Casino Royale is the best Bond film
Film James Bond is the Worst Spy In the Entire World...
- Thread starter Mockney
- Start date
Spectre is a return to the usual Bond formula..in a good way. The violence is not excessive. There is the normal train fight. Not too dependent on gadgets...unlike some.
The leading lady has spirit and not just a bimbo...unlike most.
The first Craig film would be the best if not viewed as a pure Bond vehicle.
Actually the Bond film I have watched a number of times is Goldeneye...and Spectre. I went back to From Russia with Love because it was very nostalgic...as I said brought back some great memories.
Probably will need to do a marathon watch from Dr. No to Spectre very soon.
Goldeneye is one of the best, but have to admit I am a sucker for the early ones.
understand. They have that charm. You'll never get that again.
Goldeneye is fantastic. Cant believe its been 20 years
I've decided to eschew the last lingering vestiges of my irrational British traditionalism (which only ever applied to football & Bond anyway) and agree with this 6 month old hipster video short I've just watched, that the best way forward for Bond is as an eternally rotating anthology of loosely connected stand-alones.
There's little other reason for this bump than the fact that I've just discovered it, and am a tad drunk, but as about 70% of my posts hit at least one of these marks anyway, I'm pretty confident it's worth it.
There's little other reason for this bump than the fact that I've just discovered it, and am a tad drunk, but as about 70% of my posts hit at least one of these marks anyway, I'm pretty confident it's worth it.
Last edited:
Any excuse to repost this beauty.
I think he's right. But wrong. A bunch of one-off bonds will kill the franchise pretty quickly.
That being said, the ridiculously avenger'd James Bond obviously sucks so let's move on.
I'd save it by
1) Get a great bad guy. Bond villains kind-of suck. They've sucked for a long time. They suck harder than my Henry Numatic Vacuum Cleaner. Find a great Bond Villain before going any further.
2) Find the right tension. Soviet Union is on the bring of cold war = good. Someone is stealing lots of water = bad. Someone is stealing the data from lots of MI5 agents which is never mentioned again = bad. The tension can be quite small... casino royale and skyfall proved this. But it doesn't have to be.
3) Gadgets... Whatever you give Bond - whether that's a smoke grenade, a laser monocle or a talking fish... give it to him near the start of the movie, and make sure he only uses it in the most unexpected way possible. Maybe he puts the smoke grenade under a car to make it look like it's on fire. Maybe he used the laser monocle to engrave a message on a wall. But don't make a big deal out of it.
4) Bond is human and needs to get hurt. And when he gets hurt that scene needs to make sense too, and the audience needs to feel his hurt. Have him get shot in both legs... and crawl to save the day. Have him lose an eye. Whatever. There is a reason Bond is doing the job and we aren't. Don't go over the top like a few of the recent ones, but make sure we see the pain.
5) Create a single space to play out the drama. Casino Royale has quite a narrow plot. It feels like half the film is just set in the casino. Bond meets Vesper on the way to the Casino. The *drama* and the *tension* of the movie build there, and although the key events may not take place there, the casino scenes build the movie. Skyfall is the same. The first hour of Skyfall is actually a complete mess... it's almost two separate movies. But eventually Bond heads up to Scotland and things settle down the events play out in a single space, allowing the drama and tension to make sense.
Both the Casino bit and the Scotland bit set rules of what Bond can do. Suddenly Bond isn't a superhero any more. He can't magic his way out the problem. He has to solve the problem he's created using the tools at hand. Even though Skyfall is a complete mess of a movie, I think people like that a lot.
Or to put it another way, don't just have Bond running from one fancy set piece to another the whole movie. It becomes a meaningless blur.
6) Have a plot that actually makes sense. Skyfall was particularly bad for this.
7) Cut the film 10 minutes earlier. All the final scenes suck
Being lectured on bond by a really american american. Yeah... right.
I watched all the Craig films one after another.
Spectre was the best of the lot. Not too violent. The train fight. The Aston Martin.
Stunning Bond girl.
Spectre was the best of the lot. Not too violent. The train fight. The Aston Martin.
Stunning Bond girl.
I've heard a rumour the next film is going to be called "Shatterhand" is that right? based on Raymond Benson's 2001 Never Dream Of Dying novel.
