No Time To Die: Production Diary

1119811991201120312042507

Comments

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    TripAces wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    Ottofuse8 wrote: »
    Sf is a top tier bond film, the plotholes are overplayed by critics.

    I've come around greatly on appreciating and enjoying Skyfall, but the plotholes are in no way, shape or form overplayed, whatever exactly that means. I don't know how they could be. The plotholes are perhaps the singular most glaring problem with the film and far more in-your-face than just about any other Bond. Still, the film has phenomenal cinematography, a unique style and vibe, and standout scenes and sequences that all help to elevate it.
    Every time I ask people to mention those Skyfall plotholes, I get a list of things that are simply not explained / issues that are not addressed in the movie. I've yet to read a genuine Skyfall plothole. To prove my point, I googled "Skyfall plotholes" and found a list, I will address two "plotholes" from this list:

    1. " James Bond is a man that beats unbelievable odds. It is part of his character. However, he usually beats unbelievable odds that are thrown at him, not ones he creates himself. He can kill 20 guys in a hotel if he is forced too – but he would never be stupid enough to create this situation himself. Except he did it in this movie. He lured a super villain with quasi-unlimited resources to a gun fight against him and a geriatric lady in a shit-old chalet. Of course they end-up having a third ally: Kincade, the retarded old man who likes to wave around a flash light in complete darkness to make sure bad guys can find him. But the problem here is not that James Bond won the fight 3vs15 (even though it’s stupid), the problem is that James Bond planned this gun-gang-rape in advance and assumed he would come out victorious. Which is in itself so retarded that it is insulting to Kincade."

    EXPLANATION: First of all, it turns out it wasn't that retarded on Bond's part to assume he would come out victorious, since, you know, he did come out victorious. The main objective was not to save M (who was very close to retirement anyway, in other words: she was not an extremely valuable MI6 asset anymore), it was to defeat Silva. Second of all, the whole point of the Scotland scenes were that even though Bond + M + Kinkade were clearly outmanned and outganned, they had the home advantage. Bond's plan to go to Skyfall with M is absolutely NOT a plot hole.

    2. "MI6 has weird weapons. They buy rifles that can only shoot once before reloading. Otherwise Eve Moneypenny could have, you know, shot the bad guy endlessly after she first hit James Bond on top of that train. Instead she just kept eye contact with him and hoped to make him die of guilt."

    EXPLANATION: NO, MI6 does not buy rifles that can only shoot once before reloading. Eve stopped shooting at the bad guy because she was in a state of shock after she shot Bond. This scene was clearly meant to show how unprofessional she was, and that she was not a good field agent. This is absolutely NOT a plot hole.

    I could go on...

    A few weeks ago @ClarkDevlin and @JamesBondKenya each just randomly put together a list of plot holes but you failed to answer to that. Instead you choose to wait a few weeks, let some grass grow over it and then replay your "there are no plot holes in Skyfall" tape.
    Let me make you the same offer I made to some other defendants of Skyfall.
    Just tell me anything you think makes sense in Skyfalls story and I tell you why it doesn't. To the best of my knowledge this is the only movie where it's possible to do this. Although Spectre is not far behind.


    I hate to break it to you but there are things that make no sense in all 24 official films. As Bond fans, we don't seem to care much. Even CR has a massive plot hole: the fact that playing the poker game was 100% unnecessary. And how did MI6 not know the CIA would be there? Uh...

    What makes sense in SF, however? Almost all of it...because of 1. Silva's mental instability; and 2. Silva's ability to do just about anything via "point and click."

    Bond stayed away from MI6 after being shot. That makes sense. Correct?

    I really wonder why the supporters of Skyfall always feel the need to denigrate the other Bond films just to prove their case. Nobody ever said that Bond movies where in general completely plot hole free ( keep in mind though, that even an all out fantasy greatest hits bond like DAD only has two real plot holes, which is how he manages to slow down his heart rate when he escapes and how Gustav Graves managed to become accepted by British society and the royals, that he was even to be made a knight.)What I and some others claim is that Skyfall is one plot hole after another which makes it a screenplay disaster par excellence.

