RE: Skyfall

Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

RE: Skyfall

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Skyfall

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 11:22:00 AM

manwihtheplan

Posts: 100
Joined: 11/9/2012

Barbara Broccoli on Skyfall's gun barrel:

"The gun barrel is at the end of the movie again. Is that the way it�s going to be from now on?

BARBARA: It will vary from film to film. In this film there wasn�t really a place to put it at the beginning. I know that sounds kind of funny, but we looked at putting it at the beginning and we discussed it with Sam, and we just felt it was better suited for this particular film at the end. We also thought it would be a nice way to mark the fiftieth anniversary, by having our 50th anniversary logo up there, just to mark this extraordinary event of fifty years.

So it�s not necessarily going to be at the end in all future Bond films?

BARBARA: No."

http://www.heyuguys.co.uk/2012/10/24/the-heyuguys-interview-skyfall-michael-g-wilson-barbara-broccolli/

Personally I think this is a dumb decision (irrespective of it marking 50 years of the franchise). The gun barrel scene was designed for the start of the films, not the end. I don't think Cubby Broccoli would have approved of this 'change'.

quote:

It will vary from film to film.

I also think changing it from the end then back to the beginning for future films makes it seem messy and inconsistent. They should have left it at the beginning for all the films. Once you start mucking about with it you lose any consistency and it becomes a silly gimmick: "hey, let's stick it at the end! No, let's try the middle!" I can imagine Babs and MG thinking about where to stick it in some clueless kind of way. Perhaps they chose the end at random?

Just my opinion - the producers have their own opinion and they're in charge. But it doesn't mean fans have to respect their 'change'. This is a classic example of changing something that doesn't need changing.

< Message edited by manwihtheplan -- 25/10/2012 11:29:03 AM >

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 31

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 11:32:08 AM

porntrooper

Posts: 2509
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

Barbara Broccoli on Skyfall's gun barrel:

"The gun barrel is at the end of the movie again. Is that the way it�s going to be from now on?

BARBARA: It will vary from film to film. In this film there wasn�t really a place to put it at the beginning. I know that sounds kind of funny, but we looked at putting it at the beginning and we discussed it with Sam, and we just felt it was better suited for this particular film at the end. We also thought it would be a nice way to mark the fiftieth anniversary, by having our 50th anniversary logo up there, just to mark this extraordinary event of fifty years.

So it�s not necessarily going to be at the end in all future Bond films?

BARBARA: No."

http://www.heyuguys.co.uk/2012/10/24/the-heyuguys-interview-skyfall-michael-g-wilson-barbara-broccolli/

Personally I think this is a dumb decision (irrespective of it marking 50 years of the franchise). The gun barrel scene was designed for the start of the films, not the end. I don't think Cubby Broccoli would have approved of this 'change'.

quote:

It will vary from film to film.

I also think changing it from the end then back to the beginning for future films makes it seem messy and inconsistent. They should have left it at the beginning for all the films. Once you start mucking about with it you lose any consistency and it becomes a silly gimmick: "hey, let's stick it at the end! No, let's try the middle!" I can imagine Babs and MG thinking about where to stick it in some clueless kind of way. Perhaps they chose the end at random?

Just my opinion - the producers have their own opinion and they're in charge. But it doesn't mean fans have to respect their 'change'.

But what difference does the gun barrel sequence being at the beginning make to the film? I don't get it.....

I thought the gun barrel sequence worked at the end of QoS, as it felt like the end of the 'Bond Begins' vibe that ran through that and Casino Royale, and it essentially drew a line under his first missions as 007, shaped who he was going forward. So it made sense to have it at the end and say 'Hey, look, it's Bond!'. They were Bond movies through and through, but having it at the end of QoS just felt right. It had no other effect on the quality of the film, having it at the begining would change nothing about that film, for better or worse. I genuinely thought the gun barrel would return to the start of the films from here on, but if the film makers decided it didnt fit right, then so be it. It will not change the film that precedes it in anyway. Why is it such a big issue?

You must have been in tears during the Goldeneye gun barrel, as Eric Serra fucking butchered that.

And are we really going to complain about films in the Bond franchise being 'messy and inconsistent'? Really? C'mon, this in Bond. None of it is consistent!

