Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
In this Discussion
CR's black-and-white opening - symbolic importance
http://www.mi6-hq.com/news/index.php?itemid=4460&catid=2&t=mi6&s=news
I was just trawling through some old CR news stuff (mi6 is truly the greatest Bond site on the net, its the only place I could find news stories since 2002. Excellent job chiefs.)
I came across this interesting interview from Broccoli. She talks about how the b&w opener was supposed to symbolic of Bond's life before he became a 00 and how from that point on his life would never be the same.
I thought that was really very interesting and felt like the b&w was an impressive visual way to represent character development as it creates a clear distinction from the 'then' to the 'now'. Furthermore, it got me thinking more about how damn clever it was that the first colour we see is the red blood dripping down the GB. It seems at that point Bond has forever got blood on his hands and he will never be the man he once was ever again. He is a man now defined by his profession; which is to kill people - a man who is defined by the blood he spills.
I was just trawling through some old CR news stuff (mi6 is truly the greatest Bond site on the net, its the only place I could find news stories since 2002. Excellent job chiefs.)
I came across this interesting interview from Broccoli. She talks about how the b&w opener was supposed to symbolic of Bond's life before he became a 00 and how from that point on his life would never be the same.
I thought that was really very interesting and felt like the b&w was an impressive visual way to represent character development as it creates a clear distinction from the 'then' to the 'now'. Furthermore, it got me thinking more about how damn clever it was that the first colour we see is the red blood dripping down the GB. It seems at that point Bond has forever got blood on his hands and he will never be the man he once was ever again. He is a man now defined by his profession; which is to kill people - a man who is defined by the blood he spills.
^ 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
Come on now.
I just thought it was worthy of discussion. Campbell also said some interesting things; on the directors commentary he mentioned how the whole sequence despite being set in modern times was supposed to be very evocative of Bond's cold war roots and films like The Spy who came in from the Cold. Also a great thing Campbell said was that the second kill was supposed to be more clean and sophisicated so the photography was made to be more stylised like The Ipcress File. While the first kill is supposed to be messy hense the handheld much more grainy cinematography.
A piece of excellent filmmaking.
http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/2534/how-controversial-is-black-and-white/p1
I did search for a thread and saw that that was to do with 'general film and tv' and someone mentioned CR once or twice but it was more to do with whether people like watching films in colour or b&w - not any actually meaningful discussion on the sequence in the film.
I don't think @0Brady was taking a shot at you here @Pierce2Daniel ;) If I know him even a little bit he loves CR and loves symbolism. So he actually mean what he says here, the 'yada yada yada' symbolizes that he's made his point and could continue to talk about it, but doesn't have to
I like how the first kill is submerged in dots of highly contrasting black and white. It feels remote, how Bond isn't our James Bond quite yet. His second kill takes place against a softer grey, closer to home, purer and with more of a finality: this kill will mark the turning point as Bond will swiftly be our Bond. After that, a bloody red shot pierces through the colourless layers and opens up the familiar world of 007.
What any other filmmaker would have done in 10+ minutes of exposition and talking, Campbell (with help of other brilliant folks) manages in less than 4 minutes of clear-cut excellence. I love this PTS.
What are you refering to here?
You never get a kicking for an opinion so well stated, @RC7. :-)
I tend to disagree though but we can agree to disagree, can't we?
That it looks artificial, for example, is something I fail to accept. It got a treatment, obviously, but that by itself isn't necessarily a bad thing and, for the record, you're not saying so either. But IMO it was executed very well, and perhaps amped up a bit to make it resemble half memory, half past reality. It has a dreamy vibe, I think, and that's okay for the moment. Also, I'm focused entirely on what Bond does; the men's room surroundings serve as a vague, unspecified background against which the kinetic stuff moves like a bullet. Too much detail, a normal colour pallet, a normal film stock, ... would all result in unsharpened action IMO.
Cutting the cricket scene was necessary I think. That scene would slow the pace down like salt on a snail. ;-) And it's the kill and Bond's ruthlessness that matter to me. How both men got there, is of absolutely no importance in the little PTS plot.
