James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
aox
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:02 pm
Location: nYc

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#426 Post by aox » Fri Aug 18, 2017 11:44 pm

My problem with Spectre is that it seemed to be a combination of the "seriousness" of the Dalton films and the absurdity of the final three Moore films. It's a have your cake and eat it too IMO, and it simply doesn't work for me (bottom five Bond film for me) and gets drowned by its own minutia on each end where almost every scene changes its tone. I found it jarring. I really hope they go back to the realistic dark tone of the first three Craig films.

User avatar
matrixschmatrix
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#427 Post by matrixschmatrix » Sat Aug 19, 2017 12:12 am

I think Casino into Quantum works very well- it literally starts the next moment, and Bond is not playing with his 'armor' back on, he's playing a zombie, a man who doesn't really give a damn if he lives or dies, for most of the movie. Craig has sort of stayed in that mode ever since, though there's nuances- he's somewhat recommitted by the end of Quantum, and the burned out quality he has in Skyfall is less that he's zombified by grief and more that he's become something of a machine- he has real empathy for Camille, who's hurting in a way similar to his own, in the former, whereas he gives so little of a shit in Skyfall that he watches unfazed as a woman who was his ally get murdered and then almost immediately performs a spectacular escape. The reading that was going around at the time was that a lot of time had elapsed between the two, so that the Bond we saw there had become a hardened, late career operative- a Dark Knight one rather than a Batman Begins one- but that doesn't really fit with Spectre.

I think the Batman Begins (or to go to the origin point, Batman: Year One) reboot idea does have a deconstructive quality- we know the end point, but we originally hopped aboard in media res, so now we're working back to discover how a man might acquire all these traits. As a result, things that were just fun character ideas have to be justified and explained, instead of simply being part of the persona. It's... fine, I guess, but I would also like at least one Craig outing where he's not going rogue or earning his stripes or quitting Mi6, he's just a man on a mission in the context of a security force. I doubt we'll get it, though.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#428 Post by Mr Sausage » Sat Aug 19, 2017 6:38 am

Ribs wrote:I disagree. The characters themselves aren't questioning if Bond is relevant, but it's the situation of the films themselves and how the character is presented - which, as is beyond their control, will always be informed by and in conversation with the previous iterations of the character. Obviously Casino Royale - the book and the film - is, from beginning to end, entirely building to that final(ish) line, "the bitch is dead," which codifies James Bond as the vaguely sexist, deeply afraid of feeling brute that Fleming imagined him. The act of constructing to reach that point where we watch the film and understand how he as a character gets there and that we understand how this brings him to become James Bond and earn his theme tune as the film ends is itself an act of deconstruction, attempting to reconcile this as a key stepping stone for the character as we've seen him in every film before it; there's not really much of a way to really build new ideas on top of properties like James Bond or Batman, but merely to repurpose and call into question those that are already there. I don't think this is a take on the character that was created by the Brosnan era - to greater or lesser degrees, Bond is being deconstructed as pop icon as soon as You Only Live Twice, but not every film from that point on felt the need to address that issue as a driving focus.

And, again, this is totally a semantics point, but for me personally there's absolutely no way to view Casino Royale - Quantum of Solace - Skyfall as anything resembling a cohesive arc for the character. I get it, that at the end he's finally become the classic every-Bond, unburdened by his history, but I think that's exactly what the ending of Casino Royale tries to establish in more radical, less gaudy fashion. I love Skyfall dearly, I think I agree it does explore very similar terrain to Goldeneye but the crucial difference of Javier Bardem's character not really resembling Bond whatsoever in style or appearance completely changes the context of what any of it means.