Shatterhand was Blofield's Alias in You Only Live Twice.. so could mean Christopher Waltz returns?
I really need to watch Spectre again, only seen it once.
Shatterhand was Blofield's Alias in You Only Live Twice.. so could mean Christopher Waltz returns?
I really need to watch Spectre again, only seen it once.
Bond is shit, the end.
That's where I think he's right though. It wouldn't be Bob from the Bill, 'cos it's far more likely to attract big names without the implicit 10 yr contract entailed. Besides. Whenever we float a new Bond we go for A list names like Fassbender, Hiddlestone or Elba, but none of them would realistically want to commit to it. Just look at how much Craig hates it, and he was a middling, far less in demand actor when he was cast.
Bond villains are like Batman villains, they need a good film to shine in, otherwise they come off campy or dull. Craig's movies have had a good dull villain (CR) and a good campy villain (Skyfall) but also a crap dull villain (QoS) and a crap campy one (Spectre)... it's the film that makes the villain, not the villain that makes the film.
The wider the net you cast, the better chance you have, creatively.
You can't do Cold War shit in 2017, but you can do it in an X Men First Class style scenario.
This is all dependant on the story and tone. The right script with the right context can make anything work.
This Works in a Nolan-esque trilogy, but will get very old very quickly in a never ending anthology franchise. The point I (and that video) am making, is that Bond can't survive by adhering to a specific winning formula. It needs to change. Everyone agrees Connery is the best Bond, but Bond wouldn't have lasted 50 years by bi-annually remaking the Connery films. Connery, Moore, Brosnan & Craig all have their fair share of both serious and camp. The proposition at hand is that we cut out the inevitable 10 year repitition from one to the other, and just make a series of stand alones that can do their own shizzle.
Again, you can't do this every 2/3 years. Casino Royal only worked because it was a radical departure from the previous film (it was Batman Begins to the invisible car travesty Batman & Robin)...and Skyfall worked because it was a departure again. Combining the serious tone of CR with the nostalgic camp of the earlier films.
So was Casino Royale....they all are. They're Bond films!
As controversial as it may be, I'd be fine with an American Bond, as long as he played it English. There've only been two actually English ones after all. And all the iconic American Superhero roles have been played by Brits at one time or another. As long as he doesn't Dick Van Dyke it, I'd be game for a John Hamm-type.
Last edited:
I'm not big fan of his but just give it to Tarantino.
Been to the island where man with the golden gun duel was filmed. Tourist trap!
Apparently tarantino is the reason they did CR
Casino Royale didn't make much sense, but it did make sense within the rules it had created.
They couldnt arrest Le Chief so they made him so desperate he'd have to come to them
Fixing the tournament, or doing something else would have made more sense though
Hell yes!
Still haven't seen the last one, although Skyfall was decent.
There was the one bit in one of the films, where he got repeatedly thwacked in the nuts with a knotted rope while tied to a chair...
Yeah and casino royale is the best bond film!
He was also tortured in Skyfall but it's a terrible scene. And tortured in Spectre which was a much better scene but still average.
One of the major problems with the last bond film, in my opinion, is that it was a really shit film. This is always a slight hindrance really.
I still don't get why a bunch of countries who all only came together in the first place because they wanted to share information, then had to have a vote in order to actually share information, and then because one of them voted no, none of the others were allowed to do it. This is probably the stupidest plot device ever used in any film.
It's like a group of 10 mates deciding to go on holiday together, but then deciding after agreeing to go on holiday together, and paying for the holiday, that they all need to have a vote about whether they want to go on holiday together, and then because one idiot for some reason votes no, none of them are allowed to go on holiday. Rather than just, you know, go without him. It's so fecking stupid.
The film was cluster fecked around this mess of a plot device so it was little wonder it ended up being completely terrible. The villain made no sense, the transition from one scenario to another made no sense.
My ideas on how to save Bond are:
1) Make a less terrible film next time
I still don't get why a bunch of countries who all only came together in the first place because they wanted to share information, then had to have a vote in order to actually share information, and then because one of them voted no, none of the others were allowed to do it. This is probably the stupidest plot device ever used in any film.
It's like a group of 10 mates deciding to go on holiday together, but then deciding after agreeing to go on holiday together, and paying for the holiday, that they all need to have a vote about whether they want to go on holiday together, and then because one idiot for some reason votes no, none of them are allowed to go on holiday. Rather than just, you know, go without him. It's so fecking stupid.
