|
You're never going to be able to put your finger on one thing as to why Goldeneye is/was so popular. It came along when a lot of people were kinda down on Bond, Dalton had just opted out and there wasn't a ton of optimism about the series when Brosnan signed on. Goldeneye was a reboot in a lot of ways. They brought in Dench, who became iconic, and unlike The Living Daylights and License to Kill, it does not feel like an 80's action movie. It feels fresh compared to what came before. Then there's the video game, so much of the love for the movie is wrapped up in the love for the game. And it's an incredibly effective movie/game adaptation too, you can play the game and it'll make you want to watch the movie. Then you sit down and watch the movie and you can pick out all these little moments that were recreated in the game. Now, if the movie itself was garbage probably none of this would matter, but taken on it's own merits it's actually a very solid Bond flick, so all of these things combine and make for a very memorable movie. Being memorable is half the battle for Bond anyway, those Moore Bond films tend to run together for so many people because they aren't nearly as well defined in most people's memory.
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2018 19:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 17:43 |
|
|
Roger Moore's Bond movies are the only ones that just completely bounce off me and I cannot seem to distinguish between them(outside of Moonraker I guess because of the space setting). They just all run together for me and none of them really stand out. I've never really put my finger on exactly why that is, if it's Moore himself or just a run of boring stories.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2018 16:43
|
|
|
Fart City posted:TWINE had a really good villain in Renard that they did absolutely gently caress-all with. A dude who can’t feel pain and knows he’s on a death clock has enormous possibilities to get really bonkers with, but they kept him weirdly low key. Played by a fantastic actor too, Robert Carlyle. Check out Ravenous for an idea of how great Carlyle could've been as a Bond villain if they hadn't completely wasted him.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2018 17:09
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:Who is the best Bond villain. Answers must begin with "Rosa" and end with "Klebb." Right movie but wrong villain old man.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2018 21:03
|
|
|
The opener to Spectre really was something to see on the big screen, up there with some of the best openings in the whole series. I don't dislike the movie overall, but I don't think it ever topped that first 10 minutes.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2018 18:09
|
|
|
Elba is too old now as well, the time to cast him came and went. He'd be pushing 50 by the time his first Bond was released. I'd love to see a shakeup of the formula though along those lines, I'd have no problem at all with a female Bond.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2018 21:04
|
|
|
Cacator posted:Ian Fleming would roll in his grave if they cast a black Bond and he'd probably turn inside out if it was a woman. I don't see how you make Bond a woman without fundamentally altering the character, who is a "sexist misogynist dinosaur", at which point why not make a new character instead? Because Bond means something. It's a legacy character at this point, and it has a very established cultural footprint to use as a launching point. So gently caress it, change the character, who cares. Let the character be something different for a while, not sure I see what the big deal would be. Atomic Blonde is definitely a great Bond-like character but a movie like that will never get the press and international attention as an actual female Bond would. Also, who gives a poo poo if Ian Fleming would turn in his grave. gently caress him if he'd have a problem with a non-white male Bond.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2018 14:36
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:Atomic Blonde was pretty cool but super violent I thought, more like a Tony Scott spy thriller less Bond-level goofy. Depends on the context. If you're comparing it to Bond, yea it's more intense and violent. But it was directed by one of the guys who made John Wick, so in that context it's much less graphically violent. It's a really fun mix, the stylish action but with the Cold War-era Berlin backdrop.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
I thought I read somewhere that an Atomic Blonde sequel was definitely in the works. I love that Leitch and Stahelski came along and showed everyone that you can make a movie with totally satisfying action, with stylish cinematography, and do it for a reasonable budget where you don't have to bring in half a billion or more just to be considered successful. That there's a middle ground between huge franchise tentpoles and direct to video Atkins stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2018 18:17
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:all the dumbass lines previously pointed out itt didn't disappoint but shoehorning blofeld onto the plot of every other craig movie is loving insane I took my 85 year old grandfather to see Spectre and it was a complete disaster. My reasoning was hey, this is gonna be a bit of a throwback to the old Bond films that my grandfather remembers from the 60's and 70's, and he even knows the villain! This will be a movie he can totally get into and won't have any problem following! So basically every plot beat fell flat for him, and the biggest moment, the big "author of all your pain" reveal, just made him confused as hell. I felt pretty bad about it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
I definitely wouldn't tell someone to just skip Spectre entirely, there's some good stuff in there. As was mentioned a page or two ago, the opener is worth the price of admission alone. esperterra posted:This will probably come out weird, but I love how much of a loving beating she took in that movie. From what I can tell Theron did a lot of her own choreo and they sold the hell out of those fights, and she just kept loving going which made it all the more badass. Like she was simultaneously loving terrible and amazing at her job and I loved it. I know what you mean, especially that one particular scene in the apartment building, she just won't stop. Then when there's nobody left to fight and she can barely stand, her eyes are still laser focused on her surroundings as she leads the defector out of the building. And Theron does a great job of selling the pain and exhaustion too, she'd probably make a great pro wrestler.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2018 18:57