< Message edited by porntrooper -- 25/10/2012 11:48:37 AM >

_____________________________

"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 #: 32

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 11:41:04 AM

Happy Shrapnel

Posts: 17420
Joined: 19/1/2006
From: Wishing for the Clothes of Heaven

This did make me chuckle today...........

http://www.thestudioexec.com/2012/10/adeles-skyfall-song-blamed-for-traffic.html?spref=tw

_____________________________

In John Le Mesurier's last words........

' Its All Been Rather Lovely '

Happy Trails

(in reply to porntrooper)

Post #: 33

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 11:46:10 AM

manwihtheplan

Posts: 100
Joined: 11/9/2012

quote:

Why is it such a big issue?

Because it was meant to be at the start. What gives B Broccoli the right to put it at the end? Oh, because she inherited the franchise from her father! So that gives her the right to mess around with it. But as I say, it's meant to be at the start. The whole point of the gun barrel sequence is to tell the film going public you're about to watch a James Bond film, you're entering the Bond universe. It sets the tone. Without it you lose the tone. It starts like any other film. Why kill off the unique start to the James Bond films? It's moronic and disrespectful.

Most people won't care because to them Bond films are just another action film that pops up every two to three years. Most people can't even remember all the James Bond film titles! But long term fans do care because it's dismantling the James Bond tradition. If you love James Bond films because they include the distinctive classic opening gun barrel scene, why would you ever think shoving it to the end of the film is a good idea? You wouldn't. It shows Barbara Broccoli's arrogance or disrespect for Bond tradition. But she knows the franchise is a license to print money so she knows she can get away with changing the gun barrel.

< Message edited by manwihtheplan -- 25/10/2012 11:48:05 AM >

(in reply to porntrooper)

Post #: 34

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 12:02:19 PM

manwihtheplan

Posts: 100
Joined: 11/9/2012

What makes it even more ludicrous - the Adele Skyfall video has the gun barrel at the start!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HKoqNJtMTQ

So if the music video promoting Skyfall has the gun barrel at the start, why not the actual film?

Cos we're clueless Bond producers, that's why.

If they're not clueless then they're taking the piss out of the franchise.

< Message edited by manwihtheplan -- 25/10/2012 12:03:15 PM >

(in reply to manwihtheplan)

Post #: 35

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 12:05:33 PM

porntrooper

Posts: 2509
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

quote:

Why is it such a big issue?

Because it was meant to be at the start. What gives B Broccoli the right to put it at the end? Oh, because she inherited the franchise from her father! So that gives her the right to mess around with it. But as I say, it's meant to be at the start. The whole point of the gun barrel sequence is to tell the film going public you're about to watch a James Bond film, you're entering the Bond universe. It sets the tone. Without it you lose the tone. It starts like any other film. Why kill off the unique start to the James Bond films? It's moronic and disrespectful.

Most people won't care because to them Bond films are just another action film that pops up every two to three years. Most people can't even remember all the James Bond film titles! But long term fans do care because it's dismantling the James Bond tradition. If you love James Bond films because they include the distinctive classic opening gun barrel scene, why would you ever think shoving it to the end of the film is a good idea? You wouldn't. It shows Barbara Broccoli's arrogance or disrespect for Bond tradition. But she knows the franchise is a license to print money so she knows she can get away with changing the gun barrel.

I honestly don't know how to respond to this.

"It sets the tone. Without it you loose the tone"

The point of the gun barrel sequence is to set the tone of the film? How? The sequence has no tone, it's the same (minus a few variations here and there) for all films so has no impact on the tone of the rest of each Bond film. The gun barrel at the start of Die Another Day told me nothing about the film I was about to watch, it set no tone whatsoever. I'd say the only gun barrel sequence that really did directly link into the tone of the overall film was the one from Casino Royale, as it was built into the pre-credits sequence.

It's such a random thing to be annoyed by. Would I prefer it at the start? No idea. It makes no difference to me whatsoever. I cant see how it makes a difference to anyone. I cant see how any one could feel it is somehow 'disrespectful', or 'moronic', or 'arrogant'. Tonally it makes no impact, and it has no impact on the quality of the film. Such a strange thing to be aggrieved by.

_____________________________

"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 #: 36

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 12:07:36 PM

Timon

Posts: 14548
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Bristol

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

quote:

Why is it such a big issue?

