Seperating Bond and Bourne
Pud2002
Posts: 65MI6 Agent
Apologies if this thread is to similar to other threads but i felt i wanted to address this issue alone. It also might contain spoilers so please don't read if thats something you want to avoid.
Most, if not all the reviews i've read of QOS so far have stated that the film at some points really feels more like Bourne than bond. But this is nothing new, it was said about CR too. So im at a loss to why the director/producers choose not keep to some traditional bond elements to seperate the two. I'm all for the darker bond, and do not care much about the loss of Q, Moneypenny and the god awful one liners, but when i walk out the cinema i want to know i've just watched a BOND film. I think the new direction can still be achieved by keeping such things as the gunbarrel at the start of the film, rather than the end. Same goes for the James Bond Theme. If these action scenes are very Bourne like (like the critics say) add a fanfare of bond theme to let the audience know THIS IS BOND! Like i said im all for the new style bond but these unesscesary decisions are costing 007 his identity.
Most, if not all the reviews i've read of QOS so far have stated that the film at some points really feels more like Bourne than bond. But this is nothing new, it was said about CR too. So im at a loss to why the director/producers choose not keep to some traditional bond elements to seperate the two. I'm all for the darker bond, and do not care much about the loss of Q, Moneypenny and the god awful one liners, but when i walk out the cinema i want to know i've just watched a BOND film. I think the new direction can still be achieved by keeping such things as the gunbarrel at the start of the film, rather than the end. Same goes for the James Bond Theme. If these action scenes are very Bourne like (like the critics say) add a fanfare of bond theme to let the audience know THIS IS BOND! Like i said im all for the new style bond but these unesscesary decisions are costing 007 his identity.
Comments
Still, as long as Bond doesn't end up a Manchurian Candidate, with no control over his own destiny, a puppet, an amnesiac, an unwilling pawn in someone else's game - then he's not Bourne.
"I feel there's a huge difference - it's like apples and oranges. Stylistically alone, Bond should never be in the Bourne vein. Bond has a different kind of quality. He can still transport you."
I remember when they were working on the CR script, Purvis and Wade made a comment on the lines of "Bourne is in hell," and who wants to be there? No matter how self-reflecting the Bond character may be, he will never be an angry outsider trying to figure out who and what he is (so people will leave him the heck alone); he will always be fighting for the right side and travelling all over the world in a fun and exotic way so we can all share in the adventure. No Bourne movie can do that.
It might appear like im being really picky, i'm sure i'll love QOS anyway like i did CR, i just miss certain things.
They are different. I can't see similarities to be honest, other than the spy thing. Bond is in control; Bourne isn't. Bond is a willing participant (inasmuch as he's volunteered); Bourne not so willing, at least not now. Bourne doesn't know what's going on; Bond does.
One day we'll look back and laugh
Flemings Golden Gun? remember, starts with Bond as a Manchurian Candidate, with no control over his own destiny, a puppet, an amnesiac, an unwilling pawn in someone else's game, trying to murder M. :v
-Mr Arlington Beech
It feels to me they've tacked it on at the end to appease the fans, just so they can say: "It's there so stop moaning!"
The more I think about it, the more absurd it seems. I know I haven't seen the film yet, but even when I do, I won't see any justification for it being there.
It needs to come after the MGM logo. It announces Bond on a grand, recognisable scale. For the film to start without it, yes, it is just like the opening to any other action movie
Damn. Got to be 20 years since I read that one. Doh 8-)
FRWL: The helicopter attack on Bond owes a massive debt to North By North West.
GF:Richard Vernon's portrayal of Smithers is so similar to the "City Gent" he played in "A Hard Day's Night" (made vey shortly earlier) that it is not difficult to believe that they are in fact the same character.
LALD:"Blaxploitation" is at the peak of its popularity, we get a "Blaxploitation" Bond film. Occult horror is in vogue, we get a Bond film with Occult undertones. Add to that the similarities between the speedboat chase and the one in the previous year's "Puppet on a Chain" then notice that, in the wake of "Dirty Harry" Bond is suddenly using a .44 Magnum & we have the most eclectic Bond film to date.
TMWTGG:Jumps on the Kung Fu bandwagon as enthusiastically as LALD jumped on the "Blaxploitation" one,was intended to display the influence of "Shane" & has a surprisingly large number of factors in common with "The Wicker Man"
MR: Has so many plot elements & locations in common with "Se tutte le donne del mondo" that Imdb goes so far as to describe it as a remake of that film.Also shows the influence of "Star Wars" & "Close Encounters..." & has a cable car sequence which is very similar to the one in "Where Eagles Dare". This would be my nominee for the title of "Most derivative Bond film".
FYEO: Looking to return to a more realistic style,Cubby Broccoli cited "The Guns of Navarone" as his favourite thriller. The infiltration of the monastery certainly has something of both the look & feel of that film.
OP:A Soviet-influenced attempt to detonate nuclear warheads in a Western European NATO member state in order to incite unilateral nuclear disarmament. Same idea was used in the previous year's "Who Dares Wins".
LTK:In the wake of "Rambo" & its imitators we get a maverick Bond on a completely personal mission of revenge.
If the above sounds too negative you may like to consider how many of the types of storytelling cited have subsequently gone out of fashion.
Bond films are still being made. I am strongly confident that they will still be being made when Bourne is merely a footnote in Film History as well.
1. New actor, Daniel Craig
2. Bourne films earned som much more money than Bond films, and then the Bond films begun to be more realistic, unfortunely...
Actually, if you compare Bourne Identity to Die Another Day since they came out in the same year, BI only made 121.5M in the US, while DAD made 160M. It can be argued that the reasons prompting the Bond producers to go for a reboot are stylistic and/or artistic ones, but from a financial point of view, the Bond franchise changing their direction to follow Bourne would be like a Super Bowl winner changing their style to imitate the team that they just beat.
Ok, I did not know that, but the point is that "they" makes Bond more and more like Bourne. That is very, very BAD.
We must hope that NOT everything of the iconic Bond dies out.
Bourne is fine entertainment; highly enjoyable. If they make more, I'll watch more. But he isn't---and will never, never be---James Bond :007)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Personally though, I don't understand the fuss about the Bourne movies - decent action films but I haven't got that excited about them. I have watched The Transporter movies more! (Sorry, is that a bad thing to admit! ;%)
but seriously, nothing beats good old bond. bourne has fallen out with the CIA after movie/book no:3 so he's not an agent anymore.
That´s right. After all he is an american and is absolute not Bond.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM