Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: Poor Plot

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Poor Plot Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Poor Plot - 8/11/2012 10:43:45 PM   
manwihtheplan

 

Posts: 99
Joined: 11/9/2012
I haven't seen the film. I'll stick this in the news section.

And remember, Skyfall... like apple crumble.

(original lyrics for song)

(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 331
RE: Poor Plot - 8/11/2012 10:47:34 PM   
manwihtheplan

 

Posts: 99
Joined: 11/9/2012
Can't seem to post it in the news section.

Anyway, if anyone is interested... the Sun newspaper claims Craig has had enough of playing James Bond and wants to quit but the producers have forced his hand and he has to endure two more films. Oh poor man, must be agony for him. All that money for six months of acting. Tough life.

(in reply to manwihtheplan)
Post #: 332
RE: Poor Plot - 8/11/2012 10:50:58 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27268
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

Can't seem to post it in the news section.

Anyway, if anyone is interested... the Sun newspaper claims Craig has had enough of playing James Bond and wants to quit but the producers have forced his hand and he has to endure two more films. Oh poor man, must be agony for him. All that money for six months of acting. Tough life.


I JUST POSTED IN YOUR THREAD

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to manwihtheplan)
Post #: 333
RE: Poor Plot - 8/11/2012 10:51:26 PM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 7932
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire
If you're going to post to link in order to support your anti-Craig as Bond agenda, make sure it's from a source which is known for its veracity.

The Sun are hardly bastions for truth and honesty in journalism now are they? Mostly everything they report on is projected through their own slightly warped prism.

< Message edited by MonsterCat -- 8/11/2012 10:54:06 PM >


_____________________________

"I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist and a theoretical philosopher. But above all, I am a man, a hopelessly inquisitive man, just like you."

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to manwihtheplan)
Post #: 334
RE: Poor Plot - 8/11/2012 11:11:59 PM   
musht


Posts: 1811
Joined: 21/1/2009
From: Oireland
Don't believe that story for a second, Craig has said on numerous occasions that he loves Bond, he said on Norton he wants to do it for as long as he can, why would he suddenly decide to come out with the "truth" he'd gain nothing from it. Absolute tosh.

_____________________________

"SAVE ME, BARRY!!"

"What the hell are Regionals!?"

"color=#F1F1F1" Spoiler text "/color"

(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 335
RE: Skyfall - 8/11/2012 11:25:03 PM   
ThePopcornpreacher

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 11/10/2012
A perfect blend of narrative and action, Let down by one pun too many!

For the full review visit my blog today!
http://thepopcornpreacher.blogspot.co.uk/

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 336
RE: Skyfall - 9/11/2012 2:16:57 PM   
porntrooper

 

Posts: 2603
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield
Have been reading a few of the reactions from Stateside, and in particular pissing myself at some of the bollocks being thrown about on AICN Talkbalks. They make the crazy talk here seem well reasoned and accurate.

I'm still amazed that people are trying to tie up continuity in Bond films to correctly work all films into a proper chronology of films in Bond's world. I really can't beleive people are complaining that certain films dont fit a chronology. The producers clearly dont worry too much about it, neither do the individual directors. I've always seen the Bond films as just individual films, Bond is the certal character and is the same character in all, none of this 'James Bond is a code name, the same as 007'. Utter rubbish. This was the best chronological order I could find being put forward, but it's riddled with faults to be honest. Thoughts? Is there a real chronological order to the Bond films?

Spoilers.....

Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace are Bond's first ever missions after making 007 status. Following Quantum of Solace we have the Brosnan movies, Goldeneye through to Die Another Day. This is based on the fact that Dench M promotes Bond and continues to be his boss in the Brosnan movies. It ties up the missing missions between QoS and Skyfall. Skyfall follows the Brosnan years and removes Dench M. After Dench M dies and Mallory assumes the role, the remaining Craig movies will take place before the Sean Connery years, as Mallory hands over to his successor who would appear in Dr No, From Russia With Love etc. The Lazenby and Moore Era follows, Bond marries, looses his wife, and then were into the Dalton movies. Essentially meaning License to Kill is the last Bond movie in the current chronological order. As mentioned, the idea being that Craigs remaining years would fill the gap between Mallory M and his successor, and the next Bond, whoever it is, would pick up the order from Dalton. Madness. What do people think? Does this theory hold water, or is it, as I suspect, a load of old bollocks. My opinion is there is no order to Bond. No continuity, only with certain aspects of the characters history and with the movies formula. Each Bond exists with the same character traits and history, is the same character but exisits outside the others seperately. There is no real connection between the Connery Era, Craig Era or Brosnan Era, outside the cute nods to fans. Those nods are for the fans and not really meant as in movie continuity between each series of films..

_____________________________

"I've got an idea for a special infiltration technique. It involves draining a man of his blood and replacing it with Tizer."