Because it was meant to be at the start. What gives B Broccoli the right to put it at the end? Oh, because she inherited the franchise from her father! So that gives her the right to mess around with it. But as I say, it's meant to be at the start. The whole point of the gun barrel sequence is to tell the film going public you're about to watch a James Bond film, you're entering the Bond universe. It sets the tone. Without it you lose the tone. It starts like any other film. Why kill off the unique start to the James Bond films? It's moronic and disrespectful.

Most people won't care because to them Bond films are just another action film that pops up every two to three years. Most people can't even remember all the James Bond film titles! But long term fans do care because it's dismantling the James Bond tradition. If you love James Bond films because they include the distinctive classic opening gun barrel scene, why would you ever think shoving it to the end of the film is a good idea? You wouldn't. It shows Barbara Broccoli's arrogance or disrespect for Bond tradition. But she knows the franchise is a license to print money so she knows she can get away with changing the gun barrel.

It works where it works. It worked wonderfully in Casino Royale just as the titles kicked in and at the end of Quantum of Solace. If the director thinks it works better at the end of the film he's been working on for two years, then who am I to disagree with him? Especially when I haven't even seen the film yet.

_____________________________

"I put no stock in religion. By the word 'religion', I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called 'The Will of God'. Holiness is in right action and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves."

Twitter: @timonsingh

(in reply to manwihtheplan)

Post #: 37

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 12:11:16 PM

OPEN YOUR EYES

Posts: 3578
Joined: 5/2/2012
From: RANCHO de la LUNA

I think its more to do with Tradition than anything else,but sometimes you need to break from certain traditions.

Its no different from finding a Artist(Adele) to do a soundtrack/Single for this franchise,only difference is you don't make money out of a intro-scene that you do of selling thousands of Albums.

_____________________________

Lost in the desert

(in reply to porntrooper)

Post #: 38

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 12:12:09 PM

Happy Shrapnel

Posts: 17420
Joined: 19/1/2006
From: Wishing for the Clothes of Heaven

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

quote:

Why is it such a big issue?

Because it was meant to be at the start. What gives B Broccoli the right to put it at the end? Oh, because she inherited the franchise from her father! So that gives her the right to mess around with it. But as I say, it's meant to be at the start. The whole point of the gun barrel sequence is to tell the film going public you're about to watch a James Bond film, you're entering the Bond universe. It sets the tone. Without it you lose the tone. It starts like any other film. Why kill off the unique start to the James Bond films? It's moronic and disrespectful.

Most people won't care because to them Bond films are just another action film that pops up every two to three years. Most people can't even remember all the James Bond film titles! But long term fans do care because it's dismantling the James Bond tradition. If you love James Bond films because they include the distinctive classic opening gun barrel scene, why would you ever think shoving it to the end of the film is a good idea? You wouldn't. It shows Barbara Broccoli's arrogance or disrespect for Bond tradition. But she knows the franchise is a license to print money so she knows she can get away with changing the gun barrel.

This has to be one of the most stupidest things I have ever read.....
Are you saying that GUN BARREL AT THE START = GREAT MOVIE
GUN BARREL AT THE END = BAD MOVIE ?

Also, if you are not a true fan, then you don't care its Bond film, its just another Action movie ?????

EVERYONE knows its a Bond movie !
Bond movies ARE event movies !!!!

_____________________________

In John Le Mesurier's last words........

' Its All Been Rather Lovely '

Happy Trails

(in reply to manwihtheplan)

Post #: 39

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 1:19:12 PM

MonsterCat

Posts: 6393
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire

I don't understand the argument that if you don't have the gun barrel bullshit at the beginning you'll have no idea you're watching a Bond film.

Urm, the lead character is fucking James Bond. How much more of a hint do you need?

_____________________________

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to Happy Shrapnel)

Post #: 40

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 1:22:14 PM

Happy Shrapnel

Posts: 17420
Joined: 19/1/2006
From: Wishing for the Clothes of Heaven

Maybe, people get confused without the gun barrel and think they're watching Dredd 3Deeeeeeeeeeee !

_____________________________

In John Le Mesurier's last words........

' Its All Been Rather Lovely '

Happy Trails

(in reply to MonsterCat)

Post #: 41

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 1:26:28 PM

MonsterCat

Posts: 6393
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

Most people won't care because to them Bond films are just another action film that pops up every two to three years. Most people can't even remember all the James Bond film titles! But long term fans do care because it's dismantling the James Bond tradition. If you love James Bond films because they include the distinctive classic opening gun barrel scene, why would you ever think shoving it to the end of the film is a good idea? You wouldn't. It shows Barbara Broccoli's arrogance or disrespect for Bond tradition. But she knows the franchise is a license to print money so she knows she can get away with changing the gun barrel.

