›

John Cleese Suggests that Bond franchise lost its humor with Skyfall...

135

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    Thunderfinger wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    All very well for Cleese to have an opinion. Just don't mention the car ;)

    Cars are like opinions. Everybody has one.
    Or was that arse?

    I don't have a car...so that means I don't have opinions...so that means I'm not really here. Am...am I dead? Can you guys see what I'm typing??!!
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I can see it as I do not own a car myself. Cars are overrated, like opinions. Some.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,233
    Murdock wrote:
    Bond movies aren't comedies. It's his opinion. I found him funny, but in a clumsy way. He was right for Brosnan, but not for Craig.

    And that's why Cleese is so very wrong. And when it comes to action not only is he wrong, but he is hypocritical too.
  • actonsteveactonsteve
    Posts: 1,492
    Bounine wrote:
    W

    I reckon Cleese is still bitter about being kicked out of the role after DAD. He said as much in an interview a few years ago.

    I'd like to see this.Have you got a copy?

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,262
    I'm still convinced that Cleese is a talented and versatile actor but I do agree that he might not work all that well in any of the previous Craig Bonds. However, these two fine British actors could find some chemistry between them so I wouldn't necessarily dismiss Cleese as a possibility in a slightly lighter toned fourth Craig Bond. Obviously he can't be Q at this point, since we have a new Q and I think he'll do very well. Watch Layer Cake. Wishaw and Craig were destined to team up one day. ;-)
  • BounineBounine
    edited July 2014 Posts: 2,599
    NicNac wrote:
    The thing is, they change Bond actors and as a result they change the character of Bond as well.

    As a result of this what they should do is change Bond's humour.

    The droll one liners suited Connery, and the double entendres suited Moore, but somehow they persevered with a combination of both for Dalton and Brosnan, when perhaps they should've adapted the much needed humour to the actor concerned.

    Brosnan is funnier when he reacts to situations, pulling comedy faces or whatever. Similar to when he escapes the police and drops to the ground during the PTS of TWINE. He looks at the passers by, does a double take or whatever and walks away. That's when he is funniest, not when he delivers a terrible pun.

    Dalton may have struggled with the one liners, but they really should have played to his strengths. After all his Bond is a 360 degree turnaround from Moore, so why make him drop the same old crummy jokes? Instead of the stupid 'salt corrosion' quip the writers should have discussed with Dalton what he was comfortable doing or saying. A simple wink at the girl would've been funnier.

    Absolutely. The only thing I disagree with is the wink suggestion. I think that it would have been appropriate if Dalton had merely smiled while either looking ahead or at Kara. Maybe a small chuckle would have been okay, much like the scene with Connery and Tatiana on the train in FRWL when Tania said "but there are some things that are going to change" (or something like that) and Bond replied "of course darling". I feel this would have been very natural and appropriate in terms of Dalton's portrayal of the character.
  • BounineBounine
    edited July 2014 Posts: 2,599
    actonsteve wrote:
    Bounine wrote:
    W

    I reckon Cleese is still bitter about being kicked out of the role after DAD. He said as much in an interview a few years ago.

    I'd like to see this.Have you got a copy?

    No, sorry. I just remember reading an interview with him, on this site I think. I do remember it clearly though. It was around the time Brosnan was bitching repeatedly about being cut loose so abruptly and Cleese didn't like how the same thing was done to him.

    @Murdock
    "Bond movies aren't comedies. It's his opinion. I found him funny, but in a clumsy way. He was right for Brosnan, but not for Craig."

    I don't think that he was even right for Brosnan. He was right for Inspector Closeau, well, atleast in TWINE. In DAD, I just found his performance unnatural and forced, as it was in TWINE. He was alright at the end of DAD though.

    @Getafix

    "I prefer the minimal humour of DC's first two films to the lame sub-Mooresque jokes in SF."

    I agree. This is what they got wrong with Skyfall including the gadget laden car. It was great to have the DB5 but not with the extras.
  • cmacy007cmacy007
    Posts: 20
    Well, I posted this because I thought it would start quite a discussion. Bottom line for me, Cleese sucks in the role of R/Q. Skyfall was hilarious. I could list the jokes in the script for an hour and consume 20,000 characters. If you didn't laugh at Skyfall you either need to watch it many more times, or you're not a bond fan. The film did so much for the franchise. It has successfully rebooted it! Connecting with old fans and drawing in a new audience. At the least, love Skyfall because it celebrated the 50th anniversary and guaranteed the future of Bond! Hope for another 50 years.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    cmacy007 wrote:
    Well, I posted this because I thought it would start quite a discussion. Bottom line for me, Cleese sucks in the role of R/Q. Skyfall was hilarious. I could list the jokes in the script for an hour and consume 20,000 characters. If you didn't laugh at Skyfall you either need to watch it many more times, or you're not a bond fan. The film did so much for the franchise. It has successfully rebooted it! Connecting with old fans and drawing in a new audience. At the least, love Skyfall because it celebrated the 50th anniversary and guaranteed the future of Bond! Hope for another 50 years.