(in reply to ThePopcornpreacher)
Post #: 337
RE: Skyfall - 9/11/2012 3:02:40 PM   
Scruffybobby

 

Posts: 4258
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: My House
I think the only continuity you can even attempt to make work would be between each actor's films. Basically Bond is a character that exists out of time and will always do so. Id they're still making the films in 2062 then he'll still be about 35-45 and everything around will exist in the contemporary world. He's a bit like Bart Simpson in that regard

_____________________________

I want to taste you like yogurt.

(in reply to porntrooper)
Post #: 338
RE: Skyfall - 10/11/2012 1:53:22 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010
Skyfall finds the James Bond series in a reflective mood as it turns 50. But not too reflective.

Eon have really pulled out all the stops for Bond's golden anniversary. Starting with the relentless pre-title action sequence. Cars, bikes, a train and a JCB? You’d accuse them of trying too hard if it wasn’t so damn good. The motorbike chase alone, across the same Istanbul rooftops as Taken 2, makes the Liam Neeson actioner look sluggish and unimaginative by comparison. While Daniel Craig nonchalantly adjusting his cuffs after boarding the train in a typically unorthodox manner is pure Bond. It’ll be a while before they top Casino Royale’s freerunning chase though.

But for all the usual globetrotting, exotic locations and Scotland, Skyfall is actually very London-centric for a change, shrewdly capitalising on Olympics year and 007’s own iconic – and iconoclastic - contribution to that triumphant spectacle. And that means a lot of rain. It also means a lot of patriotic iconography: the evocative image of M standing before a row of coffins draped with Union Jacks, bobbies on the beat, the London Underground (there’s a lot of train action in this one – you can’t get more British than trainspotting!) and, amusingly, the recurring motif of the British Bulldog on M’s desk - a tacky, if resilient, knick-knack aimed at tourists. No comment.

Beautifully shot by regular Coen Brothers DP, Roger Deakins, Skyfall is the best-looking Bond film since Freddie Young lensed You Only Live Twice. It’s all silouhettes and shadows. Bond symbolically emerges from the shadows at the start and that silhouette fight in a very Blade Runner-like Shanghai is artily-shot to resemble a Maurice Binder title sequence.

There’s a lot of this sort of thing in Skyfall which subtly acknowledges Bond’s heritage in more satisfying ways than the excessive Die Another Day which looks like a Roger Moore Bond film by comparison. Skyfall is altogether a classier affair. Bond is burnt out and has to fight his way back after being left for dead? It’s Die Another Day without the invisible car! An act of penance by screenwriters Purvis and Wade?

But Skyfall doesn’t pay lip service to the past. It is about the past; how the past shapes and haunts the present. M is forced to “think on her sins,” while Bond confronts his own past for the first time in a refreshingly lo-tech, Scottish Highland-set climax which goes “back in time” to the stories of Conan Doyle and John Buchan which inspired Ian Fleming.

Skyfall doesn’t just homage Bond books and films. It homages everything! From Apocalypse Now to The French Connection, Witness to Harry Potter, Shakespeare to Tennyson in what is the film’s most powerful moment - “Not To Yield” could be the title of the next Bond film. Get Danny Boyle’s agent on t’phone.

“Mommy was very bad.” Given a lot more to do than usual, Judy Dench’s M plays surrogate mother to two warring sons like a regular Queen Lear and ends up in a literal wilderness. Which makes a pleasant change from all those surrogate fathers and sons in American movies.

M is haunted by the past in the formidable form of Javier Bardem’s Raoul Silva. Blond, flamboyant and, it must be said, outrageously camp, Silva is easily the best Bond villain in decades and the first to pose a serious physical threat to Bond since Sean Bean’s Alec Trevelyan in Goldeneye. Like the former 006, Silva is another renegade agent and a shadowy reflection of Bond himself. He IS Bond. He’s Bond gone bad. It’s the battle of the blonds. Which means it’s the battle of the Red Grant clones – Michael G Wilson must be dreaming!

Silva is the first fully rounded, three dimensional Bond villain. Well, as rounded as a Mephistophelean, hi-tech hybrid of Hannibal Lecter and The Joker (with a bit of Keyser Soze and Frank Spencer thrown in) can be - Silva is implausibly omniscient and omnipotent even for a Bond villain. He’s also the first sympathetic Bond villain. Bond and Silva both shed tears; Bond in a poignant echo of OHMSS, while it’s unclear if Silva sheds tears of pain, hurt or both. For he is ultimately a tragic figure, more sinned against than sinning (well, almost), and has every right to be pissed off. As well as being “dodgy foreigners,” Fleming’s villains were always afflicted in some way. And Silva’s affliction is genuinely harrowing as well as the single most horrifying image of the series. In keeping with Fleming, he’s also an arch sadist. “It’s some kind of sadistic game.” Especially when he plays William Tell. Or is that William Burroughs?