No, most people won't care because they can't be bothered to get hung up on stupid and meaningless crap like this.

_____________________________

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to manwihtheplan)

Post #: 42

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 1:59:25 PM

demoncleaner

Posts: 2176
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Belfast

I don�t know, I�m vaguely disappointed it�s not at the start. That�s �vaguely� disappointed, I wouldn�t say I�m irritated by it. I think manwitheplan is talking about some interference with the aesthetic of Bond and it�s ok to have quibbles with that. I have a friend who bought the re-issued blu-rays last year and will still bitch that his QoS DVD is in a different presentation cover. I had the same thing with the VHS re-issues circa License to Kill. And I remember as a kid being slighly out of joint about the fact he wore a hat in early gun barrell sequences that broke my feeling of continuity (regardless if the hat wearing actually came first). Issues of whether it sets the tone, or needlessly telegraphs this is a Bond film is moot when the simple matter is that the gun barrel is when you start grinning. That�s all. It�s just a �thing� and there�s a certain charm in revisiting that thing. If there�s an equivalent I suppose it�s like putting the logo and crawl at the end of Star Wars, (although in the prequels case it would be good to have an end crawl to explain to the audience what they just fucking paid for). It�s not a substantial or sufficient complaint but after seeing Alan Partridge rage �stop getting Bond wrong!� I like that these quibbles can be aired. Quibbles and blemishes in the Bond aesthetic seem as traditional as the trademarks themselves. Like the final line of Casino Royale maybe it�s good they save the simple grin-inducer for the end.

***TRAILER SPOILER***
It�s interesting Barbara says there wasn�t a place for it. There could be a plot point here. The trailer suggests we see him sniped by a rifle in what looks a lot like the end of the opening pre-credit sequence. Maybe they thought the gun barrell was at odds with that somehow?

Anyway, looking forward to it. This time tomorrow it�ll be well under way for me.

_____________________________

"I know the meaning of life, it doesn't help me a bit."

(in reply to MonsterCat)

Post #: 43

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 2:43:46 PM

porntrooper

Posts: 2509
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: demoncleaner

I don�t know, I�m vaguely disappointed it�s not at the start.� That�s �vaguely� disappointed, I wouldn�t say I�m irritated by it.� I think manwitheplan is talking about some interference with the aesthetic of Bond and it�s ok to have quibbles with that.� I have a friend who bought the re-issued blu-rays last year and will still bitch that his QoS DVD is in a different presentation cover.� I had the same thing with the VHS re-issues circa License to Kill. �And I remember as a kid being slighly out of joint about the fact he wore a hat in early gun barrell sequences that broke my feeling of continuity (regardless if the hat wearing actually came first). �Issues of whether it sets the tone, or needlessly telegraphs this is a Bond film is moot when the simple matter is that the gun barrel is when you start grinning.� That�s all.� It�s just a �thing� and there�s a certain charm in revisiting that thing.� If there�s an equivalent I suppose it�s like putting the logo and crawl at the end of Star Wars, (although in the prequels case it would be good to have an end crawl to explain to the audience what they just fucking paid for).� ��It�s not a substantial or sufficient complaint but after seeing Alan Partridge rage �stop getting Bond wrong!� I like that these quibbles can be aired. Quibbles and blemishes in the Bond aesthetic seem as traditional as the trademarks themselves.� Like the final line of Casino Royale maybe it�s good they save the simple grin-inducer for the end.�

***TRAILER SPOILER***
It�s interesting Barbara says there wasn�t a place for it.� There could be a plot point here.� The trailer suggests we see him sniped by a rifle in what looks a lot like the end of the opening pre-credit sequence.� Maybe they thought the gun barrell was at odds with that somehow?� ��

Anyway, looking forward to it.� This time tomorrow it�ll be well under way for me.