(Your post confused me for a moment as you used the wrong film's name, Spectre in place of Skyfall)
What exactly do you mean by "deconstruction" then? There's nothing in your post that resembles it, either in the Derridean theoretical sense or in the common theoretical sense of analyzing something critically by taking it apart. Casino Royale is basic construction with standard filmic character development. "Being informed by the previous iterations of the character" is not deconstruction. And if you're arguing that imagining the events that caused a younger character to become an older character is deconstruction, than all prequels, reboots, adaptations set before the source material, or even works where an older character uses a lengthy reminiscence to explain how he ended where he did, are deconstruction by nature and your point is robbed of its relevance and interest.
ribs wrote:Obviously Casino Royale - the book and the film - is, from beginning to end, entirely building to that final(ish) line, "the bitch is dead," which codifies James Bond as the vaguely sexist, deeply afraid of feeling brute that Fleming imagined him. The act of constructing to reach that point where we watch the film and understand how he as a character gets there and that we understand how this brings him to become James Bond and earn his theme tune as the film ends is itself an act of deconstruction, attempting to reconcile this as a key stepping stone for the character as we've seen him in every film before it; there's not really much of a way to really build new ideas on top of properties like James Bond or Batman, but merely to repurpose and call into question those that are already there.
Here's the problem: you're taking certain things for granted. For instance, you take for granted that, because James Bond cannot be done in a vacuum, that sense of lineage and history must be a "deconstruction." It's not. Again, deconstruction involves a critical appraisal by taking something apart; it's theoretical. You can't just assume this connection; you have to do some heavy lifting to demonstrate it. Pointing out a low-level awareness of pop history is not it.

You also take for granted that, because the film shows some character trait in James Bond that it understands to be negative (if indeed it does), it is de facto "call[ing] into question" that thing. Again, no. M calling Brosnan's Bond a dinosaur is a critical evaluation of the wider character supported by a specific cultural theory and might reasonably count as deconstruction. Dramatizing the arc of a character and including negative traits at the end, as in Casino Royale, is not, even less so when the necessity of those negative character traits are established by the characters talking to Bond and not to the audience (M's bit to Brosnan is directed to the audience, however). Your "deconstruction" is indistinguishable from decent character development, and your "calling into question" is indistinguishable from clinical observation. To sum: the basic assumption you make, that self-awareness is deconstruction, is a false one.

We disagree entirely on the coherence across the three, but I don't want to go into it except to say that Skyfall is the fulfillment of the theme raised in Casino Royale of Bond being an orphan and what it implies about his relationship with M and about her recruitment and grooming tactics in general.

Robespierre
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 5:31 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#429 Post by Robespierre » Sun Aug 20, 2017 10:24 pm

Bond as a character was established (or re-estabished) at the end of CR. The QoS to SF arc is merely all of the other elements of the series being put back in place after being wiped away with CR.

User avatar
Lost Highway
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#430 Post by Lost Highway » Thu Mar 15, 2018 12:40 pm

Danny Boyle has signed on to write and direct the next Bond and I'm keeping my fingers crossed for the "creative differences" to strike. I think he's a sporadically interesting film-maker, but every time he gets close to something like an action scene, he gets all tricksy with the camera and the editing and everything goes tits up.

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-ente ... 57456.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Ribs
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#431 Post by Ribs » Thu Mar 15, 2018 12:55 pm

Literally cannot imagine a better situation; it's basically exactly the same situation as Mendes, where it's a good filmmaker that has serious prestige background who I really don't actually care about on an individual level and would at least probably have something of a unique "take" on it that will also totally cowtow to whatever Barbara Broccoli wants.

(Joe Wright is probably going to happen eventually, which would possibly be the only other fit I can imagine being even better)

User avatar
Lost Highway
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#432 Post by Lost Highway » Thu Mar 15, 2018 1:02 pm

Ribs wrote:Literally cannot imagine a better situation; it's basically exactly the same situation as Mendes, where it's a good filmmaker that has serious prestige background who I really don't actually care about on an individual level and would at least probably have something of a unique "take" on it that will also totally cowtow to whatever Barbara Broccoli wants.

(Joe Wright is probably going to happen eventually, which would possibly be the only other fit I can imagine being even better)
Joe Wright would be a great choice. He and Mendes are far more classical film makers, which I think is what fits Bond. Boyle has a style which suits his work, but he resorts to a type of jittery camera work and free associative editing when things get exciting, which I can’t bear in action films. I hope to be proven wrong and that he can fit his style to the franchise.
Last edited by Lost Highway on Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#433 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Thu Mar 15, 2018 1:13 pm

I felt like Trance had a little of the Bond DNA a lot of English filmmakers tend to flex, oddly enough in the same way Layer Cake did.