In a refreshing bit of villainous downsizing, Silva isn’t the usual megalomaniac out for world domination. No, he’s a very unusual megalomaniac out for revenge! Another nice nod to the books – at the start of Fleming’s The Man With The Golden Gun it’s a brainwashed Bond who tries to assassinate M! And there was me expecting a “Chicken Licken” too. That, in a knowing parody of the traditional Bond plot, Silva was somehow going to con the world into thinking the sky was going to fall as it were. While there is an element of that in Silva’s backstory, his actual plot has more than a whiff of Wikileaks about it which makes Silva… Julian Assange? He’s anything but Anonymous, though. Not with that barnet.

“It’s amazing the panic you can cause with a single computer.” Is it though? Cyberterrorism is THE action movie cliché of the 21st century. We get it – Bond is an analogue hero in a digital world. But it’s something I’d like to see the series get away from. Mission: Impossible had the same McGuffin, M:I 2 had its own “Chimera,” and M:I 3 beat Bond to Shanghai. The superspy world is clearly getting smaller. And more crowded.

The Silva Surfer is given a Shakespearean build-up - unseen, all-powerful, everyone is terrified of him. And his big entrance cheekily echoes Omar Sharif’s in Lawrence of Arabia – the second time Lean’s masterpiece has been invoked this year. Even more cheekily, it also echoes Frank N Furter’s entrance in The Rocky Horror Picture Show! It’s astounding alright…

Silva relishes a none-too-subtle rat analogy – nice. Skyfall is, er, plagued by rats. Silva compares Bond and himself to savage rats; rats infest the new MI6 located in Churchill’s bunker (which looks remarkably like the old MI6 of the Connery films); Q “smells a rat”; and Silva disguises himself as – what else? - PC 101…

In a genuinely electrifying moment which elicits gasps of disbelief, Silva tries to seduce Bond to the dark side. Literally. While caressing his thighs(!), Silva (or is that Silvia?) archly informs Bond through pursed lips that “there’s a first time for everything.” To which a surprisingly metrosexual Bond tartly responds: “What makes you think it’s my first time?” Well, Bond was in the navy. And went to Eton. Plus he wasn’t exactly Mr Inconspicuous at the airport – that black cap and shades combo was a bit Village People, wasn’t it?

Sexually ambiguous villains have been a curiously recurring feature of the last few Bond films. Le Chiffre admired 007’s physique while tenderising his knackers in Casino Royale. Silva challenges everything Bond stands for, including his sexuality, as surely as Le Chiffre threatened his masculinity. Just as Skyfall openly questions Bond’s relevance in a constantly changing world. Skyfall daringly, if not downright subversively, faces up to the very real possibility that after 50 years maybe Bond is irrelevant in the modern world of post-Cold War terrorism, of unseen enemies lurking in the shadows, of wars without frontiers. Even more than Goldeneye did. A relic of the Cold War indeed.

In an obvious nod to You Only Live Twice, Bond “dies” and after a baptism of fire and water is symbolically born again though conspicuously not Bourne again. Skyfall thankfully gets away from the Bourne stylings (or stealings) of Quantum of Solace which have become a bit of a cliché anyway. No, this one has more of the feel of a Christopher Nolan film - that spectacular entrance by yacht to what looks like the set of Inception. Bond even stands sentinel on a rooftop overlooking London like Batman. The hero Britain deserves or the shape of Bonds to come?

“Enjoying death” and looking rough, Bond loses it and it takes him a while to get it back again. Yes, James Bond’s not as good as he used to be. “Did you die? Is there any of the old 007 left?” Now there’s a question. Maybe Silva was behind that CRAIGNOTBOND website too! (Turns out he’s not as Scottish as he used to be either.)

Bond is conspicuously not a superman here. He is vulnerable. Weak. Mortal. This is the flawed Bond of Fleming’s later books when the author knew he was dying. Skyfall is a surprisingly downbeat film, morbid and death-obsessed. This is reflected in Danny Kleinman’s unusually doom-laden title sequence which out-Binders Maurice. Even heavier on the symbolism than usual, literally raining blood, fire, daggers and skulls, it is very Flemingesque. (The melancholy song marks a return to a more traditional Bond style and Adele gives good Shirley Bassey.)

Even more battered-looking than usual, Bond really gets the stuffing knocked out of him in this one – physically, mentally and emotionally. Verbally too. It seems like no time since Craig’s Bond was the new Double-Oh on the block. Now everyone’s queuing up to tell him he’s past it. Especially a very well-cast Ralph Fiennes whose trademark ambiguity is ruthlessly exploited for all it’s worth. Hang on a sec – wasn’t he John Steed? (Not The John Steed, obviously.)

Even Ben Whishaw’s new Q gets in on the act. Bond still has the same spiky relationship with his Quartermaster only now the roles have been reversed. Q is the cocky young upstart while Bond is the crusty one - “You still have spots!” There are a lot of ironic reversals like this – it’s not the villain’s base which gets blown up at the end this time. Q pointedly doesn’t dispense gadgets any more either: “Were you expecting an exploding pen? We don’t really go in for that anymore.” Looks like the gadgets really have their day now we all have them! Although the now charmingly retro gadget-laden Aston Martin makes a welcome comeback. And there’s a great ejector seat gag. Sometimes the old ways (and gadgets) are the best.