Yea, I suspect the pre-crdit sequence ends and transfers to the credit sequence and title theme when Bond hit's the water. The gun-barrel in Casino Royale acted as a transition between the pre-credit and title sequence, but it traditionally opens the film. I think what BB was getting at in the interview that as they have the 50th Anniversary logo opening the movie, it felt awkward to go from that to gun barrel to pre credits. Feels like a valid aesthetic choice on behalf of the makers. But like you say, it may just have felt awkward with the idea of having the gun barrel sequence prior to another sequence that ends with Bond on the wrong end of a gun barrel. Again, perfectly acceptable, and I'll trust that the actual makers of the film considered it, and made the right choice for their movie. The Bond films have often been at their worst when restricted to the tradition and convention of the series, which is why I loved Casino Royale and QoS. It did away with a number of the traditional elements (Q, Moneypenny, The Bond Theme) but it never felt like I wasnt watching a James Bond movie.

On another note, I dont think the gun barrel sequence could be compared to the Star Wars crawl. The crawl has to be where it is to open the film, as it gives actual story points, it tells us back ground story in the lead up to the film we're watching i.e the kidnap of Senator Palpatine in Episode 3. So the crawl can't go anywhere else but the beginning. Like wise the 'A Long time ago, in a galaxy far, far, away....' can't really go anywhere else as it's a direct lead into the story i.e. 'the following happens in a galaxy far, far away....'. The gun barrel sequence doesn't have any direct lead or link into the story that follows. If anything, it's more of an extended production logo.

_____________________________

"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 demoncleaner)

Post #: 44

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 2:59:17 PM

jobloffski

Posts: 1844
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere

Know what I'd have done (and for all I know, Mendes has)? I'd frame the shot before the trigger is pulled and Bond is hit like the gun barrel sequence, the image being the circle of the telescopic sight, surrounded by black, with the size of Bond and the guy he is fighting matching the size Bond would be in the gun barrel sequence. So it would be a reference to, and reversal of the iconic idea. Normally Bond shoots, and 'blood runs down the screen, the one man, alone, unstoppable, puts himself in the line of fire, looking down the barrel of a gun without fear and such bravado reflects the character, who he is and why he succeeds.. This time, when not on top of his game, and due to the inefficiency of someone else, he takes the bullet. Yay, etc!

The moment being whined about was probably at the end of CR because he wasn't OO7 at the start of the film. It was probably at the end of QOS because he was having a meltdown because of the love'betrayal thing over Vespa, He wan't 'Bond' again until the end. And the new film puts his relevance through the mill by all accounts, so once again, it goes at the end once he has triumphed, and then, character building work finally complete, fully fledged Bond, it goes at the start of the next one?

Whatever. Start, end, Whatever.

_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to porntrooper)

Post #: 45

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 3:21:30 PM

porntrooper

Posts: 2509
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

Know what I'd have done (and for all I know, Mendes has)? I'd frame the shot before the trigger is pulled and Bond is hit like the gun barrel sequence, the image being the circle of the telescopic sight, surrounded by black, with the size of Bond and the guy he is fighting matching the size Bond would be in the gun barrel sequence. So it would be a reference to, and reversal of the iconic idea. Normally Bond shoots, and 'blood runs down the screen, the one man, alone, unstoppable, puts himself in the line of fire, looking down the barrel of a gun without fear and such bravado reflects the character, who he is and why he succeeds.. This time, when not on top of his game, and due to the inefficiency of someone else, he takes the bullet. Yay, etc!

The moment being whined about was probably at the end of CR because he wasn't OO7 at the start of the film. It was probably at the end of QOS because he was having a meltdown because of the love'betrayal thing over Vespa, He wan't 'Bond' again until the end. And the new film puts his relevance through the mill by all accounts, so once again, it goes at the end once he has triumphed, and then, character building work finally complete, fully fledged Bond, it goes at the start of the next one?

Whatever. Start, end, Whatever.

I get where you're coming from there, but I don't expect it to be that way in the final film, although I certainly wouldnt hate it if it was.

The scene in question clearly (based on the trailer, anyway) has camera shots from 'outside' the gunbarrel during the shooting i.e we're seeing the shooter and she has dialogue with a third party (M) in another location, plus we're seeing Bond falling from the train into the water below. Building the classic gunbarrel (albeit, with necessary changes to include the third party and the unexpected ending of Bond taking the bullet) into that sequence would've been too difficult I reckon, maybe even a little showoff-y?

