New Bond Film: Skyfall (1 Viewer)

[George_W_K]

I can say I enjoyed 3 of the last 4 Bond films, only making it through QoS halfway, so I'll give these guys another shot. It could be worse, they could hire Roland Emmerich to direct, although then we'd finally see what happens when the bad guys actually detonate their Doomsday Device.

 

[cineMANIAC]

Surely tackling a Bond project would be the highlight of a Director's career, even an established one but it seems to me nobody's willing to take the time to put together a really good movie. Bond movies sell themselves; you don't have to rush them through. Its as if the producers are just picking names out of a hat when it comes time to put together the talent and the result is a movie that just looks and feels like a patchwork of other movies

 

[Zack Gibbs]

Originally Posted by Luisito34 /forum/thread/289286/bond-23/30#post_3582566
Surely tackling a Bond project would be the highlight of a Director's career, even an established one but it seems to me nobody's willing to take the time to put together a really good movie. Bond movies sell themselves; you don't have to rush them through. Its as if the producers are just picking names out of a hat when it comes time to put together the talent and the result is a movie that just looks and feels like a patchwork of other movies

I'm not sure why you think doing a Bond movie would be the "highlight" of a Director's career, but;
If they were given any sort of real control maybe they could make something special, but the producers famously strong-arm each and every film. Their poor decision making is so transparent, it's really only luck when a decent film makes it through IMO.

 

[Yee-Ming]

Agree with Zack. Didn't Tarentino famously say that he wanted to do a Bond, provided he was allowed to make an "R" rated one? Which the producers would never allow.

No marquee director is ever going to agree to relinquishing that much control to the producers. Hence the critique that the producers only hire directors and writers that are prepared to toe their party-line.

Another observation: doing a Bond theme isn't necessarily good for a music career either. From the time I started watching Bond movies upon release in the early 80s, my impression has always been that the music artiste did not go on to bigger and better things: for instance, it seems to me that Sheena Easton, Duran Duran and a-ha just about peaked at the time of their respective Bond themes, and their respective careers went downhill thereafter. Perhaps Sheryl Crow is still doing all right, but Garbage seem to have disappeared.

 

[Sam Favate]

Yes, Tarantino and Brosnan wanted to do a hard-edged version of Casino Royale after Die Another Day. It seems the producers wanted the same thing, just without those guys. I don't ever recall mention of seeking an R rating though.

The Bond themes have been a mixed bag for the performers. For everyone who peaked with their theme, there is a Tom Jones, a Nancy Sinatra, a Tina Turner, a Carly Simon, and a (!) Paul McCartney, all of whom have Bond themes as a mere moment in an expansive career.

I always thought The Smithereens were born to perform a Bond theme. And, on his last album, Southside Johnny did an approximation of a Bond theme (and even dedicated it to John Barry), called "All The Time In the World" (not the same song from OHMSS). Worth checking out if you are so inclined.

 

[MattFini]

My personal hope for Bond 23 is to take an approach similar to that of Goldfinger.

Given that SPECTRE was invovled in both Dr. No and From Russia With Love, it was cool to see the next Bond flick step away from all that for a movie.

I hope the next Bond will leave Quantum on the backburner for a future adventure. Bring back Moneypenny and Q and make this a stand alone adventure.

Above all else - toss out that horrid editing and let us SEE the action again. The film needs to breathe a little bit, so never mind the needlessly short length of the last Bond film. Thankfully Marc Forster won't be back, but I'll be curious to see who EON gets to get behind the camera this time.

I hope the decision isn't as trendy as last time, but I have a feeling it will be.

 

[Gary OS]

Originally Posted by MattFini /forum/thread/289286/bond-23/30#post_3587615
Above all else - toss out that horrid editing and let us SEE the action again.

Boy, I couldn't agree more with that statement. After seeing the great camera work with CASINO ROYALE, it was very jarring to watch QUANTUM go right to that jerky, fast-paced, editing right off the bat at the start of the film. I couldn't even keep up with what was happening in the car chase scene at the beginning, nor with the chase between Bond and the shooter right after that. It was terrible. That's got to go. At least with CASINO ROYALE we got wonderful action scenes where the camera wasn't going back and forth between scenes/faces at breakneck speed.
Gary "if they could give us anything close to another CASINO ROYALE then I'd be very pleased" O.

 

[MattFini]

I wish they'd just get Martin Campbell back as a director.

His two Bond films have been best in the modern era and I'd love to see him tackle another one.

 

[ThomasC]

Originally Posted by MattFini /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I wish they'd just get Martin Campbell back as a director.
His two Bond films have been best in the modern era and I'd love to see him tackle another one.

Ditto.

 

[Sam Favate]

Quentin Tarantino discusses his proposed Casino Royale flick:

http://www.mi6.co.uk/news/index.php?itemid=7790&t=mi6&s=news

 

[Brent M]

I love QT, but there's no way I could see him doing a Bond film. He's better off working with his own material and not trying to stay within the paramaters of something like the Bond universe.