Q’s more anorak-wearing computer geek than tweedy boffin now - shoulda called him “IT.” This is all very droll, but it’s bound to have the purists up in arms. Despite the morbid navel-gazing and melancholy tone, Skyfall is more quip-laden than of late. There’s even a Lion King gag! Although Bond’s word association test probably gets the biggest laugh.

After 50 years of glamorous women, exotic locations and the jetsetting life of an international playboy at the taxpayers’ expense, Bond is finally forced to confront the mundane real world with amusing results - “Welcome to rush hour on the tube.” So it is with supremely poetic irony that Bond bursts in and saves a parliamentary committee after it loftily announces how quaint and obsolete he is! Not bad. For a physical wreck. An exemplar of British fortitude, indeed. (Where would the obituary of a secret agent be published exactly?)

Eon has raided the piggy bank for Bond’s birthday bash too. Skyfall is one of the best cast Bond films with a lot more big names than usual – Bardem, Fiennes and, delightfully, Albert Finney who famously turned down Lawrence of Arabia, could well have been Bond himself and looks like Hagrid Pennyworth here. Finney steals the show late in the day along with the best lines.

Naomie Harris’ Eve isn’t the best agent in the field but I’m sure MI6’ll find something else for her to do. I just hope her kick-ass credentials here don’t turn out to be just a sop in the long run. Bond’s other close shave with Eve is like Samson in reverse. In the very next shot, he’s in his tux and making a spectacular/ridiculous entrance to a floating Macau casino silhouetted by fireworks. Bond is very much back!

(Nice to see the return of the exotic pets too. Those komodo dragons were reminiscent of Live and Let Die’s crocodiles. Bond even uses one as a stepping stone!)

“Transition” has been a recurring theme of the last few Bond films and, Hudsucker-style, is Skyfall’s euphemism of choice. M’s “orderly transition” to “retirement,” Hong Kong’s “peaceful transition” when it was handed back to China and Bond’s transition from death to resurrection.

But the biggest transition of all is Daniel Craig’s final transformation into the James Bond we first met back in 1962. Turns out that Skyfall is the stealth conclusion of the “Bond Begins” prequel trilogy after all. Bringing the series full-circle, Skyfall sets up the Connery Bond films even more than Casino Royale did, restoring the reactionary old order of 50 years ago and undoing the progress made since Goldeneye in the process. Why, it’s political correctness gone BACKWARDS! Laptops and cellphones notwithstanding, Dr No could almost be the “next” James Bond film!

So what next? Where does Bond go from here? And where does this leave the series? Can we expect some more traditional Bondage from now on, hollowed-out volcanoes, cat-stroking villains, steel-toothed henchmen and all? As well as the return of Quantum? (Goldfinger ignored SPECTRE too. And what is Quantum but SPECTRE given a paranoid 21st century Bildburg Group makeover?) Whatever happens, Skyfall has set the bar very high indeed and will be a hard act to follow. Sounds like a job for Danny Boyle. He likes a challenge, does our Danny.

Critics (and normal people) have been falling over themselves to hail Skyfall “The best Bond film EVER!” It’s very good, but that might be just a wee bit premature. It’s only been out five minutes. And a backlash is inevitable if it hasn’t started already. My heart actually sank a bit when Academy darling, Sam Mendes, was announced as director. His films are OK but horribly overrated. I’d have preferred Danny Boyle meself, a much more cinematic director. But I hear he was busy at the time. And rumour has it 007 was involved…

But Mendes has done a terrific job. Skyfall might not be the best Bond film ever, but it is an instant classic right up there with Goldfinger, OHMSS and Casino Royale. Skyfall is the most director-driven Bond film and is all the better for it. A new precedent for what has always been a producer-driven franchise which traditionally hires anonymous, journeymen directors; safe pairs of hands who do what they’re told. After 50 years, is Eon finally confident enough to maybe relinquish some of that legendary control to directors like Mendes, Boyle and Nolan? After notoriously turning down Spielberg and Tarantino in the past? I do hope so. Tellingly there’s no self-indulgent Michael G Wilson cameo this time. But was that Mendes lying on the floor at the start – a Hitchcock-style cameo as a dead body?

