Here's the section of the interview concerning the 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.
In the past an actor would shoot the gun barrel sequence and it would be reused three or four times, but it’s been redone again for this film after Quantum Of Solace. Why is that?
BARBARA: It’s fun to do! We decided we wanted to do it again, Daniel wanted to do it and we all thought it was a good idea.
POST CONTAINS SPOILER:
Haha I knew it! The moment those guys said: "the reason it is places where it is placed will become clear, because there's a good reason for that". I thought it must be so that the gunbarrel can blend out with that 50 year anniversary logo! (As I stated above twice)
Apparently the Gunbarrel was shown on these video porjector things at the Skyfall premiere after-party, its broken up into the seperate columns but you get a basic idea of the design (if this is infact the design they used in the film)
EDIT: For some reason the spoiler tag wasnt working. but seeing as it is only a link Im assuming its ok I post it without the tag and just attach a warning:
Here's the section of the interview concerning the 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.
In the past an actor would shoot the gun barrel sequence and it would be reused three or four times, but it’s been redone again for this film after Quantum Of Solace. Why is that?
BARBARA: It’s fun to do! We decided we wanted to do it again, Daniel wanted to do it and we all thought it was a good idea.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,746Chief of Staff
If you think that is the REAL REASON the gunbarrel is where it is....
It's where it is for a REASON....not just to look nice....there will be a lot of people kicking themselves when they finally see this movie...the reason is SO obvious...and you've ALL missed it
I've not confirmed where or if the gunbarrel is used.
I also didn't say the blog was crap etc, I just said I hadn't heard of it.
You're views are seeming to blinkered as you are so stuck in your ways on your opinion. Previously there's been no consideration or if and maybes, it's simply 'if its not at the start ill be really annoyed' etc.
He is entitled to those "blinkered" views. I share them. Now, I might not express them in the same way, but I agree with him for the most part that the gunbarrel sequence should be at the start. I know you haven't confirmed where it is going to be used, but it's pretty much the world's worst kept secret now.
It really shouldn't make much difference. It's where it is, like sir miles has said repeatedly, for a reason.
Be that as it may, the only way I'm going to eat humble pie over this is if it is indeed used at the very beginning of the film. I have a feeling I don't need to start searching for a recipe for humble pie yet.
That's funny, changing the fanfare slightly is something I expect by now, and when it doesn't get changed too much it's a tiny little pleasant surprise.
It is to be expected yes, but in my view, it's unfortunate that the original unadulterated version with the signature guitar twang isn't used. I think that in addition to the gunbarrel sequence being always at the start, the fanfare is also something that should never change.
8-) oh my god, it's a f@cking gunbarrel sequence!
Before you moan, watch the movie and if you don't like it, deal with it or dry your wet pants here but I can't see much sense what you are doing in a spoiler-free thread.
And I always thought, that I am the troublemaker here 8-)
DAF and DAD both had a gunbarrel sequence and both movies sucked in the opinion of most fans, so what does the presence of the mentioned sequence say about the quality of a Bond movie?
Diamonds are Forever is not a bad film. Die Another Day, however ....
I don't think that the gunbarrel makes or breaks a film. However, I think a film is worse off for not having a gunbarrel where it should be - at the start. Casino Royale, for example, is not a bad film, but to my mind, it would've been better if it had a traditional gunbarrel sequence right at the very start of the movie rather than at the end of the pre-title sequence, never mind the fact that there was a reason why it was placed where it is.
I agree. I think TLD was the last truly genuine gunbarrel sequence, meaning one that was classic, started the movie and had a cracking John Barry score.
LTK was ruined by a bad fanfare.
GE wasn't bad, just a bit electro.
TND and TWINE were spoiled by bad fanfares.
DAD had a hint of getting the fanfare right but then threw in the CGI bullet.
CR was a unique experiment to complement an origin story.
QoS was horrendous. Tacked on at the end, too fast and forgettable.
SF... We'll see.
I agree. -{
If there's anything the producers should've learnt after Die Another Day, it's to not mess with tradition for the sake of change "just because they can".
"Watch the birdie, you bastard!"
Mr MartiniThat nice house in the sky.Posts: 2,707MI6 Agent
If you think that is the REAL REASON the gunbarrel is where it is....
It's where it is for a REASON....not just to look nice....there will be a lot of people kicking themselves when they finally see this movie...the reason is SO obvious...and you've ALL missed it
Saying this makes me think that by telling us why the gun barrel is at the end may spoil something that happens in the movie. Just my guess. If it's true, I'd rather not know why it's at the end. Unless it's Bond posing for his new id badge to get into MI6.
