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
You are basicly saying every scene in every movie ever made are absolutly needed to the entire film... Everyone knows that's utter rubbish and is factually not true. There are scenes that are uncessessary sometimes... and there are several in QOS. Was the CGI parasurfing scene in DAD absolutly needed in the film ? No... Same thing in QOS with the boat chase, foot chase and plane chase...
Yes... But Bond movies aren't SOLELY action films...
Sorry, that is pure rubbish... So everyone who hates the film didn't understand it? I understood the film PERFECTLY, I am not dumb, and I still don't like it. Did you not understand the simplistic DAD if you hate that film?
Now, this is just my idea of fun: It starts out with paragliding down the top of Sahyadri Mountains, then a foot chase to the foot of the thick evergreen forest of the mountain range:
.
Then on to a trecherous foot chase slong the dangerous streets of New Dehli:
.
This ends up to the roof top of one of the Imperial Towers of Mumbai: http://indianskyscraperblog.wordpress.com/2007/09/08/mumbai-the-imperial-towers-formerly-sd-towers-249m-60-fl-uc/
A foot chase in India i could see in between open air markets and back alleys where they have to fly after each other but stop and looks smooth chill in the market the explode in a chase again....but Bond is the one trying to get away this time.
Dalton enough about bourne....
-2 points for B23 if it features the same foot chase that has already gotten tiresome...
You people that love Craig movies for 'breaking the formula'... You've just contradicted yourself by creating a new Bond formula, even more cliched than the first one by starting every movie by a foot chase... Bring back the old formula if you're going to do the same stuff but in worse...
here is an idea why not dislike Actions sequences and characters who are there for filler. Give me one film where moneypenny moved the plot along and was integral?
We've had two drawn out foot chases in two consecutive films. (CR's was better) We don't REALLY need another one, or at least another extended one. A 20 second foot chase? Alright.
I'd like to see an action sequence that is something a little more than your standard 'car chase' or 'foot chase'. For example: the tank chase in GoldenEye is preposterous, yes, and some despise it. In my opinion, however, it is one of the best chases in Bond. Not only because it is well done, but because it is unique!!
The 'Bondola' from Moonraker was also unique, but for the wrong reasons. It was played for laughs, and my head was down in shame the whole time. (Similar to DAD's parasailing scene)
Quantum of Solace's most memorable action scene was the opening car chase, the rest of them were fairly entertaining yet serviceable.
So, nothing as flipping stupid as the 'Bondola' from Moonraker, but maybe go for something a little more escapist this time around.
Ya'll know what I mean, right?????
As for the foot chases, I see both sides of it: I don't necessarily think they're pointless - if Mitchell or Mollaka are going to run away, what else is Bond to do than to give chase? BUT, if Mitchell or Mollaka are going to run away, what's stopping them from getting in a car or stopping and fighting, therefore reducing the number of foot chases?
So yeah, I see either side of this argument. If there is another foot chase scene, I'll be happy; they're always entertaining to me. If not, oh well - just leaves room for something more unique to happen.
Yes there was a formula from 1962-2002... But atleast the films had space to be original everytime... Now you want a formula that will rehash the same action scenes over and over again ? Do another reboot right not if that's the case... You people wanted outings that 'broke the formula'... well you are creating a formula that will make the film even more contrived than before... IMO the Craig era is become more and more pointless... Craig's era is becoming exactly like the Bourne trilogy... Stale within the 3rd movie... Why not make ONE film with Craig, explain the origins of Bond, then reboot the other way and carry on like before with the 1962-2002 timeline with a new actor, and pretending the Craig movie was a one-off.
I love Casino Royale, but not because it broke any formula. And I honestly don't believe that CR is that DRASTICALLY different from the 'original series'.