Mendes also brought his regular composer, Thomas Newman, along for the ride. While indistinguishable from David Arnold’s recent efforts, Newman’s solid score is quite a departure from his trademark ethereal whimsy. I suppose composers get typecast like everyone else and he probably leapt at the chance to do something different. And there are some affectionate John Barry flourishes from the opening frames as well as nods to John Williams and Hans Zimmer. Arnold must have been gutted not to get the 50th anniversary Bond gig, though. Especially after lobbying so hard to get Shirley Bassey the song…

“How safe do you feel?” Skyfall is also the most overtly political Bond film. And, it must be said, the most reactionary. We are expected to cheer when M tells parliament that Bond (ie, MI6) shouldn’t be accountable to us plebs who only pay for all his dry martinis and Aston Martins. Hooray! Er… wait a minute. Sure, Bond’s just a fantasy. But he leaves himself wide open to this sort of criticism when the films insist on flirting with the “real world” like this. Skyfall kinda confirms all the nasty things Paul Greengrass says about Bond which I doubt was Mendes’ intention somehow. Kinda ironic then that Greengrass was at the premier. And that direct reference to the IRA seemed out of place in a Bond film even now. As was the suggestion that sultry but sad Severine was once a child prostitute.

So the most morally murky, complex and multilayered Bond film too. Skyfall really is extraordinary. Along with OHMSS, Licence To Kill, Casino Royale, yes, and the unfairly maligned Quantum of Solace, it is one of the most Flemingesque Bond movies if not THE most Flemingesque. Maybe even more Flemingesque than it intended? He was a bit of an old reactionary too.

A Bond film which is actually about something more than booze, birds and car chases for a change, Skyfall is surprisingly melancholy, poignant, sentimental even, and does to Bond’s psyche what Goldfinger’s laser almost did to his crown jewels. Even after 50 years this is one old dog who keeps learning new tricks. Jason Who?

Bond’s had a good 50th birthday and Skyfall is nothing short of an artistic triumph as well as a critical and commercial smash. Here’s to the next 50 years. 007 reporting for duty indeed. And I bet the gun barrel’s at the start of the next one.

Oh, and anyone who still questions Craig's legitimacy as Bond after this needs more than their critical faculties seeing to.


< Message edited by chris kilby -- 5/2/2013 6:19:35 PM >

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 339
RE: FLIPPIN' GOOD..... - 10/11/2012 3:49:39 PM   
Private Hudson


Posts: 1806
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: BRAINDRAIN

This is about as far away from a Roger Moore Bond film as you can get. Daniel Craig’s thug in a tuxedo is put through the mill once more in Sam Mendes’ stylish and exciting 21st century espionage drama. A brilliant pre credits action sequence and gorgeous looking opening titles give way to a more toned down and character driven narrative which mostly eschews the over the top stunts and humour that we’ve all come to expect. Think from Russia with Love mixed up with The World Is Not Enough and a little bit of The Dark Knight plus other minor (obvious) references. Javier Bardem’s openly gay psycho is a curiously logical creation and his opening monologue (shot in one long take) is beautifully delivered giving the character a bit more humour and depth than you’d normally expect in your average Bond villain - and Judy Dench gives perhaps her best ever performance as M, her fate even more closely aligned with that of Bond than we’ve seen in any other previous film. Daniel Craig seems more at ease with the role now and the whole thing is set up nicely for his next mission. Thankfully he’s signed up for two more movies after this and if they carry on in the same sort of vein, I’d be more than happy to see what happens next. James Bond WILL RETURN.




Yeah and that is not a good thing.

Hopefully they will let Daniel Craig's 007 have a bit more fun in the next one.

The only true Bond moment for me is the bit they showed in the trailer where he leaps onto the train and adjusts his cuffs. That is James Bond.

_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0
Post #: 340
RE: FLIPPIN' GOOD..... - 10/11/2012 4:39:13 PM   
Harry Tuttle


Posts: 7987
Joined: 12/11/2005
From: Sometime in the future.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson


quote:

ORIGINAL: BRAINDRAIN

This is about as far away from a Roger Moore Bond film as you can get. Daniel Craig’s thug in a tuxedo is put through the mill once more in Sam Mendes’ stylish and exciting 21st century espionage drama. A brilliant pre credits action sequence and gorgeous looking opening titles give way to a more toned down and character driven narrative which mostly eschews the over the top stunts and humour that we’ve all come to expect. Think from Russia with Love mixed up with The World Is Not Enough and a little bit of The Dark Knight plus other minor (obvious) references. Javier Bardem’s openly gay psycho is a curiously logical creation and his opening monologue (shot in one long take) is beautifully delivered giving the character a bit more humour and depth than you’d normally expect in your average Bond villain - and Judy Dench gives perhaps her best ever performance as M, her fate even more closely aligned with that of Bond than we’ve seen in any other previous film. Daniel Craig seems more at ease with the role now and the whole thing is set up nicely for his next mission. Thankfully he’s signed up for two more movies after this and if they carry on in the same sort of vein, I’d be more than happy to see what happens next. James Bond WILL RETURN.




Yeah and that is not a good thing.

Hopefully they will let Daniel Craig's 007 have a bit more fun in the next one.

The only true Bond moment for me is the bit they showed in the trailer where he leaps onto the train and adjusts his cuffs. That is James Bond.


Agreed.