 

[Sam Favate]

I was intrigued by the idea when it surfaced after the disappointing Die Another Day, but after seeing 2006's Casino Royale and Daniel Craig as Bond, I wouldn't want to see that movie have turned out any differently.

 

[MattFini]

I'm torn. I LOVED CR, but I think a QT-written/directed adaptation with Brosnan would've been pretty freaking awesome too.

I loved Brosnan but he never had the right material to work with (outside of GoldenEye).

 

[Paul_Scott]

I would think having a main character that is laconic rather than loquacious by nature would give Tarantino fits.
The last thing I would want to see is Bond spouting out reams of colorful, but pointless dialogue- or discussing his favorite Tarkovsky film with Felix at the bar in the Casino.

I'm happy with the way CR turned out in every respect. Just go back to classically shot and edited action set pieces next time. Enough with the Michael Bay/Paul Greengrass ADD crap.

 

[BoyPcc]

The bond movies are always exciting to see. Hope the new one turn an awesome movie. The last one Quantum of soloce was not that great. And not worried if wade and pelvis are writing it....../img/vbsmilies/htf/popcorn.gif

 

[Gary OS]

Originally Posted by Paul_Scott /forum/thread/289286/bond-23/30#post_3590333
I'm happy with the way CR turned out in every respect. Just go back to classically shot and edited action set pieces next time. Enough with the Michael Bay/Paul Greengrass ADD crap.

Amen!
Gary "it's still hard for me to believe we had such a stark difference in the way the actions scenes were shot/edited between CR & QS" O.

 

[Richard--W]

Quentin Tarantino says "Daniel Craig shouldn't be James Bond."
I find some of the reader's comments refreshingly clear-headed:
http://www.showbizspy.com/article/189759/quentin-tarantino-daniel-craig-shouldnt-be-james-bond.html#comment-41782
Although I'm not a fan of Tarantino's work, I liked Jackie Brown because he deferred to Elmore Leonard rather than to his own twisted muse. It's his best story-telling, the only film of his I can watch. I think Tarantino would have deferred to Ian Fleming, too. Deferring to Fleming seems to be Tarantino's whole point. There are dark and edgier traits in the novel Casino Royale, some essential exposition, and at least two essential story threads that the 2006 film ignores. The subtext is over the producer's heads; instead, they impose their own subtext, one that is anathema to the novel and its characters. Tarantino would have delivered a more internally faithful film, if his only adaptation Jackie Brown is any indication. Pierce Brosnan earned the right to explore the character of James Bond and to finally get him right in Casino Royale after carrying the silly and inferior films the producers saddled him with. Brosnan is an excellent actor, and a better choice than the clueless Daniel Craig. I don't buy into the necessity of changing Brosnan to reboot when they searched for a twenty-something and then settled on an older actor after all.
Let's face it, the Eon producers carry too much baggage. Their Casino Royale deconstructs the character of James Bond into a caricature of political correctness. He needs to be taught responsibility and sensitivity and how to dress by M and Vesper before he is fit to go out on his own. That's an anti-James Bond film, and a political correctness run riot. The sequel Quantum of Solace is like going to a funeral with Attention Deficit Disorder. It also presses the political correctness.
Tarantino's and Brosnan's collaboration sounded like just the thing to rescue James Bond from the quagmire the Eon producers sunk him into. What a pity they'll never be a proper adaptation of Casino Royale.
I've been taking a closer look at Peter Morgan's writing, and I'm confident the next Bond film with Dench and Craig will be more of the same.

Edited by Richard--W - 8/3/2009 at 03:54 am GMT

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Richard,

Your statement about the comments from the readers is being
perceived as condescending. Perhaps you did not mean it
to be. Please be certain that in the future you are respectful
of other opinions posted here. Thanks.

 

[Richard--W]

Ronald Epstein,

Condescending?
Disrespectful?
No, that's not true.

I was not referring to opinions posted here,
I was referring to opinions posted at showbizspy linked above.
I said I found them refreshing, which is a complimentary thing to say.
How can a compliment be construed as condescending and disrespectful?

While I have your personal attention, may I ask you to please delete post #39 and deal decisively with the poster.
His accusation is unfounded, unfair, and inappropriate.
The post is a personal attack on me, rather than an objective discussion of the films.
Let it be understood I'm not in a dialog with that person and my posts do not refer to him / her personally.

 

[Will_B]

Please, no more "blowing up of the evil lair" scenes. I couldn't believe my eyes when QoS resorted to that cliche.
Another problem with QoS was Bond's hair. In CR, his hair was almost like a crew cut -- spiky most of the time. But in QoS, it was often combed-over which made him look old.
Spiky Casino Royale hair -- excellent!:

Comb-over Quantum of Solace (bad -- looks like a toupe or effort to hide baldness):