I've always loved how it worked in Casino Royale, and you're right, the gun barrel in the traditional sense doesnt work as Bond wasnt 007, he was only partly on his way to it.
As I said before, Casino Royale and QoS both have a feeling of 'Bond Begins' running through them, so once Bond essentially ends the plot strand of Vespa's betrayal at the end of QoS, he is moving forward to be the Bond we know and love, and it feels like the right place to have that sequence then. It felt right.

It wouldnt have affected anything in the film if they had thrown it up front and used it to transition to that opening shot over the water towards the mountain road chase. Thematically though, it feels right. Like I say, Casino Royale and QoS are the only two Bond films that felt like the gun barrel was doing more than just holding to tradition. It felt like a considered approach to how that could work with the tone and story of the films. Which none of the other movies have, they stick in in for traditions sake. I'm glad the Bond films are moving away from slavish tradition and using the Bond elements in different ways.

Edited for attorcious, lack of sleep inspired spelling....

< Message edited by porntrooper -- 25/10/2012 3:24:02 PM >

_____________________________

"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 jobloffski)

Post #: 46

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 3:45:55 PM

demoncleaner

Posts: 2176
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Belfast

quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper

On another note, I dont think the gun barrel sequence could be compared to the Star Wars crawl. The crawl has to be where it is to open the film, as it gives actual story points, it tells us back ground story in the lead up to the film we're watching i.e the kidnap of Senator Palpatine in Episode 3. So the crawl can't go anywhere else but the beginning. Like wise the 'A Long time ago, in a galaxy far, far, away....' can't really go anywhere else as it's a direct lead into the story i.e. 'the following happens in a galaxy far, far away....'. The gun barrel sequence doesn't have any direct lead or link into the story that follows. If anything, it's more of an extended production logo.

Admittedly Star Wars was a broad comparison

. Other franchises might have their recognisable and recurring grace notes but I couldn't think of another series that has such an out and out trademark stamp at the beginning of their films. Star Wars and Bond. But I do concede it's not the same as the crawl obviously has its purpose beyond the trademark. It's more about tinkering with the look of the opening that might raise an eyebrow, like say the crawl came up in red, or green instead of yellow. The world would end!

_____________________________

"I know the meaning of life, it doesn't help me a bit."

(in reply to porntrooper)

Post #: 47

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 3:52:22 PM

porntrooper

Posts: 2509
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield

Yea, I see what you mean. If the crawl was red instead of yellow there would be outcry, but it has no real positive or negative effect on the film. If it was something that the director genuinly choose to change up to tonally or thematically effect things, then I'd support it no end. I guess it's kinda like the Bat-Signal from The Dark Knight trilogy, it's there on all three films, but it's different in each and reflects the colour palette and, some would argue, the theme of each film. Like I saw, it's one of the reasons I like the approach to the gun barrel in Casino Royale and QoS, it feels a considered approach in line with the overall story and theme. No other Bond films did that, they all just have the same looking gun barrel sequence up front for no other reason thatn tradition, and people like 'manwiththehat' think it should only be upfront because of tradition, and that not slavishly pandering to tradition is somehow insluting and moronic.

_____________________________

"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 demoncleaner)

Post #: 48

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 3:54:43 PM

porntrooper

Posts: 2509
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper

people like 'manwiththehat' think it should only be upfront because of tradition......

Who the fuck is 'manwiththehat'?! 'manwiththeplan'!!

_____________________________

"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 porntrooper)

Post #: 49

RE: Skyfall - 25/10/2012 11:26:06 PM

Deviation

Posts: 26923
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

I personally won't survive the ordeal of having the see the gunbarrel at the end. I'm going to watch it in about 14 hours and I've already written my will. 1% of my belongings are going to the Red Cross.

_____________________________

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 porntrooper)

Post #: 50

RE: Midnight Premiere - 26/10/2012 1:21:08 PM

Dead Mike

Posts: 47
Joined: 7/7/2011

quote:

I realize now that the hope of watching a great traditional Bond flick are gone

By 'traditional' do you mean a 60 year old in a corset 'karate chopping' bad guys? If so, yeah I doubt many studios would put millions behind that in 2012.

Post #: 51

RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 26/10/2012 2:04:19 PM

manwihtheplan

Posts: 100
Joined: 11/9/2012

quote:

Saw the film yesterday...major major disappointment in my opinion. I realize now that the hope of watching a great traditional Bond flick are gone. There are those who love the change of Bond with Craig...the grittier more realistic approach...and there are those like me that love Bond the way it used to be. I just think this film is dull and takes Bond in the wrong direction. It has good moments but will not be remembered. Sad sad sad.