It's a great thing.

_____________________________

Acting...Naturaaal

Your knowledge of scientific biological transmogrification is only outmatched by your zest for kung-fu treachery!

Blood Island. So called because it's the exact shape of some blood

(in reply to Private Hudson)
Post #: 341
RE: FLIPPIN' GOOD..... - 10/11/2012 10:52:03 PM   
manwihtheplan

 

Posts: 99
Joined: 11/9/2012
quote:

And I bet the gun barrel’s at the start of the next one.


It's not as if the producers have milked the franchise for close on six hours of running time to get to the point where James Bond is a fully fledged 00 operative.

Oh, well they have, actually.

They've spent three films to get Craig's Bond to end up in the same starting point as in Dr No. What took Cubby Broccoli about ten mins to do has taken Babs and MG six hours and three films to do.

(in reply to Harry Tuttle)
Post #: 342
RE: FLIPPIN' GOOD..... - 10/11/2012 11:37:52 PM   
porntrooper

 

Posts: 2603
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

quote:

And I bet the gun barrel’s at the start of the next one.


It's not as if the producers have milked the franchise for close on six hours of running time to get to the point where James Bond is a fully fledged 00 operative.

Oh, well they have, actually.

They've spent three films to get Craig's Bond to end up in the same starting point as in Dr No. What took Cubby Broccoli about ten mins to do has taken Babs and MG six hours and three films to do.


There have been quite a few comments on this thread that I would consider to be, for want of a better phrase, dumb as fuck. This is right up there with them.

Why, after 23 films are you annoyed that we've been given three films that actually invest some time in telling a story about Bond (even if it is 'Bond Begins') whilst maintaining the traditional 'Bond on a mission' elements of the franchise. We've had 20 films of varying quality that have never really touched on how the character of Bond developed into what we know and love. The last three films do that (kinda - certainly two of them do, I'm not convinced Skyfall is a continuation o the Bond Begins feel from CR and QoS) and they do i with a freshness the franchise hasn't had i years. If it was up to you Bond would still be a cheesy old perv, winking to the camera and blasting off into fucking space. It would be terrible.

_____________________________

"I've got an idea for a special infiltration technique. It involves draining a man of his blood and replacing it with Tizer."

(in reply to manwihtheplan)
Post #: 343
RE: FLIPPIN' GOOD..... - 10/11/2012 11:47:24 PM   
musht


Posts: 1811
Joined: 21/1/2009
From: Oireland

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

quote:

And I bet the gun barrel’s at the start of the next one.


It's not as if the producers have milked the franchise for close on six hours of running time to get to the point where James Bond is a fully fledged 00 operative.

Oh, well they have, actually.

They've spent three films to get Craig's Bond to end up in the same starting point as in Dr No. What took Cubby Broccoli about ten mins to do has taken Babs and MG six hours and three films to do.


You mean the stunt guy will do the gun barrel scene for Craig's next bond film? It took Connery 3 films before he did it, surely it annoys you more that it's not Connery doing it in the first (and arguably best) Bond films

_____________________________

"SAVE ME, BARRY!!"

"What the hell are Regionals!?"

"color=#F1F1F1" Spoiler text "/color"

(in reply to manwihtheplan)
Post #: 344
RE: FLIPPIN' GOOD..... - 11/11/2012 12:40:30 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010
Yeah, it was Connery's stunt "double," Bob Simmons, who did the gun barrel sequence for the first three Bond films. Connery only re-did it for Thunderball cos it was shot in CinemaScope.

(It's Simmons who fights Bond in drag at the start of Thunderball, BTW, useless fact fans.)

< Message edited by chris kilby -- 11/11/2012 2:53:19 AM >

(in reply to musht)
Post #: 345
RE: Great Bond - 11/11/2012 12:47:49 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht


quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: musht


ORIGINAL: Filmfan 2



ALSO, a thing that annoyed me at the time but has been bubbling away and I'm now furious about it. The guy survived cyanide!! But he can't take a knife in the back? I'm sorry but what a cop out, we deserved a proper showdown between Silva and Bond


Depends where the knife goes though - surely Bond would know how to throw a knife so it kills a guy? I know he's been beat up a lot by that point, fallen through the ice etc etc, but I still think Bond had it in him to kill a guy with a short distance knife throw. Plus, the clock's ticking on M's injury. It would have been a bit jarring to have had, say, a big Bond/Silva fight scene in the chapel while M's bleeding out.


I can absolutely believe that Bond would be able to kill someone with a short distance knife throw but I still think it was a cop out. If they could've found a way to make Kincade redundant then I think Bond fighting to keep Silva away from a dying M wold have been much more dramatic, the emotion of the one trying to kill his mother figure and the other trying to protect could have worked really well.


"Sometimes the old ways are best..."