    I'll take what @Creasy47 has said about the film being made to win Oscars and apply it here: the criticism if SF has nothing to do with the film and everything to do with the biases of the audience member who into the film with a problem to begin with: whther it be Mendes at the helm, or an oscar winner as the villain, or the beloved David Arnold being replaced by the far more talented Thomas Newman.

    The "SF has plot holes" argument seems based on a need to degrade the film because it was created by people you already disliked. The film does NOT contain plot hole after plot hole; point is, even if it did, it would fit right in with the other Bond films. This entire series is mostly based on crap storylines. So why the over-the-top issues with SF?

    Again, @Creasy47 kind of let it slip out: the problem isn't with the film, it's with what appears to be the intent to make a Bond film more artsy. As if this is a bad thing?

    https://eyeonbond.com/2017/11/09/five-years-later-why-skyfall-might-be-the-best-bond-film/

    Have to agree with you here, even though I'm no fan of Mendes' pretensions and Silva's clairvoyance during his escape annoys me.

    FRWL is rightly regarded as one of the best if not the best yet contains the fundamental flaw that the moment the Lektor has been nicked the Russians would be forced to take all Lektor machines out of service. It would be a minor coup in the intelligence community because they would have to scrap the, to coin a phrase, Lektor Program but the British certainly wouldn't be able to decode their top secret messages because by the time Bond has carted it back through the Balkans for a week on the train any Soviet embassy or agent with a Lektor would've been instructed to scrap it as it was compromised.

    Does this stop FRWL from being a classic? Not in the slightest but there is a tendency, and I'm guilty of it myself, to hold the modern films to a razor sharp critical scalpel that the older films simply don't get dissected with.

    Did the Germans stop to use the enigma machine ( the real Lektor) when the Brits got hold on one model? No they didn't because the way it worked it was still considered unbeatable.

    No they didn't which was a major, possibly decisive error in losing them the war.

    Given the advances in codebreaking and computing in the 20 odd years since the war I doubt the Soviets would have taken the risk of not learning from the Germans mistakes and would at the very least upgrade all their machines leaving the British effectively playing PS3 games while they were on PS4.
  • TripAces wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    Ottofuse8 wrote: »
    Sf is a top tier bond film, the plotholes are overplayed by critics.

    I've come around greatly on appreciating and enjoying Skyfall, but the plotholes are in no way, shape or form overplayed, whatever exactly that means. I don't know how they could be. The plotholes are perhaps the singular most glaring problem with the film and far more in-your-face than just about any other Bond. Still, the film has phenomenal cinematography, a unique style and vibe, and standout scenes and sequences that all help to elevate it.
    Every time I ask people to mention those Skyfall plotholes, I get a list of things that are simply not explained / issues that are not addressed in the movie. I've yet to read a genuine Skyfall plothole. To prove my point, I googled "Skyfall plotholes" and found a list, I will address two "plotholes" from this list:

    1. " James Bond is a man that beats unbelievable odds. It is part of his character. However, he usually beats unbelievable odds that are thrown at him, not ones he creates himself. He can kill 20 guys in a hotel if he is forced too – but he would never be stupid enough to create this situation himself. Except he did it in this movie. He lured a super villain with quasi-unlimited resources to a gun fight against him and a geriatric lady in a shit-old chalet. Of course they end-up having a third ally: Kincade, the retarded old man who likes to wave around a flash light in complete darkness to make sure bad guys can find him. But the problem here is not that James Bond won the fight 3vs15 (even though it’s stupid), the problem is that James Bond planned this gun-gang-rape in advance and assumed he would come out victorious. Which is in itself so retarded that it is insulting to Kincade."

    EXPLANATION: First of all, it turns out it wasn't that retarded on Bond's part to assume he would come out victorious, since, you know, he did come out victorious. The main objective was not to save M (who was very close to retirement anyway, in other words: she was not an extremely valuable MI6 asset anymore), it was to defeat Silva. Second of all, the whole point of the Scotland scenes were that even though Bond + M + Kinkade were clearly outmanned and outganned, they had the home advantage. Bond's plan to go to Skyfall with M is absolutely NOT a plot hole.

