What do you consider the most dire moment in a Bond film?

145791020

Comments

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    bondjames wrote: »
    The trick is not to make it feel like a trope. A white dinner jacket, a train and a babe don't make a Bond sequence. The same goes for a flying object shadowing a moving vehicle with an occupant waving. The same goes for a gadget on a watch.

    Yes, those elements were in prior films, but that's not the essence of Bond.

    If it were, CR wouldn't have been such a critical slam dunk, despite not having such fare.

    If it were, any number of the numerous pretenders over the years could readily make a Bond film. Any punk from film school could make a Bond film. They can't.

    What makes a good Bond action sequence is something new, fresh & iconic. Something we've not seen before. Something which gives us an insight into the character while still being cool. Something where he uses his intelligence while thwarting and beating an enemy. Where was the intelligence in any of the action sequences in SP? Bond almost got Madeleine killed with his idiotic recklessness with the plane and didn't do anything in the Hinx fight which we haven't seen him do countless times before in previous films.

    In CR he shows his smarts during the parkour sequence, using his brains to keep up with the faster Mollaka. Even the busting through drywall moment showed smarts, because he knew it was possible. Same goes for ramming the bike into the guardrail to catch the train in SF's PTS. etc. etc.

    Excellent points especially regarding the plane sequence.

    I think that's one of the big reasons that sequence fails - Bond simply trusts to blind luck that if he crashes his plane into the cars all the bad guys will die and Madeline and he will walk away unscathed. Yes Bond's a gambler but only when the odds are right. His thought process in going into this sequence is bizarre and halfway through he simply becomes a passenger which is why it ends up being dull.

    Yes it's no more outrageous than the MR PTS or the GE tank chase but in both those situations Bond is in control of his actions rather than putting it in the lap of the gods and crossing his fingers.
  • Posts: 1,927
    Just as annoying to me in that SP plane rescue sequence is given the circumstances, just when did Bond have the time and means to come up with the aircraft given the abruptness at which Swann is kidnapped? Did he fly it there originally or just find it in a convenient place nearby and commandeer it? He just comes up with it.

    It's not like films where he simply takes a nearby vehicle that's available. A plane is a completely different matter.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    BT3366 wrote: »
    Just as annoying to me in that SP plane rescue sequence is given the circumstances, just when did Bond have the time and means to come up with the aircraft given the abruptness at which Swann is kidnapped? Did he fly it there originally or just find it in a convenient place nearby and commandeer it? He just comes up with it.

    It's not like films where he simply takes a nearby vehicle that's available. A plane is a completely different matter.

    You see it briefly on his approach. Although that's a small issue on the whole for me.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,423
    The entirety of Sean Connery's performance in Dr. No. What were they thinking? Should have got that old guy from that movie.
  • When Bond is flying in to visit the clinic, aren't we shown the small private airfield -- with planes sitting on it -- that is just below the crest of the mountain (with the clinic atop it)?
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,926
    CraterGuns wrote: »
    When Bond is flying in to visit the clinic, aren't we shown the small private airfield -- with planes sitting on it -- that is just below the crest of the mountain (with the clinic atop it)?
    (Yes.)
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited September 2017 Posts: 9,117
    BT3366 wrote: »
    Just as annoying to me in that SP plane rescue sequence is given the circumstances, just when did Bond have the time and means to come up with the aircraft given the abruptness at which Swann is kidnapped? Did he fly it there originally or just find it in a convenient place nearby and commandeer it? He just comes up with it.

    It's not like films where he simply takes a nearby vehicle that's available. A plane is a completely different matter.

    Maybe a quick shot of him running onto the runway and nicking it would've been better but as they showed us the airport and given it would take Hinx 15-20 mins to drive down the mountain road, a distance which would take Bond about 2 mins to cover in the plane, I give him a conservative 10 mins to get to the airstrip and commandeer a plane. Not a great deal of suspension of disbelief needed.

    SP has a lot of flaws but if you start calling it out for this non issue then no film is safe.
  • BT3366 wrote: »
    Just as annoying to me in that SP plane rescue sequence is given the circumstances, just when did Bond have the time and means to come up with the aircraft given the abruptness at which Swann is kidnapped? Did he fly it there originally or just find it in a convenient place nearby and commandeer it? He just comes up with it.