|
|
|
I dunno, I always felt like Brosnan fit my idea of what Bond should be more than any of the others aside from Connery and maybe Dalton. Suave and sophisticated, but incredibly competent when called to action. Moore had the charisma but I never really bought him as the guy who gets these impossible jobs done. Craig is the opposite, I totally buy that he can pull off the secret agent stuff but he's a bit lacking in charisma compared to Brosnan. Lazenby I just didn't like on any level.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2018 19:35
|
|
|
Timby posted:Yeah, Bond is weirdly celibate in QoS; I think he finally sleeps with Strawberry Fields and then finds her covered in motor oil in that ham-fisted Goldfinger callback, but besides that he keeps it in his pants. Probably due to how it's such a direct follow-up to Casino Royale, so Bond is supposed to be distraught over the loss of Vesper and focused on revenge.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2018 15:33
|
|
|
Jeb! Repetition posted:Finally watching Casino Royale since it's supposed to be one of the best, although it still can't possibly live up to the intro That was really important though because it gives you that "hell yea Bond is back" feeling, which was actually pretty exhilarating in the theater because the Brosnan era had ended on such a down note.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2018 04:10
|
|
|
They should bring back Vesper for the last Craig movie, just say she took like a pill or something and was just pretending to drown.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2018 13:50
|
|
|
I agree that the actual plot surrounding that final set piece is too convoluted. Especially because the movie up to that point had been pretty streamlined and simple, in a good way. I think maybe the whole Vesper betrayal thing and then her death would've worked better as the first third of Quantum of Solace.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2018 16:26
|
|
|
lelandjs posted:I think Venice dragging is intentional. The movie's supposed to be over, everything seems wrapped up... but why is it taking so long to end? While I think that's correct, the length isn't what lets it down imo, it's how poorly it's all set up beforehand. It's not really a satisfying twist because I think most people at that point are having a hard time following exactly how and to whom Vesper betrayed Bond. It's a convoluted mess and that same problem is carried over into Quantum.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2018 18:22
|
|
|
Jeb! Repetition posted:*Le Chiffre voice* That's funny I went to sleep last night after seeing that you were live posting Casino Royale and then when I saw that tweet this morning I immediately thought of Le Chiffre.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2018 18:39
|
|
|
Just watching Casino Royale again after the talk in here and found a digital code that's still good for another few months. Someone may as well use it before it expires. 4BZBBUCCXVR5NC71 It says you go to FoxRedeem.com and then you choose what format you want.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2018 01:28
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:quantum of solace is good, especially when you watch it right after casino royale I agree that's enjoyable IF you watch it right after Casino Royale, but I think that on its own is a legitimate criticism. Even a direct sequel should be able to stand on it's own.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2018 13:54
|
|
|
It again goes back to the issues with the last segment of Casino Royale, which were a little too convoluted and hard to follow. So unless you really pay attention there, and then jump right into Quantum soon afterwards, it's hard to piece together exactly what Bond is up to in Quantum. Had they moved the end of Casino Royale to the beginning of Quantum, I think that would've smoothed a lot of that out.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2018 14:16
|
|
|
What made you think the villain won by losing the poker game or that he did it on purpose? He only goes after Bond because he needs the bank info to get his money back.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2018 18:33
|
|
|
Natural 20 posted:So events as I remember: Here's how it goes down: 1. Le Chiffre wins at first, but then Bond gets more funds from his CIA buddy Leiter. 2. Bond beats Le Chiffre in the next round 3. Le Chiffre nabs Bond and interrogates him for the account information so that he can force him to transfer the money back to himself(he's desperate because he knows the organization he works for will kill him if he doesn't get the money) 4. Le Chiffre lies to Bond by telling him that Mathis is the one who told him where Bond would be, allowing him to be kidnapped by Le Chiffre. Why he lies is unclear, probably just to be an rear end in a top hat. But this part is pretty insignificant to the plot. 5. Le Chiffre may or may not have gotten the info out of Bond but turns out he was going to be killed regardless because Quantum no longer trusts him. It all comes together when you rewatch those opening scenes. Le Chiffre is taking his organizations money and "investing" it. The money he takes from those warlords in the opening scene he then uses to short the stock of an airline company. He thinks he's got all his bases covered because he's going to blow up their big famous prototype plane, but then Bond stops that plot from happening and he loses all his money, forcing him to arrange the poker game out of desperation. So basically Le Chiffre was hosed from before the game ever started because Quantum had already decided he was more trouble than he was worth. Basebf555 fucked around with this message at 19:30 on May 18, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 18, 2018 19:26
|
|
|
Well you don't find out that Le Chiffre was lying until Quantum of Solace, so you could consider it a bit of a retcon. At the end of Casino Royale we're left to assume that Mathis did in fact betray Bond, leading to his abduction by Le Chiffre. I'm not sure what was confusing about that specific part, Bond clearly beats Le Chiffre in the poker game and Le Chiffre never gives any indication that he was losing on purpose. Also, it's established by the time of Le Chiffre's death that he works for a big organization, and that MI6 is doing this precisely so he might flip and give them information about it. The warlords that he does business with at the beginning are just clients.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2018 19:45