    2. "MI6 has weird weapons. They buy rifles that can only shoot once before reloading. Otherwise Eve Moneypenny could have, you know, shot the bad guy endlessly after she first hit James Bond on top of that train. Instead she just kept eye contact with him and hoped to make him die of guilt."

    EXPLANATION: NO, MI6 does not buy rifles that can only shoot once before reloading. Eve stopped shooting at the bad guy because she was in a state of shock after she shot Bond. This scene was clearly meant to show how unprofessional she was, and that she was not a good field agent. This is absolutely NOT a plot hole.

    I could go on...

    A few weeks ago @ClarkDevlin and @JamesBondKenya each just randomly put together a list of plot holes but you failed to answer to that. Instead you choose to wait a few weeks, let some grass grow over it and then replay your "there are no plot holes in Skyfall" tape.
    Let me make you the same offer I made to some other defendants of Skyfall.
    Just tell me anything you think makes sense in Skyfalls story and I tell you why it doesn't. To the best of my knowledge this is the only movie where it's possible to do this. Although Spectre is not far behind.


    I hate to break it to you but there are things that make no sense in all 24 official films. As Bond fans, we don't seem to care much. Even CR has a massive plot hole: the fact that playing the poker game was 100% unnecessary. And how did MI6 not know the CIA would be there? Uh...

    What makes sense in SF, however? Almost all of it...because of 1. Silva's mental instability; and 2. Silva's ability to do just about anything via "point and click."

    Bond stayed away from MI6 after being shot. That makes sense. Correct?

    I really wonder why the supporters of Skyfall always feel the need to denigrate the other Bond films just to prove their case. Nobody ever said that Bond movies where in general completely plot hole free ( keep in mind though, that even an all out fantasy greatest hits bond like DAD only has two real plot holes, which is how he manages to slow down his heart rate when he escapes and how Gustav Graves managed to become accepted by British society and the royals, that he was even to be made a knight.)What I and some others claim is that Skyfall is one plot hole after another which makes it a screenplay disaster par excellence.

    I'll take what @Creasy47 has said about the film being made to win Oscars and apply it here: the criticism if SF has nothing to do with the film and everything to do with the biases of the audience member who into the film with a problem to begin with: whther it be Mendes at the helm, or an oscar winner as the villain, or the beloved David Arnold being replaced by the far more talented Thomas Newman.

    The "SF has plot holes" argument seems based on a need to degrade the film because it was created by people you already disliked. The film does NOT contain plot hole after plot hole; point is, even if it did, it would fit right in with the other Bond films. This entire series is mostly based on crap storylines. So why the over-the-top issues with SF?

    Again, @Creasy47 kind of let it slip out: the problem isn't with the film, it's with what appears to be the intent to make a Bond film more artsy. As if this is a bad thing?

    https://eyeonbond.com/2017/11/09/five-years-later-why-skyfall-might-be-the-best-bond-film/

    Have to agree with you here, even though I'm no fan of Mendes' pretensions and Silva's clairvoyance during his escape annoys me.

    FRWL is rightly regarded as one of the best if not the best yet contains the fundamental flaw that the moment the Lektor has been nicked the Russians would be forced to take all Lektor machines out of service. It would be a minor coup in the intelligence community because they would have to scrap the, to coin a phrase, Lektor Program but the British certainly wouldn't be able to decode their top secret messages because by the time Bond has carted it back through the Balkans for a week on the train any Soviet embassy or agent with a Lektor would've been instructed to scrap it as it was compromised.

    Does this stop FRWL from being a classic? Not in the slightest but there is a tendency, and I'm guilty of it myself, to hold the modern films to a razor sharp critical scalpel that the older films simply don't get dissected with.

    Did the Germans stop to use the enigma machine ( the real Lektor) when the Brits got hold on one model? No they didn't because the way it worked it was still considered unbeatable.

    No they didn't which was a major, possibly decisive error in losing them the war.

    Given the advances in codebreaking and computing in the 20 odd years since the war I doubt the Soviets would have taken the risk of not learning from the Germans mistakes and would at the very least upgrade all their machines leaving the British effectively playing PS3 games while they were on PS4.