    It's not like films where he simply takes a nearby vehicle that's available. A plane is a completely different matter.

    Maybe a quick shot of him running onto the runway and nicking it would've been better but as they showed us the airport and given it would take Hinx 15-20 mins to drive down the mountain road, a distance which would take Bond about 2 mins to cover in the plane, I give him a conservative 10 mins to get to the airstrip and commandeer a plane. Not a great deal of suspension of disbelief needed.

    SP has a lot of flaws but if you start calling it out for this non issue then no film is safe.

    Congratulations. You stumbled over just about the only thing in the movie that makes some sense.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,926
    Well, that's the thing, isn't it? Like the film: take things in passing. Dislike the film, especially early on, and so many plot items can come into question. As case-building to support a negative opinion, it doesn't help to rationalize how Bond could quickly appear in chase using an airplane(!).
    Has Bond done such a thing before? Chasing down a car with an airplane to rescue the Bond Girl? Seems like a genuinely new approach some viewers say they're looking for. Minus anything OO7 happened to have done in a previous film, I mean, like eyeballing the opposite transport then smiling. And a viewer doesn't have to like its execution, that's a given.
  • edited September 2017 Posts: 12,837
    The plane chase is technically impressive but it's definitely the weakest action scene of the film imo. When I read the leaked script I was picturing it being a big moment ala the tank chase in GE, you think they've got away with the girl but then the Bond theme kicks in and he comes out of nowhere in a massive plane, pulling off some insane ariel stunts to stay low and in pursuit. But Newman and Mendes really undersold it. They made what should have been an epic moment and an exciting chase feel boring and passive. To be fair I guess Craig is partly to blame as he apparently shut down the idea of a ski chase very early on ("parkour on skis" was I think how it was described, then leaked concept art shows that this was retooled into something involving a snowmobile, then finally in the last couple of drafts I think it was the plane chase), but I didn't mind that because we've had loads of ski chases before. The plane chase was an exciting new idea, it's just the execution that was lacking.
  • I think it would be like if in GoldenEye, Bond crashes through the archives window and the next time you see him is when the tank goes through the wall. Campbell still made sure to establish that Bond is eyeing it and adds to the excitement when Bond finally does come crashes through that wall. In SP, Craig simply walks off screen. Not a big issue on its own but they do start to add up...
  • PalmyraSharkRIPPalmyraSharkRIP California
    edited September 2017 Posts: 9
    Spectre pictures on the wall of bombed out MI6. Don't know why Blofeld went to Kinko's/FedEx first.

    Also, Moore describing Scaramanga's third nipple during the briefing. He sounds like he just drank a bunch of milk.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    Spectre pictures on the wall of bombed out MI6. Don't know why Blofeld went to Kinko's/FedEx first.

    Also, Moore describing Scaramanga's third nipple during the briefing. He sounds like he just drank a bunch of milk.

    On top of the fact that he was blindfolded to begin with and wouldn't have even seen the pictures.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Spectre pictures on the wall of bombed out MI6. Don't know why Blofeld went to Kinko's/FedEx first.

    Also, Moore describing Scaramanga's third nipple during the briefing. He sounds like he just drank a bunch of milk.

    On top of the fact that he was blindfolded to begin with and wouldn't have even seen the pictures.
    Even more tragically, they blindfolded him to take him back to his own old office!

    What a complete shambles.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Pay more attention to your chef
    Posts: 7,057
    Is there a thread for the best moment in a Bond film? There should be!
  • PalmyraSharkRIPPalmyraSharkRIP California
    Posts: 9
    Do you think one of the Spectre members jacked his rebreather from the drawer in his office so they could get it to Largo for Bond 27?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Is there a thread for the best moment in a Bond film? There should be!

    There is, somewhere.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited September 2017 Posts: 28,694
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Spectre pictures on the wall of bombed out MI6. Don't know why Blofeld went to Kinko's/FedEx first.

    Also, Moore describing Scaramanga's third nipple during the briefing. He sounds like he just drank a bunch of milk.

    On top of the fact that he was blindfolded to begin with and wouldn't have even seen the pictures.

    They blindfolded him to not allow him to see where he was going, not for walking through MI6. How this keeps coming up is boggling to me.