(in reply to musht)
Post #: 346
RE: Skyfall - 11/11/2012 12:59:47 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44


quote:

ORIGINAL: pythonlove

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht


quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson



If you want the Bond of the books, go read the books. The cinematic Bond is far more appealing and interesting. As I have said before, if they go back to the 007 of the books, I believe the franchise will go belly up. The cinematic Bond is laced with more humour, wit and charm.




Well they have gone back to the 007 of the books and they've earned $287million in ten days, and it hasn't even opened in US yet. Take into account the critical acclaim and we're looking at on of the most successful Bond films ever if not THE most successful. So much for your belly up theory.

If you want a "far more appealing and interesting" Bond maybe you should just watch the old Moore films.



You do realize people pay on the way IN to the theatre and not when they leave. And if monetary success is everything then DIE ANOTHER DAY was the best Bond film up until 2002.

People should be allowed to not like this film - or at least, be disappointed that it doesn't feel Bondian enough.

I thought the plot was thin and the action was fairly mundane. For starters...

Three entire films to get Bond back to being himself. Wow. Will we get a proper Bond mission next time? Will he be allowed to move forward and do his job, or will they find more personal problems to torment him?


The week on week drop offs have not been the standard pattern for blockbusters which suggests good word of mouth, but I am sure you are right and everyone came out hating it.

What does Bondian mean? Chessy slightly sexist jokes?

Can someone present to me a list or define what Bondian means. Or are we just talking about Roger Moore films, which is the subtext I always feel is in these discussions?


Pretty sure number 1 on the list would be the gun barrel scene at the BEGINNING of the movie.

I have no problem with people not liking this movie, I do have a problem with people claiming that their image of proper Bond is the right one (particularly when it's fucking Roger Moore) and that any attempt by the studios to deviate from that is sacrilege. I have a problem with people saying "f you want the Bond of the books, go read the books", it's not an argument, it's petulant and immature (I'm aware that wasn't you pythonlove), as I can (and did ) rebuttal "If you want Bond of the Moore films, go watch the Moore films".



One of the funniest things about Alan Partridge is he's the sort of guy who thinks Roger Moore is the best James Bond. The same way he thinks Wings are better than The Beatles...

(in reply to musht)
Post #: 347
RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 11/11/2012 1:12:40 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010
quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

You two know nothing about James Bond films. And it's the same with 90 percent or more of the people paying to see Skyfall and not caring about the gun barrel. If Bond 24 didn't have a gun barrel I doubt 90 percent of people would care. I accept this but it doesn't mean it's right. Eon can do what they like with their franchise, B Broccoli and MG Wilson inherited it from Albert Broccoli so they can do what they like but it doesn't mean some - even if it's a tiny minority of fans - have to like what they're doing with the franchise. I am not paying to see Skyfall at the cinema in protest at the removal of the gun barrel from the start of the films. Plus, I will not pay to see a Craig Bond film because I'm opposed to his casting!




That'll teach 'em.

You planning on giving it a rest any time soon? Or changing the record at least? If I had a gun barrel I know where I'd like to stick it...

(I take that back. Keep up the good work, cos this po-faced, fandamentalist Talifanboy shit is pure comedy gold-fing-GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH...!!!)



< Message edited by chris kilby -- 11/11/2012 1:17:23 AM >

(in reply to manwihtheplan)
Post #: 348
RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 11/11/2012 1:22:46 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper


quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

You two know nothing about James Bond films. And it's the same with 90 percent or more of the people paying to see Skyfall and not caring about the gun barrel. If Bond 24 didn't have a gun barrel I doubt 90 percent of people would care. I accept this but it doesn't mean it's right. Eon can do what they like with their franchise, B Broccoli and MG Wilson inherited it from Albert Broccoli so they can do what they like but it doesn't mean some - even if it's a tiny minority of fans - have to like what they're doing with the franchise. I am not paying to see Skyfall at the cinema in protest at the removal of the gun barrel from the start of the films. Plus, I will not pay to see a Craig Bond film because I'm opposed to his casting!




So, you havent seen Skyfall, and therefore, Bond fan or not, you're in no position to comment on it's quality or otherwise.

I really hope fans of the franchise like yourself never, ever get their way. I hope you never get to see a Bond film the way you want to see them ever again, cos I am 99.99% sure that if the makers of these films pandered to fans such as yourself, we would end up with shit film, after shit film, after shit film. It would run the franchise into the ground faster than any progressive change up to the formula ever would. With Skyfall, Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace the traditional Bond formula is intact, it has been brought up to date with quality film making (arguably, of course), with a level of seriousness and respect that the franchise has been crying out for. The Craig era has been able to deliver everything the franchise needs......action, humour, style, glamour and all the other traditional elements that have come before. I hope as a franchise it stays on this course for many, many years.


There is a historical precedent for this - 1980s Doctor Who.

[PUTS TIN HAT ON. DIVES FOR COVER...]

(in reply to porntrooper)
Post #: 349
RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 11/11/2012 1:28:02 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat


quote:

ORIGINAL: Happy Shrapnel

Who's James Bond ?