    That upgrade is the twist. Since those kind of machines rely on disks featuring holes and bumps in it and their sizes they would have been easily exchanged.
    Also, I would assume that the Russians would have used the 20 years gone by to improve upon the enigma themselves.
  • edited December 2017 Posts: 9,847
    Well it’s my birthday so since we have no serious news right now once again I will post what I want

    1. A Good solid title from Fleming’s pen: it’s a minor thing but Craig deserves to go out on a Fleming title preferably The Property of A Lady The Hildebrand Rarity or The Rough and the Smooth

    2. No MENDES: look I don’t hate Skyfall or Spectre both are middle of the road Bond Adventures for me but If Mendes returns I can literally write out the plot summary now... ever film Mendes does is about family so clearly bond 25 directed by Mendes woukd just be Bond’s struggle with which family should he be apart of the one he creates for himself (him Swann and little children) or the one given to him (M Q etc) and I just don’t want to see such a boring predictable film

    3. A rock theme: John Barry once said “ever bond actor has a different instrument that reflects their personality for Connery it’s brassy and bold for lazenby synthesizer and youthful for Moore strings and eloquent and for Dalton bass and dark” Arnold for all his faults did try and continue that for Brosnan techno and hip for Craig the Guitar was the predominant instrument on Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace Thomas Newman said screw John Barry/David Arnold idea I am just gonna do a generic mixture of Connery and Moore’s sounds and there ya go... for Craig’s final film bring the Guitar back bring the rock back


    4. A ski sequence and a great Casino sequence: now one of the bond patterns since Goldeneye (or A View to a kill if we count the unreleased 1991 bond film) is every odd number has bond in a Casino and ever even number bond at a party... but the Skyfall Casino sequence was well crap (sorry pancho) I want to see Craig confidently at the card table one final time.

    That is about it small list but I get that I am happy
  • Posts: 19,339
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Well it’s my birthday so since we have no serious news right now once again I will post what I want

    1. A Good solid title from Fleming’s pen: it’s a minor thing but Craig deserves to go out on a Fleming title preferably The Property of A Lady The Hildebrand Rarity or The Rough and the Smooth

    2. No MENDES: look I don’t hate Skyfall or Spectre both are middle of the road Bond Adventures for me but If Mendes returns I can literally write out the plot summary now... ever film Mendes does is about family so clearly bond 25 directed by Mendes woukd just be Bond’s struggle with which family should he be apart of the one he creates for himself (him Swann and little children) or the one given to him (M Q etc) and I just don’t want to see such a boring predictable film

    3. A rock theme: John Barry once said “ever bond actor has a different instrument that reflects their personality for Connery it’s brassy and bold for lazenby synthesizer and youthful for Moore strings and eloquent and for Dalton bass and dark” Arnold for all his faults did try and continue that for Brosnan techno and hip for Craig the Guitar was the predominant instrument on Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace Thomas Newman said screw John Barry/David Arnold idea I am just gonna do a generic mixture of Connery and Moore’s sounds and there ya go... for Craig’s final film bring the Guitar back bring the rock back


    4. A ski sequence and a great Casino sequence: now one of the bond patterns since Goldeneye (or A View to a kill if we count the unreleased 1991 bond film) is every odd number has bond in a Casino and ever even number bond at a party... but the Skyfall Casino sequence was well crap (sorry pancho) I want to see Craig confidently at the card table one final time.

    That is about it small list but I get that I am happy

    Happy Birthday @Risico007 !!
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited December 2017 Posts: 9,117
    TripAces wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    Ottofuse8 wrote: »
    Sf is a top tier bond film, the plotholes are overplayed by critics.