    Like in SF, where some people actually thought that Bond meant the scotch comment about Severine. Thought does actually go into these movies.
  • Yeah I'm with Brady, that makes perfect sense to me. They'd captured him and didn't want him to be able to get his bearings until they had him where they wanted him. Otherwise he might have spotted an opportunity to escape early.

    I remember in the script he was drawn to MI6 through a city wide blackout. The only light left on was coming from Dench's M's office in the old building so he sprinted over there. I don't know why they changed it (maybe Craig's injury? Or maybe they couldn't stretch the budget after how much they'd already spent) but I do think that would have been cooler.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Yeah I'm with Brady, that makes perfect sense to me. They'd captured him and didn't want him to be able to get his bearings until they had him where they wanted him. Otherwise he might have spotted an opportunity to escape early.

    I remember in the script he was drawn to MI6 through a city wide blackout. The only light left on was coming from Dench's M's office in the old building so he sprinted over there. I don't know why they changed it (maybe Craig's injury? Or maybe they couldn't stretch the budget after how much they'd already spent) but I do think that would have been cooler.

    Blofeld clearly wanted it to be a surprise, so why wouldn't Bond be blindfolded on his way to MI6, in addition to how it already incapacitates his senses? There are some reasonable criticisms about SP out there, but others like the above are solved with just a little logical thought. How people make a big deal out of such a simple thing is hilarious, and is very much in tune with the overly dramatic outrage we see post-SP.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Yeah I'm with Brady, that makes perfect sense to me. They'd captured him and didn't want him to be able to get his bearings until they had him where they wanted him. Otherwise he might have spotted an opportunity to escape early.

    I remember in the script he was drawn to MI6 through a city wide blackout. The only light left on was coming from Dench's M's office in the old building so he sprinted over there. I don't know why they changed it (maybe Craig's injury? Or maybe they couldn't stretch the budget after how much they'd already spent) but I do think that would have been cooler.

    Blofeld clearly wanted it to be a surprise, so why wouldn't Bond be blindfolded on his way to MI6, in addition to how it already incapacitates his senses? There are some reasonable criticisms about SP out there, but others like the above are solved with just a little logical thought. How people make a big deal out of such a simple thing is hilarious, and is very much in tune with the overly dramatic outrage we see post-SP.
    The only hilarity and big deal I see here are the continued attempts to justify the asinine events that take place in London in the final cut of SP. Combined with holier than thou shots at other member's points of view on the matter.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    bondjames wrote: »
    Yeah I'm with Brady, that makes perfect sense to me. They'd captured him and didn't want him to be able to get his bearings until they had him where they wanted him. Otherwise he might have spotted an opportunity to escape early.

    I remember in the script he was drawn to MI6 through a city wide blackout. The only light left on was coming from Dench's M's office in the old building so he sprinted over there. I don't know why they changed it (maybe Craig's injury? Or maybe they couldn't stretch the budget after how much they'd already spent) but I do think that would have been cooler.

    Blofeld clearly wanted it to be a surprise, so why wouldn't Bond be blindfolded on his way to MI6, in addition to how it already incapacitates his senses? There are some reasonable criticisms about SP out there, but others like the above are solved with just a little logical thought. How people make a big deal out of such a simple thing is hilarious, and is very much in tune with the overly dramatic outrage we see post-SP.
    The only hilarity and big deal I see here are the continued attempts to justify the asinine events that take place in London in the final cut of SP. Combined with holier than thou shots at other member's points of view on the matter.

    Whatever, @bondjames. I'm not going to have this discussion for the 200th time because I don't enjoy repeating myself like some others. I see a lack of thought going on at times, and point it out without calling people idiots or saying they don't "get it." If it's apparently a fact that Mendes is a hack who cobbled together a "travesty" of a Bond film, I think the overly dramatic treating a movie like a heart attack shouldn't be dealt with too lightly either if they want to swap opinion and discourse with theater.

    It may be annoying for some to read responses that take them to task for being melodramatic, but it's also annoying to read people who treat a movie like a creepy uncle that touched them in the broom closet. I'm sorry that SP has caused such severe and long-lasting psychological trauma for folks, but I'll share no sympathy in such a hilariously over blown reaction that makes EON out to be hacks, Mendes the worst director in history and Daniel a fallen Bond legend. It's time to grow up, seriously.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    Yeah I'm with Brady, that makes perfect sense to me. They'd captured him and didn't want him to be able to get his bearings until they had him where they wanted him. Otherwise he might have spotted an opportunity to escape early.