I was thinking about the modern era Craig Bond films yesterday and it hit me what is wrong with them...

There is not much glamour.

When you watch the Craig Bond films all the glamour is stripped down. Craig isn't exactly the type of man most men would like to be like (I mean in a secret agent context) and going the more realistic route tends to negative the fantastical elements of the franchise: world domination, over-the top henchman, gadgets, humour etc. From what I've read Skyfall has the f word? UPDATED - a reviewer has confirmed this on a James Bond website.

I feel the inclusion of the f word is unnecessary. Cubby Broccoli described his Bond franchise as "sadism for the family" but the f word makes it not "sadism for the family." And as for the gun barrel at the end of Skyfall - meh. Babs and MG are basically saying: "screw the old format, we're doing it our way and if some fans don't like it, tough."

Post #: 52

RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 26/10/2012 2:49:50 PM

MonsterCat

Posts: 6393
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

When you watch the Craig Bond films all the glamour is stripped down. Craig isn't exactly the type of man most men would like to be like (I mean in a secret agent context) and going the more realistic route tends to negative the fantastical elements of the franchise: world domination, over-the top henchman, gadgets, humour etc.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: this approach that Craig and the producers have taken with this incarnation of Bond fits in with a post 9/11 world. All that winking to the camera crap that Moore did and all that fantastical stuff might have been all well and good in the 70s and 80s, but it just doesn't cut it anymore today.

Franchises need to progress and mature over the years in order to avoid becoming stagnant. Eon realized this and gave the franchise the kick in the pants that it needed with a more grounded approach and casting Craig in the lead. It always hasn't been successful (Quantum of Solace is awful) but Eon have been pretty smart in how they've presented this incarnation of Bond.

quote:

And as for the gun barrel at the end of Skyfall - meh. Babs and MG are basically saying: "screw the old format, we're doing it our way and if some fans don't like it, tough."

Well, it hasn't hurt the last two film's BO performances, and you can't tell me that Casino Royale and QOS made a metric fuck-ton of cash just from cinema-goers with only a casual interest in Bond.

Any sensible and true Bond fan (Of which I'm sure there are many) would roll with the changes and say: "OK, just as long as its a good movie and the changes are done intelligently, I'm fine with it".

_____________________________

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to manwihtheplan)

Post #: 53

RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 26/10/2012 3:27:10 PM

manwihtheplan

Posts: 100
Joined: 11/9/2012

quote:

Any sensible and true Bond fan (Of which I'm sure there are many) would roll with the changes and say: "OK, just as long as its a good movie and the changes are done intelligently, I'm fine with it".

Review of gun barrel from Skyfall - by a guy that posts on Commander Bond.net:

Satorious

Posted Today, 01:25 PM

I'm sticking by my original assessment about the gun-barrel's placement. Once again we get a very nice opening shot. But once again the gun-barrel is far too brief/quick and tacked on the end. There is no reason the gun-barrel couldn't segue into the opening shot brilliantly. It certainly doesn't build the same level of excitement for me. Oh, plus more of that horrible fast SPOILER REMOVED which I am not a huge fan of! All in all, the gun-barrel is a mild step up from QOS' (the walk is less hurried and the final pose better natural), but to be perfectly frank - it's not really by that much. This aspect was a mild disappointment for me - especially on the 50th Anniversary. Still, did I mention the film was good?

The gun barrel at the end of the film doesn't sound like an intelligent change to me! Most people are sheep and accept what they're given. Why should the Bond franchise be any different.

< Message edited by manwihtheplan -- 26/10/2012 3:29:13 PM >

Post #: 54

RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 26/10/2012 3:32:42 PM

MonsterCat

Posts: 6393
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire

The gun barrel thing is unimportant.

Put your toys back in the pram and get over it.

_____________________________

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to manwihtheplan)

Post #: 55

RE: Where this hype is coming from is a mystery to me. - 26/10/2012 3:44:21 PM

Wild about Wilder

Posts: 1505
Joined: 9/4/2010
From: Hertfordshire

Managed to do a Likely Lads & miss all trailers & mention of the film, & have to say though it was hard it was well worth it fantastic action, beautifull cinematography while still being smart enough to keep your interest.
I was warry of Mr.Mendis when first announced BUT! have to say he didn't put a foot wrong & it just went to show Bourne, Hunt et all just Whose The Daddy!
9/10 Mr.Bond I salute you

& here's to another 50 years.