User avatar
Lost Highway
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#434 Post by Lost Highway » Thu Mar 15, 2018 1:15 pm

flyonthewall2983 wrote:I felt like Trance had a little of the Bond DNA a lot of English filmmakers tend to flex, oddly enough in the same way Layer Cake did.
I haven’t seen either but I‘m no fan of Matthew Vaughn, so it could always have been worse I suppose.

flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#435 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Thu Mar 15, 2018 1:27 pm

It's notable for being the movie that attracted Daniel Craig to the Bond producers I believe.

User avatar
Lost Highway
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#436 Post by Lost Highway » Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:42 pm

flyonthewall2983 wrote:It's notable for being the movie that attracted Daniel Craig to the Bond producers I believe.
So I’ve heard. I remember that Layer Cake was well received. At the time I was a little tired of British gangster flicks and as I haven’t enjoyed much of Vaughn’s subsequent work, I never went back to watch it.

User avatar
MoonlitKnight
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:44 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#437 Post by MoonlitKnight » Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:28 am

Lost Highway wrote:
Ribs wrote:Literally cannot imagine a better situation; it's basically exactly the same situation as Mendes, where it's a good filmmaker that has serious prestige background who I really don't actually care about on an individual level and would at least probably have something of a unique "take" on it that will also totally cowtow to whatever Barbara Broccoli wants.

(Joe Wright is probably going to happen eventually, which would possibly be the only other fit I can imagine being even better)
Joe Wright would be a great choice. He and Mendes are far more classical film makers, which I think is what fits Bond. Boyle has a style which suits his work, but he resorts to a type of jittery camera work and free associative editing when things get exciting, which I can’t bear in action films. I hope to be proven wrong and that he can fit his style to the franchise.
Wright showed he's more than capable of tackling the Bond series with "Hanna."

User avatar
Luke M
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:21 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#438 Post by Luke M » Sat Mar 17, 2018 2:12 pm

I would prefer Wright to Boyle. I like pretty much everything Wright has done while Boyle is extremely hit or miss. Still upset about that 3rd act of Sunshine.

User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#439 Post by Big Ben » Sat Mar 17, 2018 2:22 pm

Luke M wrote:I would prefer Wright to Boyle. I like pretty much everything Wright has done while Boyle is extremely hit or miss. Still upset about that 3rd act of Sunshine.
Always felt that had more to do with the script changes more than anything. The original script for Sunshine had an immensley Pro-Atheist stance and that didn't go over well and it changed because of that. However a Bond film with the mood of say Slumdog Millionaire would be atrocious.

I feel the trepidation about Boyle though. The Craig Bond films have been entirely hit or miss with me with Quantum of Solace being my least favorite Bond film ever. If Boyle goes towards a Skyfall I think I'll be just fine. But a Quantum of Solace or Spectre would be...not good in my book.

User avatar
MoonlitKnight
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:44 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#440 Post by MoonlitKnight » Sun Mar 18, 2018 11:15 am

Granted, Michael Apted directed "The World Is Not Enough," and it was nothing like the Up films. :-"

User avatar
Lost Highway
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#441 Post by Lost Highway » Sun Mar 18, 2018 11:28 am

Big Ben wrote:
Luke M wrote:I would prefer Wright to Boyle. I like pretty much everything Wright has done while Boyle is extremely hit or miss. Still upset about that 3rd act of Sunshine.
Always felt that had more to do with the script changes more than anything. The original script for Sunshine had an immensley Pro-Atheist stance and that didn't go over well and it changed because of that. However a Bond film with the mood of say Slumdog Millionaire would be atrocious.

I feel the trepidation about Boyle though. The Craig Bond films have been entirely hit or miss with me with Quantum of Solace being my least favorite Bond film ever. If Boyle goes towards a Skyfall I think I'll be just fine. But a Quantum of Solace or Spectre would be...not good in my book.
In Sunshine’s last act Boyle does that thing he does, where he uses tricksy camera work rather than properly blocking scenes. He did the same thing with 28 Days Later where whenever there is an attack by the rage virus victim, the camera appears infected by rage. Which reminds me of Mark Foster‘s incompetent work on Quantum of Solace, where everytime an action scene started, it immediately disintegrated into invoherence, because he didn’t know how to block a classic action scene. Maybe Boyle does know and has just been trying to do things differently, but I’m just not that confident about his action movie skills.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#442 Post by knives » Sun Mar 18, 2018 12:00 pm

To be fair to Foster he wasn't the one blocking those scenes as all of the action was carried out by the second unit.