    I've come around greatly on appreciating and enjoying Skyfall, but the plotholes are in no way, shape or form overplayed, whatever exactly that means. I don't know how they could be. The plotholes are perhaps the singular most glaring problem with the film and far more in-your-face than just about any other Bond. Still, the film has phenomenal cinematography, a unique style and vibe, and standout scenes and sequences that all help to elevate it.
    Every time I ask people to mention those Skyfall plotholes, I get a list of things that are simply not explained / issues that are not addressed in the movie. I've yet to read a genuine Skyfall plothole. To prove my point, I googled "Skyfall plotholes" and found a list, I will address two "plotholes" from this list:

    1. " James Bond is a man that beats unbelievable odds. It is part of his character. However, he usually beats unbelievable odds that are thrown at him, not ones he creates himself. He can kill 20 guys in a hotel if he is forced too – but he would never be stupid enough to create this situation himself. Except he did it in this movie. He lured a super villain with quasi-unlimited resources to a gun fight against him and a geriatric lady in a shit-old chalet. Of course they end-up having a third ally: Kincade, the retarded old man who likes to wave around a flash light in complete darkness to make sure bad guys can find him. But the problem here is not that James Bond won the fight 3vs15 (even though it’s stupid), the problem is that James Bond planned this gun-gang-rape in advance and assumed he would come out victorious. Which is in itself so retarded that it is insulting to Kincade."

    EXPLANATION: First of all, it turns out it wasn't that retarded on Bond's part to assume he would come out victorious, since, you know, he did come out victorious. The main objective was not to save M (who was very close to retirement anyway, in other words: she was not an extremely valuable MI6 asset anymore), it was to defeat Silva. Second of all, the whole point of the Scotland scenes were that even though Bond + M + Kinkade were clearly outmanned and outganned, they had the home advantage. Bond's plan to go to Skyfall with M is absolutely NOT a plot hole.

    2. "MI6 has weird weapons. They buy rifles that can only shoot once before reloading. Otherwise Eve Moneypenny could have, you know, shot the bad guy endlessly after she first hit James Bond on top of that train. Instead she just kept eye contact with him and hoped to make him die of guilt."

    EXPLANATION: NO, MI6 does not buy rifles that can only shoot once before reloading. Eve stopped shooting at the bad guy because she was in a state of shock after she shot Bond. This scene was clearly meant to show how unprofessional she was, and that she was not a good field agent. This is absolutely NOT a plot hole.

    I could go on...

    A few weeks ago @ClarkDevlin and @JamesBondKenya each just randomly put together a list of plot holes but you failed to answer to that. Instead you choose to wait a few weeks, let some grass grow over it and then replay your "there are no plot holes in Skyfall" tape.
    Let me make you the same offer I made to some other defendants of Skyfall.
    Just tell me anything you think makes sense in Skyfalls story and I tell you why it doesn't. To the best of my knowledge this is the only movie where it's possible to do this. Although Spectre is not far behind.


    I hate to break it to you but there are things that make no sense in all 24 official films. As Bond fans, we don't seem to care much. Even CR has a massive plot hole: the fact that playing the poker game was 100% unnecessary. And how did MI6 not know the CIA would be there? Uh...

    What makes sense in SF, however? Almost all of it...because of 1. Silva's mental instability; and 2. Silva's ability to do just about anything via "point and click."

    Bond stayed away from MI6 after being shot. That makes sense. Correct?

    I really wonder why the supporters of Skyfall always feel the need to denigrate the other Bond films just to prove their case. Nobody ever said that Bond movies where in general completely plot hole free ( keep in mind though, that even an all out fantasy greatest hits bond like DAD only has two real plot holes, which is how he manages to slow down his heart rate when he escapes and how Gustav Graves managed to become accepted by British society and the royals, that he was even to be made a knight.)What I and some others claim is that Skyfall is one plot hole after another which makes it a screenplay disaster par excellence.

    I'll take what @Creasy47 has said about the film being made to win Oscars and apply it here: the criticism if SF has nothing to do with the film and everything to do with the biases of the audience member who into the film with a problem to begin with: whther it be Mendes at the helm, or an oscar winner as the villain, or the beloved David Arnold being replaced by the far more talented Thomas Newman.

    The "SF has plot holes" argument seems based on a need to degrade the film because it was created by people you already disliked. The film does NOT contain plot hole after plot hole; point is, even if it did, it would fit right in with the other Bond films. This entire series is mostly based on crap storylines. So why the over-the-top issues with SF?