    ...or it wasn't someone's style of comedy. I found certain parts to be quite funny, but I wouldn't say the film was hilarious, and I also don't get where this whole "If ___, then you're not a Bond fan" idea has come from, especially if someone didn't find one of the films funny, let alone "hilarious."
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    cmacy007 wrote:
    Well, I posted this because I thought it would start quite a discussion. Bottom line for me, Cleese sucks in the role of R/Q. Skyfall was hilarious. I could list the jokes in the script for an hour and consume 20,000 characters. If you didn't laugh at Skyfall you either need to watch it many more times, or you're not a bond fan. The film did so much for the franchise. It has successfully rebooted it! Connecting with old fans and drawing in a new audience. At the least, love Skyfall because it celebrated the 50th anniversary and guaranteed the future of Bond! Hope for another 50 years.

    SF was hit and miss at best, has not rebooted any series and as for not being a Bond fan if you do not like it................... I strongly advise you to look in the mirror so you can enjoy a Craigfan which is something else than a James Bond fan. The script was unfinished and left a lot to be desired, it had its moments and the sense of humor was hit and miss too. For me Mendes left me very underwhelmed with the finished product and that is at best seen in his explanation for the gunbarrel, it was total bullshit and attention grabbing where none was needed.

    I did not laugh at SF because the movie made me feel sad with the current status of Bondmovies, while I admire Craig in the part he does not get the best he deserves. It has been going downhill since CR.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited July 2014 Posts: 13,356
    Bounine wrote:
    actonsteve wrote:
    Bounine wrote:
    W

    I reckon Cleese is still bitter about being kicked out of the role after DAD. He said as much in an interview a few years ago.

    I'd like to see this.Have you got a copy?

    No, sorry. I just remember reading an interview with him, on this site I think. I do remember it clearly though. It was around the time Brosnan was bitching repeatedly about being cut loose so abruptly and Cleese didn't like how the same thing was done to him.

    From 12th June 2006:

    http://www.mi6-hq.com/news/index.php?itemid=3776&catid=2

    Cleese said, "Q doesn't appear in Casino Royale but it would have been nice if the producers had the courtesy to telephone me."
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,233
    Sour grape.
  • BounineBounine
    edited July 2014 Posts: 2,599
    SaintMark wrote:
    cmacy007 wrote:
    Well, I posted this because I thought it would start quite a discussion. Bottom line for me, Cleese sucks in the role of R/Q. Skyfall was hilarious. I could list the jokes in the script for an hour and consume 20,000 characters. If you didn't laugh at Skyfall you either need to watch it many more times, or you're not a bond fan. The film did so much for the franchise. It has successfully rebooted it! Connecting with old fans and drawing in a new audience. At the least, love Skyfall because it celebrated the 50th anniversary and guaranteed the future of Bond! Hope for another 50 years.

    SF was hit and miss at best, has not rebooted any series and as for not being a Bond fan if you do not like it................... I strongly advise you to look in the mirror so you can enjoy a Craigfan which is something else than a James Bond fan. The script was unfinished and left a lot to be desired, it had its moments and the sense of humor was hit and miss too. For me Mendes left me very underwhelmed with the finished product and that is at best seen in his explanation for the gunbarrel, it was total bullshit and attention grabbing where none was needed.

    I did not laugh at SF because the movie made me feel sad with the current status of Bondmovies, while I admire Craig in the part he does not get the best he deserves. It has been going downhill since CR.

    I was hoping they could maintain the high standard that we got in CR right throughout Craig's tenure, but alas, they seem to mess it up too often and don't always seem to learn. For me, this has been going on since LTK. I like SF, but CR is definitely the superior film. Better humour in CR that is suited to Craig's style is just one of the reasons.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited July 2014 Posts: 17,835
    2004
    "Hey, we gotta drop Cleese for this reboot- he's too silly.
    Now, we keep Dench & cast an actor that's about fourty to play Bond on his first mission..."

    :O
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    edited July 2014 Posts: 12,837
    "Q doesn't appear in Casino Royale but it would have been nice if the producers had the courtesy to telephone me." That's hardly bitching is it? He doesn't even seem pissed off that he wasn't in the film, he just seems annoyed that he wasn't told about it before, which is understandable.

