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
Funny how you and I disagree on many things, yet our introductions into the Bond world are almost exactly the same.
I've logged countless hours into GE 64 and Nightfire. It's funny Im not that into videogames but if it has anything to do with Bond I'm sold.
Yes. That's not hard to figure out.
Well I actually got into the Bond games after I watched the films. But I doubt the videogame sales were enough to influence EON. If anything DUD as you so accuractly put it was more influenced by the preasure put on by CGI fests like The Matrix and such to conform. What EON didn't understand was a spy with his gun, wits, and wild labido is what made Bond what he was in the first place. We don't need CGI.
True but video games were still a big influence in the film. What about the VR sequence or THAT suit?
Those are small instances in the movie. At that time in 2002 the Bond games were selling as well. 007 racing and Agent Under Fire were the last 2 at the time and niether did too well. Nightfire and Everything or Nothing turned the tide but they were released after DAD.
I've no problem with him occassionaly using a machine gun if it helps him but the Brosnan era turned him into a GQ Rambo. Never again please.
If it's not a Walther or it isn't made of knuckle and bone then Bond shouldn't use it.
and yet everyone remembers them. What about the surfing sequence?
I suppose machine guns were all the craze at the time.
The GE shootout was exciting and well filmed but after that they just went too far.
Craig has used a machine gun but only a quick short burst.
It was actually QoS.
Very funny.
But it was ;)
It is. It also explains why Goldeneye is so beloved of them. Myself? Saw LALD as a kid at the pictures and until the Connery Bonds appeared on TV in the seventies read all Flemings books.
Then had the luxury of having a film appear every two years until 1989.
I pretty much agree with you. I thought Brozza and his films were a step backwards after the Dalton era. It was a case of biting my tongue and hoping for somethng better comes along.
Personally I don't think any of them have felt like proper Bond movies since Dalton left. Up until then we evolution and since then it's been either devolution or revolution, if u know what I mean.
ummm...I thought CR was very classic. And QoS felt very Daltonesque. Maybe thats why I like it.
Bain's right. It was QoS, not CR. Bond punches and shoots in CR's PTS, and then never has a machine gun at any time during the film.
I second that. But honestly after the Moore era EON always wanted to do a serious Bond and leave Moore's style permanantly in the past. They started it with Dalton but after the 6 year hiatus they needed to bring back a style of Bond that was familiar to the main stream. And after they dumped Brosnan they went right back to a serious Bond with Craig. Had Dalton been a success I don't think they ever would've went back to an overly tounge and cheek Bond. But the audience expected it. Remember EON was never to keen on Brosnan and only hired him becasue the studio wanted a safe choice. First EON wanted Dalton to return and then they wanted James Purefoy. Brosnan was United Artist's call. And then after Brosnan's contract was up and EON had re-established the Bond series they dumped him as soon as they could. That never happened with a Bond actor before. EON fought to keep Connery, Lazenby, Dalton, and even Moore for as long as they possibly could. And now it seems they have very long-term plans for Craig.
All-in-all I felt the 90s and DAD were a huge regression in the Bond series. That funny style should've stayed in the 70s/early 80s. By the mid 80s it felt tired. Bond had become a tired old caricature instead of a character. Now's he's a character again.
A step backwards? I for one really enjoy the Brosnan era, not only because I started out my Bond-ing with Nightfire, but because they are very exciting movies that never fail to thrill. Also, this whole machine-gunning thing, is it that hated? I for one absolutely love the machine gun sequences, and welcome them into any Bond movie. That's one thing that the Brosnan era did right: plenty of machine gun fire! Only DAD ruined the Brosnan era. GE, TND, and TWINE are near flawless movies that should be considered Bond classics!
And, sorry, 00Beast, TWINE is not a near flawless movie. Christmas Jones alone is a flaw I wish would be struck from the Bond legacy.