    I remember in the script he was drawn to MI6 through a city wide blackout. The only light left on was coming from Dench's M's office in the old building so he sprinted over there. I don't know why they changed it (maybe Craig's injury? Or maybe they couldn't stretch the budget after how much they'd already spent) but I do think that would have been cooler.

    Blofeld clearly wanted it to be a surprise, so why wouldn't Bond be blindfolded on his way to MI6, in addition to how it already incapacitates his senses? There are some reasonable criticisms about SP out there, but others like the above are solved with just a little logical thought. How people make a big deal out of such a simple thing is hilarious, and is very much in tune with the overly dramatic outrage we see post-SP.
    The only hilarity and big deal I see here are the continued attempts to justify the asinine events that take place in London in the final cut of SP. Combined with holier than thou shots at other member's points of view on the matter.

    Whatever, @bondjames. I'm not going to have this discussion for the 200th time because I don't enjoy repeating myself like some others. I see a lack of thought going on at times, and point it out without calling people idiots or saying they don't "get it." If it's apparently a fact that Mendes is a hack who cobbled together a "travesty" of a Bond film, I think the overly dramatic treating a movie like a heart attack shouldn't be dealt with too lightly either if they want to swap opinion and discourse with theater.

    It may be annoying for some to read responses that take them to task for being melodramatic, but it's also annoying to read people who treat a movie like a creepy uncle that touched them in the broom closet. I'm sorry that SP has caused such severe and long-lasting psychological trauma for folks, but I'll share no sympathy in such a hilariously over blown reaction that makes EON out to be hacks, Mendes the worst director in history and Daniel a fallen Bond legend. It's time to grow up, seriously.

    Or maybe it's just time to realize that SP is a terrible flawed and boring movie, which tries to make up for it with melodramatic pretensions. Obviously some people fall for that soap opera approach but they shouldn't be too proud of it.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,926
    Yeah, I'm not ready. Likely never will be, to be honest.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited September 2017 Posts: 4,043
    It's no deep psychological trauma it's an era of a series of films that I was quite enjoying till that entry came along.

    Anyway I'm going to try and make it my last word on dislike of SPECTRE I've devoted enough time to it, it's time I walked away.

    You can hold me to this as well if you like.

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    bondjames wrote: »
    Yeah I'm with Brady, that makes perfect sense to me. They'd captured him and didn't want him to be able to get his bearings until they had him where they wanted him. Otherwise he might have spotted an opportunity to escape early.

    I remember in the script he was drawn to MI6 through a city wide blackout. The only light left on was coming from Dench's M's office in the old building so he sprinted over there. I don't know why they changed it (maybe Craig's injury? Or maybe they couldn't stretch the budget after how much they'd already spent) but I do think that would have been cooler.

    Blofeld clearly wanted it to be a surprise, so why wouldn't Bond be blindfolded on his way to MI6, in addition to how it already incapacitates his senses? There are some reasonable criticisms about SP out there, but others like the above are solved with just a little logical thought. How people make a big deal out of such a simple thing is hilarious, and is very much in tune with the overly dramatic outrage we see post-SP.
    The only hilarity and big deal I see here are the continued attempts to justify the asinine events that take place in London in the final cut of SP. Combined with holier than thou shots at other member's points of view on the matter.

    Whatever, @bondjames. I'm not going to have this discussion for the 200th time because I don't enjoy repeating myself like some others. I see a lack of thought going on at times, and point it out without calling people idiots or saying they don't "get it." If it's apparently a fact that Mendes is a hack who cobbled together a "travesty" of a Bond film, I think the overly dramatic treating a movie like a heart attack shouldn't be dealt with too lightly either if they want to swap opinion and discourse with theater.

    It may be annoying for some to read responses that take them to task for being melodramatic, but it's also annoying to read people who treat a movie like a creepy uncle that touched them in the broom closet. I'm sorry that SP has caused such severe and long-lasting psychological trauma for folks, but I'll share no sympathy in such a hilariously over blown reaction that makes EON out to be hacks, Mendes the worst director in history and Daniel a fallen Bond legend. It's time to grow up, seriously.