    Again, @Creasy47 kind of let it slip out: the problem isn't with the film, it's with what appears to be the intent to make a Bond film more artsy. As if this is a bad thing?

    https://eyeonbond.com/2017/11/09/five-years-later-why-skyfall-might-be-the-best-bond-film/

    Have to agree with you here, even though I'm no fan of Mendes' pretensions and Silva's clairvoyance during his escape annoys me.

    FRWL is rightly regarded as one of the best if not the best yet contains the fundamental flaw that the moment the Lektor has been nicked the Russians would be forced to take all Lektor machines out of service. It would be a minor coup in the intelligence community because they would have to scrap the, to coin a phrase, Lektor Program but the British certainly wouldn't be able to decode their top secret messages because by the time Bond has carted it back through the Balkans for a week on the train any Soviet embassy or agent with a Lektor would've been instructed to scrap it as it was compromised.

    Does this stop FRWL from being a classic? Not in the slightest but there is a tendency, and I'm guilty of it myself, to hold the modern films to a razor sharp critical scalpel that the older films simply don't get dissected with.

    Did the Germans stop to use the enigma machine ( the real Lektor) when the Brits got hold on one model? No they didn't because the way it worked it was still considered unbeatable.

    No they didn't which was a major, possibly decisive error in losing them the war.

    Given the advances in codebreaking and computing in the 20 odd years since the war I doubt the Soviets would have taken the risk of not learning from the Germans mistakes and would at the very least upgrade all their machines leaving the British effectively playing PS3 games while they were on PS4.

    That upgrade is the twist. Since those kind of machines rely on disks featuring holes and bumps in it and their sizes they would have been easily exchanged.
    Also, I would assume that the Russians would have used the 20 years gone by to improve upon the enigma themselves.

    What the Russians do to solve the problem is irrelevant. The point still stands that when Bond hands over the Lektor to MI6 they'll be able to decode sod all as if Bond and M know that having a Lektor in their possession allows them to 'decode all their top secret signals' so will the Russians and they will take steps to stop it. And it's not as if the theft is very subtle with Bond breaking the 'absolutely inviolate rule
    of international relationships' and storming the Soviet embassy so I think they'll probably notice it's gone.
    Risico007 wrote: »
    1. A Good solid title from Fleming’s pen....The Rough and the Smooth

    Seriously?
  • DoctorNoDoctorNo USA-Maryland
    Posts: 755

    NSGW wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    SF is rightfully regarded as one of the best highlights of the Bond series in the modern era - and really ever. We would be lucky if Craig’s last is as good as CR or SF. I’d just be satisfied if it could top QoS and SP.

    Completely agree, I'd be happy if Bond 25 was as good as QoS, CR is an incredibly high bar that isn't realistically attainable every time. Although knowing its Craig's last adventure should give the writers plenty of ideas to work with to make a great send off.

    I want B25 to be better than OoS, SF or SP. I want it on par with CR. They made 5 great films in the 60s and CR can stand beside the very best of those. 5. If EON can't figure out what they did to accomplish that and the ingredients that created CR, they need to pass it along to someone else who can.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,807
    Omnipotence. Puppetmastery. Ego.
    Showoff.
    You are absolutely right. Mendes urgently needs some medical treatment.
    Et tu...
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,585
    One thing to maybe agree upon is that in a fan community, like this one, nobody should be "shamed" for what they enjoy within the franchise. It makes no sense. We're all Bond fanatics, which means anything is fair game in terms of what one enjoys. Personally, I am not fond of MR and DAD. But I do NOT begrudge those who love them. At the same time, I love the silliness of DAF, which I can watch over and over again and get a kick out of...but I know there are those who (rightfully so) think DAF is awful. :-*
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,216
    TripAces wrote: »
    One thing to maybe agree upon is that in a fan community, like this one, nobody should be "shamed" for what they enjoy within the franchise. It makes no sense. We're all Bond fanatics, which means anything is fair game in terms of what one enjoys. Personally, I am not fond of MR and DAD. But I do NOT begrudge those who love them. At the same time, I love the silliness of DAF, which I can watch over and over again and get a kick out of...but I know there are those who (rightfully so) think DAF is awful. :-*

    Great post.