The film was cluster fecked around this mess of a plot device so it was little wonder it ended up being completely terrible. The villain made no sense, the transition from one scenario to another made no sense.
My ideas on how to save Bond are:
1) Make a less terrible film next time
Cheers, yeah it seems that Tarantino is still pissed off with them for not giving him the gig.
Still a better plot than Quantum
Id read that somewhere recently, is it really bad?
John Hamm would be amazing as a Connery type "period" bond. Like some of the recent books have been written....
Yea, totally covered in stalls selling typical Thai wares, Buddha's, elephants, shirts, t-shirts, etc.
The island where the beach was filmed is similar. No shops but shit loads of tourists.
Casino Royale was the best bond film made as it was pretty clever with the spread betting financing terrorism stuff, they then subsequently ruined it with Quantum.
Skyfall is completely overrated, from Adele's theme song right the way through to the adult version of Home Alone that plays out. Bond was even to blame for the ultimate death of M by using her as bait on the way to his Scottish booby trapped home rather than, you know, dropping her off at a nice picturesque tea room in the middle o'nowhere on the way up without telling anyone where she was. Rubbish! Just like pretty much every other Bond film bar Casino Royale. Bond just has a knack of getting people killed.
Skyfall is completely overrated, from Adele's theme song right the way through to the adult version of Home Alone that plays out. Bond was even to blame for the ultimate death of M by using her as bait on the way to his Scottish booby trapped home rather than, you know, dropping her off at a nice picturesque tea room in the middle o'nowhere on the way up without telling anyone where she was. Rubbish! Just like pretty much every other Bond film bar Casino Royale. Bond just has a knack of getting people killed.
Last edited:
I'm watching Spectre now, as it's come on Netflix, and it's depreciated pretty badly. The 'twist' is just really, really dumb. The idea of trying to connect everything with one nonsensical retrofitted superplan was pretty dumb anyway, but you get the impression they did it to make it seem more like a "franchise", which is extra super dooper dumb considering Bond was already a franchise. The original franchise in fact. Then on top of trying to franchise a franchise, they tripled down on the dumb by making this retrofitted re-franchisation revolve around the plot twist from Austin Powers 3, thereby re-franchising a franchise by inadvertently parodying a parody of the original franchise. A scenario so ridiculous it'd be, ironically, almost impossible to parody.
It's also just a bit dull. Plus he's super rapey again. Though at least not in a shower this time. He's gravitated to dry rape. But I'm unsure whether that counts as an improvement.
It's also just a bit dull. Plus he's super rapey again. Though at least not in a shower this time. He's gravitated to dry rape. But I'm unsure whether that counts as an improvement.
Last edited:
I think what annoyed me the most was that they managed to get Christopher Waltz and Monica Bellucci to be in the film and then completely wasted them. You've got an iconic bond villain and probably the best actor you could possibly hope for to play him, and they still managed to feck up the character and story.
Yeah, you can't blame Waltz. Everyone knew he was playing Blofeld anyway, and he played it exactly how everyone expected him to. The only reason they 'hid' it was to protect the incredibly dumb twist that only served to undermine the inclusion of the character. It would've been an infinitely better film if they'd written him as a standard supervillan and admitted who he was from the start.
By attempting to avoid the meta-naffness of a character that basically created the supervillan archetype, they ended up making him significantly more naff by over thinking it.
And being too naff for a Bond film is too naff for life. They have a lisence to naff. But they should never say naff again.
Naff.
This....
Basicly 2 whole underpaced hours for the whole plot to be ......dah dah daarrrrrr!. It was me all along!
If they make another one the plot needs to be something more than supervillain "top trumps"
That's classThe next one will likely pick up where Spectre left off, with Waltz heavily linked with being back to continue as Blofeld.
Well I hope he gets up to some actual villainy rather than just hacking google or getting everyone's porn logins!
What's this about Idris Elba playing Bond?
Craig has been confirmed for Bond 25.
Danial Craig to be Bond again.
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/daniel...ux-again-confirms-bond-25-is-his-next-project
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/daniel...ux-again-confirms-bond-25-is-his-next-project
Good news. He's a very believable Bond.