Some people would complain even if you hang them with a new rope
Okay. In an attempt to tackle the accusations of being blinkered and biased in my views, I’ll attempt to outline my reasons for holding the gunbarrel placement in such high esteem – without resorting to profanity or abuse.
Since I started watching James Bond films 25 years ago, a key thing that separated them from other films of a similar ilk was the trademark opening.
The white dots, the brassy fanfare, the way it led brilliantly into a PTS (usually, but not exclusively, detached from the main plot).
Now, the movies in themselves are unique, of course, given the characters, gadgets and vehicles etc, and I love them for this reason too.
That is why I won’t disavow Skyfall for a poor gunbarrel placement.
However, EON is in possession of a world famous trademark, which is a celebrated and recognised way of opening a Bond movie.
To abuse this for whatever reason is, and I stress here this in my opinion, wrong.
The gunbarrel gets you excited that you are not watching just any old film, but that you are watching a Bond film and, for that 10 seconds or so, anything is possible. Other films can open with tense music and nice camera angles but Bond has this wonderful trademark and it seems stupid not to use it, especially for the 50th anniversary and especially given the film’s promotion material relied heavily on it.
We’re told by people on here, and other fora, that all will become clear when we see the film – and I’m fully prepared for that.
If it makes sense, then I’ll admit it. If it doesn’t, I’ll say so.
However, there’s too many contradictory statements out there from producers, directors and those who have already seen the film, as to why the sequence is placed where it is.
I know the natural response to this post will be, ‘just see the f**king film and shut up’, which is fair enough.
I just wanted to get my point across in a way that wasn’t aggressive or as part of a riposte.
However, there’s too many contradictory statements out there from producers, directors and those who have already seen the film, as to why the sequence is placed where it is.
There are inconsistancies in 'the reason' of where the gunbarrel is where it is, because EoN don't want to let too much cat out of the bag yet, and those who have seen it aren't supposed to blab about it either.
All this adds even more weight to the arguement to, how did you put it.....
If you think that is the REAL REASON the gunbarrel is where it is....
It's where it is for a REASON....not just to look nice....there will be a lot of people kicking themselves when they finally see this movie...the reason is SO obvious...and you've ALL missed it
Damn and here I was thinking I had figured it all out )
But my guess about the logo was right though! - We'll just have to wait and see why else it's placed there then!!
God you guys must be loving this teasing right now ! )
If you think that is the REAL REASON the gunbarrel is where it is....
It's where it is for a REASON....not just to look nice....there will be a lot of people kicking themselves when they finally see this movie...the reason is SO obvious...and you've ALL missed it
Damn and here I was thinking I had figured it all out )
But my guess about the logo was right though! - We'll just have to wait and see why else it's placed there then!!
God you guys must be loving this teasing right now ! )
Was your theory that the gunbarrel merged into the 50th Anniversary logo ? I'm pretty sure it doesn't do that....
Yep...a much more obvious reason...some of you are trying to be WAY too clever )
Enjoying the teasing ? Not really...it would be more fun to tell you all where and why...but I don't wish to spoil the movie...if you can stay away from spoilers....I would suggest you do so -{
It's fit in the end of the movie very good! I of course hope the next movie will open with the gunbarrel. But the reason for it being in the end is good. Not like QoS.
A better gunbarrel by DC compared to QoS. Kind of understand why it is where it is but probably 75% convinced tho'. Didn't necessarily have to be where it was I think as we have setablished the reason for the gun barrell in CR which I thought was much better constructed anc convincing.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Slightly disappointed about the gunbarrel placement; I'm a bit of a stubborn purist that way Not going to affect my enjoyment of the film, but I'd be lying if I said it wasn't mildy annoying.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Okay, I take on board all opinions regarding the iconic gun barrel sequence
and I strongly believe that it should be at the beginning of each film. It is a
brand identifier of a GREAT brand. As important as the big M of McDonalds or
the red can of coca cola. AND I will never really understand why the Bond producers
decided to f@@k about with it from LTK onwards. BUT, and this is a big BUT,
Skyfall works brilliantly as it is and stands out as one of the best Bond films ever
and I've had a ball today watching it irrespective of the placement of the gunbarrel
sequence. Go and enjoy it. You won't be disappointed...
The gunbarrel is looming large in the publicity poster, referencing its original design (and it's elsewhere, too; e.g. on Adele's website, for the title song). Before reading this thread I was taking this as a positive sign that the gunbarrel sequence would be back with a vengeance in the movie itself - in its rightful place at the beginning of the film. It would make sense for it to be there again now, as the 'adjustments' to the Bond mythos associated with the Craig reboot/Vesper saga were formally completed at the end of QoS and the equilibrium restored. Call me a traditionalist, but I'll be disappointed if in 'Skyfall' we don't get the gunbarrel sequence back where it properly belongs - at the start. Because if we don't, this time, when it makes thematic sense to do so (i.e. in recognition of a completed transitioning to a 'readjusted' anniversary Bond), there'll be no particular thematic pretext for ever putting it back there subsequently. If you see what I mean.