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    @noSolaceleft No, YOU tell me anything you think does not make sense in Skyfalls story and I will tell you why you are wrong.

    Tell you what. Why don't you answer Clark Devlins and Jamesbondkenyas list first? After all they already did that work, so it would only be polite of you to answer them.

    my problem with skyfall is that it asks me to trust in this gritty and realistic look at bond, and then it doesn’t give me an espionage story but a series of contrivances written by a four year old who couldn’t be bothered to reread his work even once to see that it literally makes no sense.

    Pervis and Wade are eleven now
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    A
    TripAces wrote: »
    One thing to maybe agree upon is that in a fan community, like this one, nobody should be "shamed" for what they enjoy within the franchise. It makes no sense. We're all Bond fanatics, which means anything is fair game in terms of what one enjoys. Personally, I am not fond of MR and DAD. But I do NOT begrudge those who love them. At the same time, I love the silliness of DAF, which I can watch over and over again and get a kick out of...but I know there are those who (rightfully so) think DAF is awful. :-*

    Sorry but I struggle to get behind this wishy washy 'Everybody's entitled to their opinion' Chamberlain-esque appeasement.

    I'd much rather call a spade a spade: if someone thinks DAD is a better film on any level than OHMSS they are a moron. It really is as simple as that.

    Furthermore they are not really a Bond fan but more a fan of Michael Bay/Vin Diesel/Jason Statham noisy, trashy popcorn cinema - which has its place by all means - but really should not be considered the apotheosis of a James Bond film.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489

    I'd much rather call a spade a spade: if someone thinks DAD is a better film on any level than OHMSS they are a moron. It really is as simple as that.

    What a disgraceful comment, and i agree.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited December 2017 Posts: 4,585
    A
    TripAces wrote: »
    One thing to maybe agree upon is that in a fan community, like this one, nobody should be "shamed" for what they enjoy within the franchise. It makes no sense. We're all Bond fanatics, which means anything is fair game in terms of what one enjoys. Personally, I am not fond of MR and DAD. But I do NOT begrudge those who love them. At the same time, I love the silliness of DAF, which I can watch over and over again and get a kick out of...but I know there are those who (rightfully so) think DAF is awful. :-*

    Sorry but I struggle to get behind this wishy washy 'Everybody's entitled to their opinion' Chamberlain-esque appeasement.

    I'd much rather call a spade a spade: if someone thinks DAD is a better film on any level than OHMSS they are a moron. It really is as simple as that.

    Furthermore they are not really a Bond fan but more a fan of Michael Bay/Vin Diesel/Jason Statham noisy, trashy popcorn cinema - which has its place by all means - but really should not be considered the apotheosis of a James Bond film.

    Schindler's List is a better film than Jaws.

    But I wouldn't call someone a moron for preferring to watch Jaws.

    We're not talking high art, here. They're Bond films. And as I have pointed out, the whole of them are rather ridiculous. While I agree that OHMSS is a better film than DAD, we're losing sight of the nostalgic power of film. I grew up with 70s Moore (which is why I rank LALD and TSWLM so high on my Bond list.) For many Bond fans who may have grown up on Brosnan, they'll have a "pull" to a film like DAD -- and will prefer it to OHMSS.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,807
    TripAces wrote: »
    One thing to maybe agree upon is that in a fan community, like this one, nobody should be "shamed" for what they enjoy within the franchise. It makes no sense. We're all Bond fanatics, which means anything is fair game in terms of what one enjoys.
    Of course, and it gets down to how a person expresses dislike.

    If it's chronic and peppered with insults, synonyms for excrement, and Hitler comments the poster is really exposing a lot more of theirself than the audience deserves.
  • Posts: 16,169
    Certainly a wide variety of tastes in Bond fandom.

    I have a friend who loved DAD just because of the Aston Martin ice chase. Also a huge fan of the Fast/Furious franchise, Michael Bay/Jason Statham films, etc, which, in my own snobbery, I referred to as crap.
    DAD was his favorite up until SF, which ironically doesn't really have much in the way of car chases. Pierce was his favorite Bond until Craig, and so forth. I think some people just choose whatever is current as their favorite.