User avatar
Lost Highway
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#443 Post by Lost Highway » Sun Mar 18, 2018 12:19 pm

knives wrote:To be fair to Foster he wasn't the one blocking those scenes as all of the action was carried out by the second unit.
Presumably headed by a blender.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#444 Post by tenia » Sun Mar 18, 2018 2:27 pm

Not sure who did the action scenes in Foster's World War Z, but they definitely looked as poorly shot and edited than Quantum of Solace's.

User avatar
Lost Highway
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#445 Post by Lost Highway » Sun Mar 18, 2018 5:14 pm

tenia wrote:Not sure who did the action scenes in Foster's World War Z, but they definitely looked as poorly shot and edited than Quantum of Solace's.
I thought they were a lot better. That first one of the zombie virus taking hold while the family is trying to escape was a decent action scene which built tension rather well and the plane crash was not bad either. No classic but a big step up from the Bond movie.

User avatar
MoonlitKnight
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:44 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#446 Post by MoonlitKnight » Sun Mar 18, 2018 6:16 pm

*Marc Forster

Robespierre
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 5:31 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#447 Post by Robespierre » Sun Mar 18, 2018 10:32 pm

Are there any hardcore fans of the series on this forum? All you guys sound like you've seen the films maybe one time apiece, especially QoS which is a lot better than its reputation and a one time viewing would suggest. Lately I've even thought that it may be better than Spectre.

User avatar
Ribs
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#448 Post by Ribs » Sun Mar 18, 2018 10:43 pm

You don't need to be a big fan to have an opinion on something; I watch the whole run probably every two years or so (not all at once, but just happening to put one on every few weeks). What I admire about Quantum of Solace is that it does feel like Forster had, deep down, a real idea. I just can't for the life of me figure out what it was. It's probably how it's really designed from the ground up as Casino Royale 2, and really just interested in taking the movie that ends with "...and now he's James Bond" and stretching it out to "well, now he's James Bond" by the end of this one. The novety of doing a big set piece for each Earth/Water/Air/Fire also strikes me as something suggesting more under the surface. I like the movie, but it's in all likelihood going to go down as Craig's worst pretty easily (though, historically, every Bond's "worst" movie in the common consensus has been their last one, by happenstance or otherwise) (and Spectre's reputation has really sunk from the generally-positive-but-disappointed reception it originally received).

Having just watched Spectre again, I'll defend it happily; it's a big, long, messy (in a good way) delight. The unnecessary villain stuff of the last act drags down a really top-rate, slow-burn Bond movie but I absolutely admire them for trying. I'm fascinated that the film originally ended with Bond killing the villain in cold blood on the bridge, and remain entirely mixed on whether that would have made a better ending.

Robespierre
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 5:31 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#449 Post by Robespierre » Mon Mar 19, 2018 12:03 am

I like every Craig movie thus far and happily defend both QoS and Spectre. For me QoS is clearly just an unhinged revenge movie, Bond grappling with anger and attempting to focus everything he learned in CR to become the Bond we know. There are scattershot ideas here and there that don't land but that has more to do with the writer's strike. All in all I think they pull it together quite miraculously. QoS is the flip side of CR, a fast, choppily edited adrenaline rush that is anti-Bond is some respects and yet nails the character in other ways (mostly through tropes and Bond's inner turmoil).

Don't get me wrong, I still like Spectre and enjoy the first hour fifty minutes immensely; it's that third act that is becoming harder and harder for me to reconcile.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#450 Post by tenia » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:40 am

I've been a Bond fan since I'm a kid and no, I still think QoS is awful. I probably wouldnt rank it last though, either Octopussy or Tomorrow Never Dies would get this place.
And I found Spectre way better than QoS.

Post Reply