    Or maybe it's just time to realize that SP is a terrible flawed and boring movie, which tries to make up for it with melodramatic pretensions. Obviously some people fall for that soap opera approach but they shouldn't be too proud of it.

    Chill out. It's a movie.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2017 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    Yeah I'm with Brady, that makes perfect sense to me. They'd captured him and didn't want him to be able to get his bearings until they had him where they wanted him. Otherwise he might have spotted an opportunity to escape early.

    I remember in the script he was drawn to MI6 through a city wide blackout. The only light left on was coming from Dench's M's office in the old building so he sprinted over there. I don't know why they changed it (maybe Craig's injury? Or maybe they couldn't stretch the budget after how much they'd already spent) but I do think that would have been cooler.

    Blofeld clearly wanted it to be a surprise, so why wouldn't Bond be blindfolded on his way to MI6, in addition to how it already incapacitates his senses? There are some reasonable criticisms about SP out there, but others like the above are solved with just a little logical thought. How people make a big deal out of such a simple thing is hilarious, and is very much in tune with the overly dramatic outrage we see post-SP.
    The only hilarity and big deal I see here are the continued attempts to justify the asinine events that take place in London in the final cut of SP. Combined with holier than thou shots at other member's points of view on the matter.

    Whatever, @bondjames. I'm not going to have this discussion for the 200th time because I don't enjoy repeating myself like some others. I see a lack of thought going on at times, and point it out without calling people idiots or saying they don't "get it." If it's apparently a fact that Mendes is a hack who cobbled together a "travesty" of a Bond film, I think the overly dramatic treating a movie like a heart attack shouldn't be dealt with too lightly either if they want to swap opinion and discourse with theater.

    It may be annoying for some to read responses that take them to task for being melodramatic, but it's also annoying to read people who treat a movie like a creepy uncle that touched them in the broom closet. I'm sorry that SP has caused such severe and long-lasting psychological trauma for folks, but I'll share no sympathy in such a hilariously over blown reaction that makes EON out to be hacks, Mendes the worst director in history and Daniel a fallen Bond legend. It's time to grow up, seriously.
    Only one person is making a big deal out of things and being over dramatic now and it's not any of the posters who you are indirectly taking a shot at. I've never seen anyone call Mendes a hack on here. Many don't like his approach (on both SF & SP), and that's fine. Some didn't like Glen either. Others disliked Brosnan and some don't like Craig.

    Just because you see something doesn't mean it's obvious. There are many things we all individually see in Bond films that others don't. That doesn't make those who don't see what we see simpletons. On the contrary. It just means they have a different point of view.

    If there are enough intelligent people commenting on something (and I tend to believe nearly all members on this forum are intelligent and well versed enough on all things Bond), that means the film makers could have done a better job of it, or the actors could have done a better job. That's all. At the end of the day it's the overall impression a film leaves that will be remembered and not specific scenes.

    With respect to the issue in question: I don't think it's stupid for members to question why Bond was blindfolded when being taken back to his own office in a city he is quite familiar with. The truck that he was being transported in does not have any windows in the cabin area (including towards the drivers section) and the rear windows are blocked out too. Is there a plausible explanation for why he was blindfolded? Yes and you've provided it, but not an obvious one (unless someone has read the leaked script). Certainly not enough to warrant negative reprisals.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,231
    The most annoying thing about the SP finale to me was not the fact that Bond was captured, blindfolded, and led to a place he knew very well.

    No, for me, it was that he was led there by two very inept henchmen who didn't even disarm him before blackbagging him in the back of the van. Having Bond pull out his PPK to take down a helicopter at the end just capped it all off for me. If a lot of thought went into this sequence then it went into all the wrong places.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    edited September 2017 Posts: 7,209
    Depite being a fan of Brosnan I think one of the direst moments is:

    "You're so good, when you're bad."

    But if we aren't talking about one single, disposable moment and looking at the broader picture it's the plot of Spectre I'm afraid.
  • edited September 2017 Posts: 19,339
    When Kara 'brain dead' Milovy says :

    "Take me on da wheel ?",with that stupid goofy grin on her chops.

    And Bond : "Don't think,just let it happen." - time to throw up everywhere,its embarrassing.

    I always feel the urge to punch someone when that happens.
Sign In or Register to comment.