He's the one who's all like: "Yeah, baby, yeah!"


I thought he was the one with the bowler hat and the brolly. But then I'm not a "true James Bond fan" so what do I know? Hang on a sec. Is that an angry, torch-wielding mob at the window chanting "Burn the heretic"? Uh-oh. Must dash!

(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 350
RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 11/11/2012 1:28:23 AM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 7932
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire
Po-faced, fandamentalist Talifanboy shit. I like that.

_____________________________

"I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist and a theoretical philosopher. But above all, I am a man, a hopelessly inquisitive man, just like you."

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to chris kilby)
Post #: 351
RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 11/11/2012 1:38:17 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: Magneto

How can the makers of Bond win with some of the pan chokers on here?


Because they are an infinitesimally tiny and insignificant minority of socially maladroit misfits and malcontents? Almost as infinitesimally tiny and insignificant as Monster Cat's dick. Empty vessels and all that...

(That was a question, BTW.)

(in reply to Magneto)
Post #: 352
RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 11/11/2012 1:42:21 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

Po-faced, fandamentalist Talifanboy shit. I like that.


It's sort of a hobby of mine. Actually, it's more my specialist subject. Remind me to show you The Ecology of Fandom over a pint some time...

(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 353
RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 11/11/2012 1:47:19 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: FoximusPrime


quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

And by the way... the gun barrel sequence? Hasn't always been at the start of the movies. It was at the end in Dr. No, for instance. And seeing as how reminding people of the 60's was the clear intention with this movie, it's entirely justified to have it in the end in this one, too. Either way, it still baffles me why there are people who seem to be judging the entire movie on whether that few seconds was placed at the beginning or end.


AND it wasn't even Connery was it? Are there any fans still bitching about that and demanding a new edit with a digitally inserted Connery?


Christ, don't encourage them!

(in reply to FoximusPrime)
Post #: 354
RE: Skyfall - 11/11/2012 1:53:10 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010
quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

James Bond is the one who works for IMF, right?


I thought it was B&Q.

(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 355
RE: Poor Plot - 11/11/2012 2:15:55 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pedro6798

Very disappointing.There were too many unanswered questions in the plot.How did Bond survive the shooting and apparent drowning?


He's Bond. He's been routinely surviving scrapes which would total us mere mortals for 50 years now. The booze, fags and syphilis alone would be fatal. They did for Ian Fleming when he was 56. Apart from the syphilis, obviously.

quote:

What was the villains grudge against Judy Dench?


It was clearly spelled-out during the "Hannibal Lecter" scene.

quote:

How did they blow-up the MI6 HQ? By computer hacking??


Yup. Hacked the building's internal works/heating system, causing a huge gas leak. Someone hitting a light switch did the rest...

quote:

How did the villain escape captivity ?


"It's amazing what you can do with just a computer." Or something like that. In a Bond movie, I mean. I could be wrong, but I think it might have something to do with the willing suspension of disbelief...

quote:

Why did Bond accept a lift on the villain's boat ?


Cos he is one suave fuck. Besides, he accepted the lift from the villain's bird.

quote:

Surely it would have made more sense to follow it secretly to the island?


Not when he knew Silva knew he was coming. And it wouldn't have looked as cool as Bond standing on the deck of that yacht accompanied by what sounded suspiciously like the ghost of John Barry.

quote:

Also near the end after Bond escapes from the frozen lake he appears to be completely dry a few mins later!


No he doesn't.

Next!




< Message edited by chris kilby -- 11/11/2012 1:31:30 PM >
Post #: 356
RE: Poor Plot - 11/11/2012 2:24:07 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: szoni

clear enough but not effective enough, and no way well stressed


Would you have preferred a diagram? Semaphore? Or a megaphone, perhaps...?


(in reply to szoni)
Post #: 357
RE: Poor Plot - 11/11/2012 2:28:08 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

Is this gonna end up like The Dark Knight Rises thread, with people complaining about plot holes that only exist in the minds of people who couldn't be bothered actually watching the movie that's playing in front of them?


You have to ask? They'll be banging on about Bond's dry cleaning bills and travel arrangements next!

(in reply to AxlReznor)
Post #: 358
RE: Poor Plot - 11/11/2012 2:35:38 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Is that the narrative for TDKR now? That if you had a problem with it you were just looking for things to dislike in it?


When that is obviously the case, yes. Same with this movie (even though it's different people, admittedly).
It is possible to come up with legitimate problems with both movies... unfortunately both threads are full of people who didn't even bother watching so come up with things that "don't make sense" when they do when you pay attention. Listen to the script, etc.


"Pay attention, 007."

(in reply to AxlReznor)
Post #: 359
RE: I'm torn... - 11/11/2012 2:38:51 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: mancalledpete

SkyFall made my butt hurt...


Not as much as this thread, surely...
Post #: 360
Page:   <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Poor Plot Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.109