.
Do hope you are right, Skyfall made me somewhat loose faith . Will only have to wait and see.
there was nothing even remotely practical, or realistic about that whole abortion of a film - much less that scene. lol
Yes, there was!
...mojitos are incredibly delicious.
That's all I can think of. I really thought of so many scenes, and almost nothing of realism comes to mind.
The fencing was realistic to an extent, but had moments that went over the top. Still a good fighting piece though.
i stand corrected..... :) and yes they are... i do have to say, if it wasn't for Bond drinking them in that movie, it would not have become one of my preferred drinks... so i guess i owe that travesty that little bit of contribution to my life lol.
well.. Bond also did a lot of standing around... walking... and looking at other people... i guess that can be considered realistic as well :-?
And without it we likely wouldn't have CR or the whole Craig era as a whole! For that, I am glad DAD exists, even if I look down at it in contempt.
But the fencing was an actual dynamic action piece, whereas standing around and walking isn't anything like that. I know you are joking anyway, so sorry for taking it so seriously.
That's exactly how I feel: I was out one night, thought of Bond and Jinx sharing a Mojito, and tried one. Has to be one of my favorite drinks now.
And yes, I was going to include the fencing scene, but decided to skip it, as it was (apparently, I've never noticed, though) sped-up throughout. I do love that scene, though. Bond diving down the stairs, right over Graves' swing, is awesome.
no.. but he does order a Budweiser with a lime in LTK (after Pam does), and also drinks a Mint Julep in GF... so a Mojito isn't out of the realm of possibility lol.
The fencing scene to me is actually where the Film begins to tumble,just to fall finaly flat on its Face after coming to iceland. Before that it is a straight forward Spy Thriller with very Little to fault in the Logic Département (well,exept the Heart stopping scene. The genetic Redesign Stuff - which i am actually not very Fond of - to me falls in the farfetched but ... Category, if you should ask.)
When it comes to booze i got the Impression that - at least Flemings Bond - drank just about anything he could get his hands on, so the Mojito is defenitly allright with me!