    I have another friend who, thanks to the Craig era, has embraced the Bond novels and prefers them to the films. YET, he despised the OHMSS film because he felt Lazenby's performance ruined a great story. He also seems to believe Idris Elba would be the Bond most true to Fleming's concept. Lots of conflicting opinions in Bond fandom.




    Either way, I still rank DAD as the worst Bond film.

  • brinkeguthriebrinkeguthrie Piz Gloria
    Posts: 1,400
    parts of it, yes. but the tarzan yell in octopussy and any scene with sheriff JW or jaws would have fleming rolling over in his grave.
  • edited December 2017 Posts: 12,473
    My top choices for the title of Bond 25 would be "The Property of a Lady" and "Risico." We could use a title that starts with an "R"; give "S" a break. Shatterhand would be okay, but not as great IMO.
  • edited December 2017 Posts: 12,473
    That's not a bad choice. I'd rather they didn't go the route of using "Blofeld" as the title. Part of me thinks they will do a YOLT adaptation because of how SP ended. However, since they know SP was less successful critically, perhaps they will drop Blofeld and/or the SPECTRE organization. Hard to say; I have never been this puzzled about the direction they will go in with the next movie.
  • edited December 2017 Posts: 832
    They should drop spectre until they can map out its gradual reintroduction down the road. Like in the connery era, bond should work his way up to finally facing #1. If the spectre meeting had been the extent of the blofeld's involvement, with a few changes (less cheap humor, more suspense and sense of helplessness, keep the dialouge from the original script, reveal less of blofelds face, no cuckoo) and another character had been the main villain, it could have been more interesting. Like blofeld's cameos in the connery films. For bond 25, hoping for an independent, more traditional, less thematic (but keep craig era drama, just depart from where mendes brought it for something more fun). The drama should be focused on the villains personality abd plot, not bond.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,807
    FoxRox wrote: »
    My top choices for the title of Bond 25 would be "The Property of a Lady" and "Risico." We could use a title that starts with an "R"; give "S" a break.
    Yes. R-words.
  • I still like "007 in New York"
  • Posts: 12,473
    Ottofuse8 wrote: »
    I still like "007 in New York"

    Not as crazy about this myself. Maybe better with the next actor.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,807
    OO7 in New York should be the IMAX short feature (40 minutes would be good) released October 2018.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,584
    I like it - it would be perfect as a TV episode, but think it could work as a film too, depending on the tone. I wouldn't use it for the Bond actor's debut film though, but perhaps his sophomore follow up.
  • Posts: 16,169
    007 IN NEW YORK is a throwback to the types of titles used in 1930's/ 1940's mysteries: THE SAINT IN NEW YORK, CHARLIE CHAN IN LONDON,
    SHERLOCK HOLMES IN WASHINGTON, and for that alone, I kind of like it. Very old school, though not particularly Bondian.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited December 2017 Posts: 13,807
    I like it for the same reason. 7281.jpg
    And for any title, when they put out a great Bond film it takes on greatness.
  • Posts: 12,473
    007 in New York I could actually see being a debut title for the next Bond actor. I just don’t think it’d work very well for Craig. Risico is the one I like that seems most Craig-esque I think.
  • Posts: 16,169
    I could see Eon considering THRILLING CITIES over 007 in New York.
    Bond's assignment could be called Operation: Thrilling Cities, or the villain's plot could be named Operation: Thrilling Cities.
    I still doubt that will ever happen. We probably have a better chance of a film called RISICO.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,807
    That's a smart idea, @ToTheRight. The Diamond Smugglers also aligns with that.
    Birds of the West Indies could also be used for a complex meaning beyond the obvious. Though it would be obligated to match or best the number of Bond Girls in a Bond film.
  • Posts: 12,473
    5Yqss7L.jpg

    248d353ee01024cafd9c82e93245d04a--honeypot-james-bond.jpg

    One of these please?
Sign In or Register to comment.