    It was a job he enjoyed and instead of them ringing him and telling him that he wouldn't be in it because they were going in a different direction, they just never contacted him again after DAD and announced CR without him. I think it's the producers that were in the wrong there, not Cleese.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,233
    His comment about SF is bitchy though. We can debate about the humour of the movie, its nature and its amount, but when you played in DAD and TWINE, you don't complain about the amount and time spent on action scenes!
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    edited July 2014 Posts: 12,837
    He was asked about the current Bond films and he gave his honest opinion. That's not being bitchy, it's not like he went out of his way to slate them. I agree that his comments about the action scenes didn't make sense though, they're no longer than they ever were before.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,233
    That is certainly being hypocritical. Or show poor judgment. I mean did he ever watch the two Bond films he played in?
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Ludovico wrote:
    That is certainly being hypocritical. Or show poor judgment. I mean did he ever watch the two Bond films he played in?

    He probably prefers his films to the Craig entries. After all, other people do. Whether you think that's absurd is up to you, but some people just don't like the tone of the newer entries.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    SaintMark wrote:
    cmacy007 wrote:
    Well, I posted this because I thought it would start quite a discussion. Bottom line for me, Cleese sucks in the role of R/Q. Skyfall was hilarious. I could list the jokes in the script for an hour and consume 20,000 characters. If you didn't laugh at Skyfall you either need to watch it many more times, or you're not a bond fan. The film did so much for the franchise. It has successfully rebooted it! Connecting with old fans and drawing in a new audience. At the least, love Skyfall because it celebrated the 50th anniversary and guaranteed the future of Bond! Hope for another 50 years.

    SF was hit and miss at best, has not rebooted any series and as for not being a Bond fan if you do not like it................... I strongly advise you to look in the mirror so you can enjoy a Craigfan which is something else than a James Bond fan. The script was unfinished and left a lot to be desired, it had its moments and the sense of humor was hit and miss too. For me Mendes left me very underwhelmed with the finished product and that is at best seen in his explanation for the gunbarrel, it was total bullshit and attention grabbing where none was needed.

    I did not laugh at SF because the movie made me feel sad with the current status of Bondmovies, while I admire Craig in the part he does not get the best he deserves. It has been going downhill since CR.

    Well said, sir! I agree with pretty much everything you say, apart from that I have a bit more time for QoS than perhaps you do.

    If the series was ever 'rebooted', it was with CR.

    I totally agree with you about DC. I've been saying this for years. I think he was inspired casting, but I really think he's been let down by the scripts - even in CR. The quality is just not there.
  • NapoleonPluralNapoleonPlural
    Posts: 512
    The Independent Suggests that Monty Python franchise lost its humor with Live Show...

    http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/comedy/reviews/monty-python-live-mostly-02-arena-review-cute-mildly-rude-harmless-and-of-course-also-available-on-dvd-9577568.html
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,233
    RC7 wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    That is certainly being hypocritical. Or show poor judgment. I mean did he ever watch the two Bond films he played in?

    He probably prefers his films to the Craig entries. After all, other people do. Whether you think that's absurd is up to you, but some people just don't like the tone of the newer entries.

    What I find absurd is complaining about the level of action in SF when one played in TWINE and/or DAD. It would be like a member of the cast of Batman Forever or Batman & Robin complaining that TDKR's plot is too far fetched.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Ludovico wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    That is certainly being hypocritical. Or show poor judgment. I mean did he ever watch the two Bond films he played in?

    He probably prefers his films to the Craig entries. After all, other people do. Whether you think that's absurd is up to you, but some people just don't like the tone of the newer entries.

    What I find absurd is complaining about the level of action in SF when one played in TWINE and/or DAD. It would be like a member of the cast of Batman Forever or Batman & Robin complaining that TDKR's plot is too far fetched.

    Yeah, but he's obviously lost the plot generally. It wouldn't surprise me if he was actually thinking of QoS.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,233
    I do think he is getting old.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,360
    Ludovico wrote:
    I do think he is getting old.

    You're not here to think! You're here to do what I tell you. Now go put on the coat and demonstrate it for 007. ;)
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited July 2014 Posts: 11,189
    With respect to Cleese he does have a rather bitter side. I saw him in Oxford during his Alamony tour in 2012 and he spent the whole first half talking about how much money his ex made during everyday of their marriage.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,360
    Were only human. We all have our bad days.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Yeah. I do get the feeling though Cleese would be a rather...difficult person to work with and particularly know personally.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited July 2014 Posts: 11,425
    He's obsessed by money and with himself. Not a very pleasant person.
  • actonsteveactonsteve
    Posts: 1,492
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    "Q doesn't appear in Casino Royale but it would have been nice if the producers had the courtesy to telephone me." That's hardly bitching is it? He doesn't even seem pissed off that he wasn't in the film, he just seems annoyed that he wasn't told about it before, which is understandable.

    It was a job he enjoyed and instead of them ringing him and telling him that he wouldn't be in it because they were going in a different direction, they just never contacted him again after DAD and announced CR without him. I think it's the producers that were in the wrong there, not Cleese.

    He's still moaning about it in 2014. I would say it went deep.

    Thanks for the quote - they took their mind off Q during those years. The quote from Baine about the alamony tour was interesting.
Sign In or Register to comment.