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
They only made 2 movies after that. In fact, I think Craig's Bond is a bit dated for that reason.
How does that make a difference to how a film ages?
Because we don't have new Bond movies. You can't evolve if you don't make movies.
The new Bond really needs an update.
What do you feel it is about TWINE which has OHMSS about it?
I think it helps that Deakins' cinematography is quite classic in many ways. It's more in line with the 60s films like FRWL. The camera doesn't need to move when it isn't necessary (even during action sequences), and the visuals are meant to tell the story/not draw quite as much attention to itself. It's got a modern flair to it no doubt (it was shot digitally after all) but it still holds up in my opinion, more than NTTD weirdly (which is a beautiful looking film, but very different visually).
I think there’s a lot that makes both TWINE and OHMSS similar. Visually speaking there are some nice homages there like the Ski Chase (even though it doesn’t really match what EON was able to accomplish back in ‘69) to smaller details like Elektra King’s gown during her final scene looking extremely similar to the one Tracy Bond wears when she’s first introduced. Both stories present a more emotionally invested Bond. There’s the source of the title itself coming from Fleming’s novel of course, and then there’s the quote from P&W where they stated that their goal with Elektra was to create somebody “Whom Bond thinks is Tracy but is really Blofeld.”
But for all that TWINE does to try and replicate Majesty’s, I don’t really think they quite pull it off. I think Brosnan is a much better Bond than George Lazenby without a doubt, but I don’t really get the same sense of vulnerability from Brosnan’s Bond in this film that I get from Lazenby’s. I wouldn’t say that’s Pierce’s fault but I always leave TWINE feeling too much emphasis was placed on the action set pieces (some of which weren’t that great) rather than fleshing out the story more. Plus I think that for all the criticism’s Lazenby receives, he’s at least elevated by the supporting players around him and of course Peter Hunt. I don’t think Brosnan really had that luxury for TWINE; I thought Sophie Marceau was great while Denise Richards and Robert Carlyle left a bit to be desired.
In many ways I look at TWINE sort of like how I view NTTD; I appreciate what it’s trying to accomplish and the callbacks it has, but it lacks in a few areas to really go toe to toe with Majesty’s for me.
Yes, that's really interesting. The ski scene, down to her outfit and the beginning of the score, is clearly meant to evoke Tracy.
And yet...and yet. TWINE fails in so many regards, and I think you hit on it with the not-great action sequences. If some of those had been scrapped in favor of better character development--I don't know, say, Bond in the PTS while doing his job had to double-cross a woman, and then he gets double-crossed by Elektra in the end.
But it's muddled by the PTS action sequence and Bond's shoulder, blah blah blah.
Elektra's big reveal to M--which should be a bigger moment and should possibly have been done in front of Bond, with Elektra escaping with M and her guards--instead gets overshadowed by sillier and sillier sequences (like the pipeline, and the random Goldie explosion, and the caviar factory). Bond tells Christmas what has happened instead of having an actual, high-stakes confrontation with, you know, the villain.
If you took Christmas Jones out of the movie entirely--and I'm not talking about the performance, I'm talking about the character--I wonder if you'd end up with a stronger and more focused film.
I'm sure there are many reasons why it didn't quite pull together, but things like Apted seemingly not having much interest in Bond films didn't help.
The confrontation with the villain was in the torture scene. I think it would have been redundant.
I don't see it this way, Elektra's outfit for example didn't resemble Tracy, I've read it somewhere in the behind the scenes that those outfits were made to evoke the Azerbaijani identity of the character, none of her outfits reminds me of Tracy, the same for the ski scene (Tracy was adventurous and independent, Elektra always clings on Bond or would find some ways to caught Bond's empathy for her, her hysteria when they're trapped under the snow was something Tracy never done and I don't see her doing either), Tracy was also cold towards Bond, unlike Elektra who's being sensual or using her sexuality to seduce Bond, Tracy was also a headstrong and determined character, Elektra was too touchy feely (if you get my point).
The gambling scene could've been a point here, but it's not Tracy, that scene was something that's copied right out of OHMSS, just like the train meeting scene in CR between Bond and Vesper, those scenes evoked the scene.
But even in that gambling scene, Elektra still didn't remind me of Tracy, they're still different: Tracy was frustrated and hopeless, Elektra was intentionally doing it and being a spoiled brat, even Bond was frustrated and a bit annoyed watching her because she's doing it the way she wanted it, in OHMSS, Bond felt a wave of curiousness and sympathy towards Tracy.
I liked Elektra the best of the Brosnan Era Bond Girls (Natalya is 2nd, and yes, Jinx is 3rd, mainly for the chemistry between Halle and Brosnan), but I see her as a character on her own, she doesn't reminds me of Tracy.
Perhaps I used the wrong word, but I think on a subconscious level they were somewhat influenced by OHMSS. I guess in some ways it’s sort of like FYEO for me where there are plenty of visual references to OHMSS which are meant to evoke that film but really nothing else beyond that.
I think I agree with most of this. It’s just a film filled to the brim with so many missed opportunities. There really wasn’t any need to give Bond a shoulder injury if they were hardly going to utilize that plot element; the big reveal of Elektra as the villain and how it was handled was quite poor like you say, and honestly I completely forgot Goldie was in this film until you mentioned him haha.
The climax of the film is a pretty mixed bag for me as well. I love the moment where Bond kills Elektra and states “I never miss.” I could’ve done without that slight moment of Necrophilia afterwards. I also really love the moment where he kills Renard with the nuclear rod and Brosnan’s acting during that scene. I’m less enthralled about the film ending on two separate Christmas jokes.