|
|
|
Natural 20 posted:Broadly I think it's incredibly unsatisfying to have Le Chiffre get killed by a third party that's almost entirely uninvolved with the film. Yes they're about, but there's no resonance in his defeat. It's just a thing. That I can understand. It works a bit more if you've seen all the Craig Bonds like 3 times each and you know them really well, because Mr. White(the guy who kills Le Chiffre) becomes a pretty important character. But within the context of just Casino Royale I suppose it's a bit anti-climactic. Mr. White probably needed one or two memorable establishing scenes before then.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2018 20:13
|
|
|
Face blindness aside, if you're a Bond fan Leiter would stand out just because he's Leiter.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2018 20:40
|
|
|
Yea, "traditional" Bond rankings would have Goldfinger as most "important" while From Russia With Love is just a flat-out better movie than the rest of them.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2018 19:07
|
|
|
Yea I'd love to see them cast an age appropriate actor for the role and actually do a run of "early Bond" stories. Get somebody in the 25-30 range who can actually grow into the role instead of being too old after the first sequel.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2018 18:07
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Or if you want someone else, John Boyega could do it. He can be smooth as ice when he’s required. Timing could work out too, maybe they wrap his Star Wars character up in the next Episode and he'll be ready to move on to the next thing right as Craig is signing off. He'd be much more of an established star than anyone else they've cast though.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2018 18:48
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Martin Campbell's preferred choice for Casino Royale was Henry Cavill, who would've been around 22 at the time. Cavill would've been so goddamned perfect. He's done a great job with Superman but man, I'd have loved to see a decade of Cavill Bond films. The Man From U.N.C.L.E proved he'd have been amazing at it.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
Barudak posted:I dont really like From Russia With Love within the Bond movies but thats probably because its actually a pretty good spy movie and not a “spy movie” like what the rest of the franchise turned into so it sticks out. It still has plenty of Bond stuff in it though, like the trick briefcase, all the stuff with the various Spectre meetings, the poison shoe-dagger, and I'm sure a few others I'm not remembering. It's just that the plot is very simple and actually quite realistic compared to most Bond films. MI6 wants this machine that will allow them to break codes and they send Bond after it, while at the same time Spectre sends their own operatives to take it from him should he succeed. No world-ending super-villain plot, just regular spy stuff with a Bond twist.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2018 16:58
|
|
|
gently caress it, if it's really Craig's last Bond just bring Mendes back.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
Cacator posted:Ugh please no. Spectre was a huge letdown. I agree it wasn't good but he's at least proven he can make a good Bond film, and I think it'd be worth allowing Craig to go out with a (visually)coherent trilogy rather than tacking one on at the end that doesn't feel like it fits with what came before.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2018 18:33
|
|
|
Vagabundo posted:Why not someone like Jeremy Saulnier, Patty Jenkins or Kathryn Bigelow? Not sure that Saulnier has shown he can work with the kind of large scope that James Bond films typically have, the other two seem like more natural fits.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2018 18:58
|
|
|
Electronico6 posted:Just let Nolan do his Bond movie already. No thanks.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2018 19:24
|
|
|
Electronico6 posted:With Nolan we might just get Tom Hardy grunting his way through a James Bond movie and that's the only way to salvage this franchise at this point. If Hardy were to ever get the job they better just skip to the washed up alcoholic phase, he'd be so perfect for it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2018 19:28
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:My wife asked this the other day, does Bond travel commercial? Well Craig Bond always seems like he's disavowed and going rogue so yea he flies commercial because he has to blend in with his various fake passports. Connery didn't fly in planes, he traveled exclusively via min-sub and mini-helicopter.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:My hot take is that Casino Royale 2006 doesn't hold up, and everything that came after it was a waste. I don't really agree with your overall opinion, but what flaws the movie does have are definitely due to pacing. You're right that the card game wasn't handled well, imo they should've cut out the entire section where Bond loses and has to buy back in using Lieter's money. There was no need for that complicated poo poo with learning Le Chiffre's tells so that he could beat him later or whatever, just have him win the game in a dramatic hand, that's good enough and it gives you like 10 extra minutes to let the post-Le Chiffre section breath a little bit.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2018 19:50
|
|
|
thrawn527 posted:*ahem* Fine then, when necessary but of course private only, never commercial.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2018 20:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 17:43 |
|
|
Has a Bond debut ever been a financial failure? Because they obviously operate under this questionable idea that once a Bond is established we should squeeze as much out of their run as possible before risking a recasting, but is that even based on any real evidence? If you recast Bond and give the franchise a fresh start, historically people typically respond to that and show up to buy tickets right? That said, I love Craig in the role so I did want to see him have a chance to go out on a better note.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2018 14:05
|
|