I've seen 'Skyfall' now and accept that the 'adjustment' to which I referred has taken three movies to complete fully, not just two.
Critics and material I don't need. I haven't changed my act in 53 years.
I've reserved judgment on the gunbarrel until seeing the film. I understand that the gunbarrel is important to be at the beginning to some people where as other people aren't totally fussed. I'm a gunbarrel at the start man and after watching Skyfall, I still see no reason why it wasn't at the beginning. The excuse from the director was he couldn't see it working with the opening shot. I say "rubbish." They could have easily faded the gunbarrel to black (like FRWL) and it would have worked perfectly. I felt like it was stuck on the end just to be there. The theme was half way through before we saw the white dots, and we didn't get those powerful BADAM notes.
However, the gunbarrel itself was good. I liked the design and much prefer the pace the Craig walked. Even liked his stance. We'll have to see where they go from here in relation to the films. I for one can do without another becoming Bond as I thought SKYFALL did it good enough. So next time gunbarrel where it belongs please.
I've reserved judgment on the gunbarrel until seeing the film. I understand that the gunbarrel is important to be at the beginning to some people where as other people aren't totally fussed. I'm a gunbarrel at the start man and after watching Skyfall, I still see no reason why it wasn't at the beginning. The excuse from the director was he couldn't see it working with the opening shot. I say "rubbish." They could have easily faded the gunbarrel to black (like FRWL) and it would have worked perfectly. I felt like it was stuck on the end just to be there. The theme was half way through before we saw the white dots, and we didn't get those powerful BADAM notes.
However, the gunbarrel itself was good. I liked the design and much prefer the pace the Craig walked. Even liked his stance. We'll have to see where they go from here in relation to the films. I for one can do without another becoming Bond as I thought SKYFALL did it good enough. So next time gunbarrel where it belongs please.
I agree with you on everything there, apart from the design, which I didn't like either. I now know why everyone said it would make sense when we saw the film, and it did. Or at least I think it can be interpreted that way, as it isn't blatant.
In my opinion, the GB could have opened the film a la FRWL or GF, as you say.
At the end, I completely agree, the music seemed disassociated with the GB and it did have that tacked on feeling again.
But there was a reason for it being there, I agree there too.
So, no more excuses left for Bond 24 now. Everything suggests it will be at the start.
I'm going again on Sunday, so I'll comment more after a second viewing.
The film as a whole is brilliant, though. I can say that confidently.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,746Chief of Staff
I didn't feel it had to be there at all. After the last line it could have easily gone into the "James Bond Will Return" with the 50th anniversary logo, still playing out the bond theme. I get the reasoning, but just didn't think it was necessary. In no way did it spoil the film though.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,746Chief of Staff
I didn't feel it had to be there at all. After the last line it could have easily gone into the "James Bond Will Return" with the 50th anniversary logo, still playing out the bond theme. I get the reasoning, but just didn't think it was necessary. In no way did it spoil the film though.
I guess that is where we differ....for me...the gunbarrel HAD to be where they placed it...it wouldn't have made sense to place it anywhere else and it tied it all up....perfectly...each to their own though... -{
This was meant to be a traditional Bond movie, or at least that is how Sam Mendes described it which is true. Skyfall was fantastic and had all the elements of a traditional Bond movie... apart from the gunbarrel! I absolutley agree with there being no reason why it could not be at the start. Im one of the people Im afraid that has to have the gunbarrel at the start otherwise it doesnt feel like a Bond movie. Now I accept why it was placed in different postitions for CR and QoS and it kind of made sense for those films but it should have been here at the start for this one and with big loud brassy horns and guitar music to accompany it. A nice retro black and white look too like on the poster? shame. Hopefully for Bond 24 though.
scaramanga1The English RivieraPosts: 845Chief of Staff
Alas I didn't see the gun barrel sequence properly last night as a couple of rows stood up just as the music started! Yes stood up right in front of me! Bloody Heathens! Anyway I will be able to comment after I watch the film again. which unfortunately isn't until Wednesday.
IMO i think it could of worked at the start (Ive seen Skyfall now), but it definately worked where it was, although I did not like the new design much, ive seen better fan-art, although its better than Quantum, I didnt like the way it just faded out either. His stance was odd aswell, but i'm sure it'll grow on me, the others were right, it made perfect sense! I'm so glad I waited it out and it didnt dissapoint!