Post #: 56

RE: Gun Barrel Barney.... - 26/10/2012 5:26:01 PM

Fit Kisto

Posts: 469
Joined: 15/8/2007

Just back. A total home run on this one, easily the best of the Craig era. Along with Sam Mendes, Roger Deakins was a fantastic addition to the creative team, I can't wait to watch a replay that high-rise silhouette sequence and the ending scenes had some standout locations and lighting for the entire Bond series.

Like with Casino Royale The tone was very well judged, and the new additions to the cast proved themselves entirely worthy of the roles they are stepping in to. Bardem added another memorable villain to his roster, his entrance scene was particularly effective The humorous moments in the film went down very well. Thankfully Purvis and Wade managed to avoid slipping in any of their occasional clunkers this time.

One thing lingering on my mind

SLIGHT SPOILERS

Is it possible the role of Kincade played by Albert Finney might have been intended for Sean Connery? It would have fit in with the whole anniversary theme.

_____________________________

There is no Swamp Ape. It was invented for people who can't find the actual world fascinating. Y'know?

Post #: 57

RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 26/10/2012 5:32:12 PM

Deviation

Posts: 26923
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan
I was thinking about the modern era Craig Bond films yesterday and it hit me what is wrong with them...

There is not much glamour.

When you watch the Craig Bond films all the glamour is stripped down. Craig isn't exactly the type of man most men would like to be like (I mean in a secret agent context) and going the more realistic route tends to negative the fantastical elements of the franchise: world domination, over-the top henchman, gadgets, humour etc. From what I've read Skyfall has the f word? UPDATED - a reviewer has confirmed this on a James Bond website.

I feel the inclusion of the f word is unnecessary. Cubby Broccoli described his Bond franchise as "sadism for the family" but the f word makes it not "sadism for the family." And as for the gun barrel at the end of Skyfall - meh. Babs and MG are basically saying: "screw the old format, we're doing it our way and if some fans don't like it, tough."

With all due respect, that is not glamour in the later Connery Bonds, Moore Bonds and the Brosnan Bond (I re-watched Goldeneye recently and that hasn't aged well) and what those Bonds featured were quite a bit of camp and wackiness (YOLT is still the the most wonderfully wacky of them all, Moonraker the one that's just dumb). There is more glamour in Skyfall's Shanghai's and Macua's sequences than anything in Brosnan's and Moore's films, while even giving us a pit of man-hungry komodo dragons.

Oh and you know what you sound like right now? Kyle's mum. "Guys, it's ok to do all the horrific violence you want to do, but say no naughty words".

quote:

There is zero story and it ends up a rather embarrassing thinly disguised DARK KNIGHT-rip off

There actually was a story. It was quite good and one of the most unique ones in the franchise

Oh and yes, because Bond films don't have a habit to rip-off things from other franchises and fashions of the day (Live and Let Die and Moonraker) or themselves, how many times did a satellite prove a danger for mankind or did a third party try and start a war between the UK and USA agaisnt the Soviets?

quote:

... did no-one else enjoy the opening of the film - replacing the gun barrel sequence with bond appearing at the end of the darkened corridor. I thought it was a clever replacement.

Me too, and the opening credits were class.

I loved it btw, best Bond film I've seen since The Living Daylights IMHO, most emotional one since OHMSS and also the best directed, one of the most memorable opening credits and some great moments, a truly fun flamboyant villian in Bardem and the prettiest Bond ever, even considering the earlier Bonds when they were released in their times.

I guess this means Craig has been in more good Bond films than Brosnan has.

< Message edited by Deviation -- 26/10/2012 5:33:51 PM >

_____________________________

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 #: 58

RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 26/10/2012 5:53:19 PM

manwihtheplan

Posts: 100
Joined: 11/9/2012

Deviation wrote:

"Oh and you know what you sound like right now? Kyle's mum. "Guys, it's ok to do all the horrific violence you want to do, but say no naughty words".

Yeah, well, your signature quote isn't exactly charming or clever so you'll have to forgive me for disagreeing with your comments about swearing in Bond films! Sarcasm meant.

(in reply to Deviation)

Post #: 59

RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 26/10/2012 6:03:03 PM

rawlinson