quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze
Mattyb is a shining example of what the perfect Empire Forum member is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

Reaching a long way with this comment, but I wonder if

1) The villain has blonde hair because when Craig was cast as Bond blonde hair was reacted to in some quarters as though blonde hair is the most terrible thing in the world and it's an in-joke to make the trailed as very evil baddie blonde

2) Bond getting shot and falling into water is a similarly arch middle finger to comments in the last few years like THIS ISN'T BOND, THEY'RE JUST COPYING BOURNE, WAH!!! WAH!!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: captainrentboy

After watching the Bourne trilogy over the last few nights, I'm really surprised that anyone can actually defend that style of action sequence shooting.
To me, it's basically a big fucking mess on screen, just like the poxy opening car chase sequence in Quantum Of Solace. I don't care if there's some sort of theme or meaning to the shooting style (although I don't believe that's the case, more that they're just lousy editors), if I can't make out bugger all, due to them cutting literally every two seconds, well for me the action sequence is basically a failure.
If they're confident in their action choreography, then give us some wide/steady shots, ones that last more than a few secs before switching to another friggin angle.
Grrrrrr

Thankfully from the trailer it would appear we're getting some Casino Royale quality action beats, rather than ones like QOS.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

That's a matter of opinion. I regard the editing in QOS as reflecting Bond's fractured state of mind. When he is as his most frantic, and 'in pieces' at the start we see only tiny aspects of him at first before we see his face. By the end, after scenes involving fire/desert (basically heat) he is in a cold place (literally) and all that rage has burnt out, and the camera is locked down, focusing on him, as cold inside himself as the weather in the scene.

There's a massive range of uses of camera in QOS, contrasting scenes of stillness with scenes of chaos, and they, IMO reflect the state of mind of the character at any given point in the film. Some of the action could be considered Bourne like (they did use some of the same personnel), but that's not the only thing the film has to offer, especially given some of the action goes way beyond the Bourne style into the outlandish stuff people expect bond to get into, including a gunfight where Bond is swinging on a chain and the putting a parachute on while in mid air freefall.

Regarding the locations, when Bond is desolate, the locations are desolate, when Bond is burning up inside (because he seems to, once again be about to fail to 'save the girl' there is literally fire all around him, and when the fire has burnt out, he's gotten over his range/grief, the location is icy, and the camera is calm.

It's a big underestimation to dismiss QOS as overly Bourne influenced. Unless of course this is all pretentious gobshite and there's no deliberate choice involved in putting Bond in arid surroundings when he is at his most 'empty' in a burning location when he is closest to failing again to save the woman he has met, and in wintry surroundings when he is at his most controlled, calm, and icy enough to drop the gift Vesper gave him into the snow and walk away, with the camera lingering on images in a way it doesn't in earlier parts of the film when Bond is still 'falling apart inside'.

(I'm not Marc Forster in disguise )

quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee
CR is a great film but it is surely more Bourne than Bond

quote:

ORIGINAL: captainrentboy

After watching the Bourne trilogy over the last few nights, I'm really surprised that anyone can actually defend that style of action sequence shooting.
To me, it's basically a big fucking mess on screen, just like the poxy opening car chase sequence in Quantum Of Solace. I don't care if there's some sort of theme or meaning to the shooting style (although I don't believe that's the case, more that they're just lousy editors), if I can't make out bugger all, due to them cutting literally every two seconds, well for me the action sequence is basically a failure.
If they're confident in their action choreography, then give us some wide/steady shots, ones that last more than a few secs before switching to another friggin angle.
Grrrrrr

Thankfully from the trailer it would appear we're getting some Casino Royale quality action beats, rather than ones like QOS.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze
Mattyb is a shining example of what the perfect Empire Forum member is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson

As I have said before...

James Bond has been around for 50 years. Bond should never try and copy anyone, whether that is Bourne or whoever. Indeed Bond used to be the trendsetter (Without Live and Let Die you don't get Smokey and the Bandit and Cannonball Run... hmmn, perhaps not a great example!!!) and created a style and world which basically invented a new spy genre, not the hard, gritty The Spy Who Came in From The Cold type, but rather one where our hero can unzip his frogman outfit to reveal a tuxedo. One where our hero has incredible gadgets built by the geniuses at Q branch to get him out of a sticky situation. One where our hero, after being challenged to a duel by the world's greatest assassin accepts but wants to finish his lunch first.

THAT is Bond. That is 007.

Forget Bourne et al.

Deliver us a Bond movie we all want. QoS was not a Bond movie. It was a movie with a character called James Bond in it. There is a massive difference.

I believe that for every For Your Eyes Only (a less outlandish 007) we still want our fantasy like The Spy Who Loved Me.

The Spy Who Loved Me is my favourite Bond movie for the two signature scenes which when you see you KNOW it can only be a Bond movie:

1. The legendary ski jump off the cliff to certain death only to sprout a Union Jack parachute
2. The beautiful Lotus Espirit which when being chased by a nasty helicopter drives off a jetty into the Med, and transforms into a submarine... with guided missiles, of course.

We need the style, sophistication and smart arse moments that make Bond, Bond.

"Red wine with fish?"

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

I am surprised you are even paying attention to this film Hudson - given you hate the previous two, not sure what this movie could bring to interest you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

This looks amazing. I thought Quantum Of Solace was great, too, but nowhere near the same quality as Casino Royale. My theory is that taken as a trilogy, these movies will chart Bond from his most cold-hearted and brutal, through to when he learns to come to terms with his job and become the more light-hearted character of the earlier films (whilst still keeping the violence of the character that I think has only been present in Dr. No, From Russia With Love and License To Kill before Casino Royale arrived).

Never understood the almost universal hatred of Quantum Of Solaces. It's not the greatest Bond movie, but at least it wasn't a Roger Moore Bond movie (I could never stand that most cheesy of takes on the character). Skyfall so far looks to be the most pure fun Bond movie since Tomorrow Never Dies, though. Looks like it'll be amazing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b

From Russia With Love is pretty brutal, too. And Live and Let Die rips off elements off the blaxploitation genre, Moonraker takes off Star Wars and Licence to Kill is heavily influenced by the likes of Death Wish. So, no, Bond has always been influenced by other genres, both thematically and visually.

But this is Private Hudson, pub bore of the Bond films - what would he be doing if not droning on like he's the only person who knows what a Bond film is?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson

As I have said before...

James Bond has been around for 50 years. Bond should never try and copy anyone, whether that is Bourne or whoever. Indeed Bond used to be the trendsetter (Without Live and Let Die you don't get Smokey and the Bandit and Cannonball Run... hmmn, perhaps not a great example!!!) and created a style and world which basically invented a new spy genre, not the hard, gritty The Spy Who Came in From The Cold type, but rather one where our hero can unzip his frogman outfit to reveal a tuxedo. One where our hero has incredible gadgets built by the geniuses at Q branch to get him out of a sticky situation. One where our hero, after being challenged to a duel by the world's greatest assassin accepts but wants to finish his lunch first.

THAT is Bond. That is 007.

Forget Bourne et al.

Deliver us a Bond movie we all want. QoS was not a Bond movie. It was a movie with a character called James Bond in it. There is a massive difference.

I believe that for every For Your Eyes Only (a less outlandish 007) we still want our fantasy like The Spy Who Loved Me.

The Spy Who Loved Me is my favourite Bond movie for the two signature scenes which when you see you KNOW it can only be a Bond movie:

1. The legendary ski jump off the cliff to certain death only to sprout a Union Jack parachute
2. The beautiful Lotus Espirit which when being chased by a nasty helicopter drives off a jetty into the Med, and transforms into a submarine... with guided missiles, of course.

We need the style, sophistication and smart arse moments that make Bond, Bond.

"Red wine with fish?"

100% agree with all this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson
Bond is a pantomime for the family. Please never turn it into something it is not.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson
Bond is a pantomime for the family. Please never turn it into something it is not.

No... Roger Moore turned him into a pantomime for the family. Bond is really more like how Sean Connery's early films and the last two films have portrayed him. I enjoyed Pierce Brosnan's take on the character, too (well... his first two movies), but those few Connery/Craig films are closest to the source material. They should have stopped turning it into something it's not in the 70's... now he's back on form.