In many ways, one of the best things to come out of TWINE would be the influence it had on SF; which takes some of TWINE’s ideas and builds upon while being a better film in general.
I agree, it needs more Bond and Elektra, also, more focus on Elektra's involvement in the plot.
Christmas Jones is okay (she's important to the plot, mainly in the Pipeline scenes), but her role was extended too much beyond of her scenes where she's urgently needed (in the pipeline scenes), I think her presence needs to be cut, perhaps after deactivating the bomb in that pipeline, that's the end of her role, I don't know why Bond still included her in the final act, she's not needed, she didn't even helped Bond in the submarine scenes (retrieving the Plutonium Rod), and was mostly a damsel in distress in there.
Renard, this character needs fleshing out to, I need to know more of him and his motivations and plans, I think his character was interesting, but it needs a further development and fleshing out, like the bullet inside his head for example, or his connection to Elektra, it needs to be explained more.
The major difference of course is that Elektra plays Bond and by extension others around her. So she would be a bit more clingy and emotionally manipulative at points, whereas Tracy can be colder because she's a sincere (but unhappy) character. I'm sure there's more differences and similarities that can be rattled off but I wouldn't get too bogged down in them. Broadly I can see what they were going for.
'Slight moment of Necrophilia' :)) Yeah, I get what you mean.
It would have been cool if we'd seen Renard's lack of pain utilised a bit more in that final fight with Bond. It could even have been his undoing or something that Bond could have used against him.
It’s so bizarre, and the funny thing is it happens in TND also when he finds Paris Carver dead in his hotel room. I’m not sure if those moments are in the scripts but lord I feel bad that Brosnan is forced to endure moments like that.
I could’ve done without the No-Pain element in general. They could’ve found ways to make Renard genuinely terrifying without resorting to gimmicks that have zero plausibility in reality. How can anyone survive a bullet point blank to the head? It just doesn’t make sense as a set up.
I've watched a series here in our country about that, it's a love story, but it's a story involving a boy who had been shot by a stray bullet to the head, but he had still survived.
And again, Bond films could have distinctions like that in their characters (especially villains), after all Stromberg had webbed hands, Jaws have metallic teeth, May Day had unbelievable strength, Primo had bionic eye, and Fleming designed Dr. No as having a heart placed in wrong location of his body and with pincer hands, in the world of James Bond, it's acceptable, we even have Baron Samedi who have been shot by Bond, yet still alive (just looked at his smoking, open head), Xenia Onatopp can kill people with her thighs, Oddjob's steel rimmed hat that could cut people's heads.
He's one I have no problem with ostensibly but does still look too Marine more than Spy to me. He's a little too big of a person.
I actually quite like the bullet in the head thing. Not sure if it's terribly realistic (then again I think one of the great things about Bond is that nonsense like that can be made plausible).
I like that Renard essentially has a terminal diagnosis. He's already an anarchist with the goal of ultimate chaos, so the idea that he'd want to cause as much of it as possible before dying is quite scary in its own way. The lack of pain thing isn't fully shown anyway beyond a couple of brief moments (I do like the scene with him holding the burning rock though). It's one of these weird and almost Fleming-esque ideas in concept. Not very well done in the context of the film, and I think Carlyle is quite badly miscast. Renard as a character is set up as this charismatic and even attractive man in the script. A psychopath, yes, but not quite the weird little loner Carlyle plays the part as. Someone like a young Javier Bardem would have been better in my opinion. It would have shown a man cut down in his prime, and might have given him falling for Elektra a much more tragic dynamic (as it is I always got the sense Carlyle's Renard is a bit of a weirdo and liked that Elektra noticed him. It's sad, but not in an impactful way or for the reasons relevant to the story).
It's even more strange in TND when he's leaving the hotel goes to Paris' body. No idea what the direction would have been for that one.
'Right Pierce, love, we want Bond to appear sad at Paris' death. Distraught in fact. I want you to go to her body and give her a kiss on the neck. Really bury your head, darling, don't be afraid to really get in there. And do it for a full two seconds. It has to be sad.'
I don't think it's as bad as some people make it out to be. I think he looks great in a lot of scenes. I think it's just because it's noticeably shorter than in his other movies, much more blunt I guess (which works for where his Bond is at in this film. It also highlights his facial features a bit more so you get a sense of how haggard he looks in the first third).
I wouldn't say it's a dated haircut at all. The short fade is actually quite a modern look if anything. It's not on the level of Connery's sideburns in DAF, or Dalton's slicked back hair in LTK. It's not even Brosnan's hair (its ability to stay in such elaborate shape defies gravity. I can't even imagine how much they would have put in his hair in GE especially).
The suits are too tight.
I suppose I would’ve liked the “No Pain” element if it was utilized properly. I agree I love that introduction scene where he’s holding the rock and forces one of his underlings hold on to it in order to prove their loyalty, and I also sort of like his reaction to finding out about Elektra’s death but yeah I don’t think Robert Carlyle is all that memorable and perhaps slightly miscast. Young Javier Bardem is a great idea; he probably would’ve come across as more menacing/intimidating than Carlyle.
Honestly I wish somebody like Michael Wincott would’ve been cast instead of Carlyle. Wincott has a sort of unpredictability that would’ve been perfect for Renard that Carlyle unfortunately lacks.
I’m not entirely sure what you mean by this. I still find Skyfall to be one of the most visually stunning films in the series and by all accounts still seems to be a good crowd-pleaser.
I actually don’t think any of Craig’s films have dated in any way. Yeah perhaps seeing the big/blocky cell phones in Casino Royale is a reminder of how much time has passed since then, but Craig’s era never feels dated by the technology constraints of the time. I’d say the same about Brosnan’s era as well.