Just my two cents. :-)
I really liked seeing the deleted bit on the Dvd, as it added a bit more information and tension, but I agree with you that the scene is better as it is in the film. Bond also felt a bit like Michael Myers in the omitted stuff, slowly following his prey :)
-If the theatrics are supposed to scare me, you've got the wrong man, Bond.
-It's 'Dangers' Bond.
Different Michael Myers ;)
http://ghostradio.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/michael-myers11.jpg <-- This one
What a scene that would be:
Villain: "Try as you might, Bond, but I have got you right where I want you!"
Mike Myers Bond: "..."
Villain: "That's right Bond, you have fallen right into my trap! And how wonderfully you have sprung it. MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"
Mike Myers Bond: "..."
Villain: "Any last words, before the kiss of death falls upon your cheeks, 007?!"
Mike Myers Bond: "..."
Villain: "Giving me the cold shoulder, are you Bond? How strategic of you-"
Mike Myers Bond: *Pulls out knife and runs it through villain, slowly walks away* "..."
Oh my, yes, how interesting.
Dr Loomis: - I shot you six times!
Bond - Yeah... Using a Smith & Wesson. [smirk]
I really don't get you Midsomer Murders comparison to be honest. I thought the sequence was a great hark back to Bond's cold war roots. The sequence is all about character and for this reason and the b&w transtion to colour I felt injected a much more art-house feel. You get the thrills you were expecting from a Bond flick but there's an extra layer.
What makes it work even better is how unexpected the sequence is, it essentially punches you in the face and immediately tells you to put your expectations aside because they are re-writing the rule-book here. Campbell and Mehuex deserve acclaim for these 4 minutes alone. Midsomers Murders this ain't.
So we can infer that the initiation of Bond is not a prequel but a reboot (as it is after 1993). Nice and artistic way to establish the proper timeline.
I'm talking about the deleted scene, where they are at the cricket match in lahore. The exteriors look like Midsomer Murders, so thankfully they were cut. As I said, the content is good, as is thd notion of using Black and White, I just found the cinematography a bit flat compared to the rest of the film.
Oh ok, in that case /i agree the cricket stuff was hokey at best and unintentional funny at worst (that bit with the old guy in the bathroom and Fisher pointing the gun at him), they made the right decision to cut it.
Also I found this interesting interview with Campbell
http://www.mi6-hq.com/news/index.php?itemid=4414&catid=2&t=mi6&s=news
He's not as articulate or verbose as Mendes, but I love everything Campbell's saying about his approuch to CR; making Bond human, making him bleed, showing the effect the ugly violence has on him and how he is almost lying to himself about it.
One thing I was wondering though after reading the interview: when Bond sees Solange's body and Villiers goes to barf off-screen, I seem to recall that Bond himself is slightly unsettled by the sight of the body. Am I misremembering this?
Just reading the discussion about that gorgeous PTS makes me want to watch CR...
It's a very small and clever thing interwoven into the fabric of the film. Those brief occasions where the killings seem to affect Bond really do make him a more compelling human character. Like after Bond kills Fisher and he looks at the dead body, or even in the brief moment after he kill Dimitros, its clear he is internalising a lot of this and its screwing him up.
Exactly. I like that they stripped out the over-the-top stunts for once and gave us a character study of Bond.
I agree it's a very important aspect. Daniel does it very well, I think - a man who is an assassin, and brutal about it, yet affected by it, but dealing with it alone, saying (to Vesper, to M) that none of it is a problem to him, and pretending to be more heartless than he is, and indeed having to do that - not only in order to do his job, but also to help himself deal with it and what it's doing to him.
I agree with you both. I still remember how thrilled I was after the PTS when I saw CR the first time. It was immediately clear the movie was going to be something very different - in a goooood way. It remains my fave Bond PTS. In fact, I don't remember another instance where the beginning of any movie has made me just... so totally happy, and made me look forward to the rest of the movie as much.