Alas I didn't see the gun barrel sequence properly last night as a couple of rows stood up just as the music started! Yes stood up right in front of me! Bloody Heathens! Anyway I will be able to comment after I watch the film again. which unfortunately isn't until Wednesday.
Same thing happened with me - although no-one blocked my view enough for me to fully miss it. Why do people leave when the gunbarrel starts? Film hasn't ended yet!
Anyway... My thoughts on the gunbarrel placing:
I personally would have had it at the start, but I can certainly see why it was placed where it was. I was going to add more, but I don't want to spoil anything, and I have no idea how to add spoiler tags (yes I've been here for almost 10 years and I don't know how to add spoiler tags ) )
But yes, I can see both sides of the perspective with this now. And I would think that bond 24 will almost certainly have it at the beginning now...
I feel I should back up what I said about how the gunbarrel would of worked at the start.
After the MGM/Columbia logos, the dots appear across the screen, no music, then all we hear are craigs footsteps as he walks swiftly along with the gunbarrel, after he turns and shoots we hear those two opening notes of the films score exactly the same way as the movie starts in reality, then the blood flows quickly down and the barrel either cuts straight to the opening show or there is a zoom into the barrel then we cut sharply to the first shot.
I understand why it was where it was but this is what I would like to of seen now I have seen the film. I may do a fan-edit when the film is released on home media.
To me the sequence was forgettable, as was the design, it wasnt in time with the (for some reason re-used) The Name is Bond, James Bond music from Casino Royale, they should of used 'Breadcrumbs' from the films score. It had no 'pop', I found that Quantums barrel was actually much more effective this way but the scene that precedes the Skyfall barrel makes up for this. I also didn't like the barrel just fades out mid blood-stream.
IMO i think it could of worked at the start (Ive seen Skyfall now), but it definately worked where it was, although I did not like the new design much, ive seen better fan-art, although its better than Quantum, I didnt like the way it just faded out either. His stance was odd aswell, but i'm sure it'll grow on me, the others were right, it made perfect sense! I'm so glad I waited it out and it didnt dissapoint!
Agreed. Also felt stance was odd and odd again in titles sequence.
Comments
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
POST CONTAINS SPOILER:
Haha I knew it!
Well looks like my theory was absolutly correct!
YouTube channel Support my channel on Patreon Twitter Facebook fanpage
Apparently the Gunbarrel was shown on these video porjector things at the Skyfall premiere after-party, its broken up into the seperate columns but you get a basic idea of the design (if this is infact the design they used in the film)
EDIT: For some reason the spoiler tag wasnt working. but seeing as it is only a link Im assuming its ok I post it without the tag and just attach a warning:
MAJOR SPOILER: VIEW AT YOUR OWN PERIL
Believe away my friend, believe away
If you think that is the REAL REASON the gunbarrel is where it is....
It's where it is for a REASON....not just to look nice....there will be a lot of people kicking themselves when they finally see this movie...the reason is SO obvious...and you've ALL missed it
He is entitled to those "blinkered" views. I share them. Now, I might not express them in the same way, but I agree with him for the most part that the gunbarrel sequence should be at the start. I know you haven't confirmed where it is going to be used, but it's pretty much the world's worst kept secret now.
Be that as it may, the only way I'm going to eat humble pie over this is if it is indeed used at the very beginning of the film. I have a feeling I don't need to start searching for a recipe for humble pie yet.
It is to be expected yes, but in my view, it's unfortunate that the original unadulterated version with the signature guitar twang isn't used. I think that in addition to the gunbarrel sequence being always at the start, the fanfare is also something that should never change.
Diamonds are Forever is not a bad film. Die Another Day, however ....
I don't think that the gunbarrel makes or breaks a film. However, I think a film is worse off for not having a gunbarrel where it should be - at the start. Casino Royale, for example, is not a bad film, but to my mind, it would've been better if it had a traditional gunbarrel sequence right at the very start of the movie rather than at the end of the pre-title sequence, never mind the fact that there was a reason why it was placed where it is.
I agree. -{
If there's anything the producers should've learnt after Die Another Day, it's to not mess with tradition for the sake of change "just because they can".
Saying this makes me think that by telling us why the gun barrel is at the end may spoil something that happens in the movie. Just my guess. If it's true, I'd rather not know why it's at the end. Unless it's Bond posing for his new id badge to get into MI6.
Since I started watching James Bond films 25 years ago, a key thing that separated them from other films of a similar ilk was the trademark opening.
The white dots, the brassy fanfare, the way it led brilliantly into a PTS (usually, but not exclusively, detached from the main plot).
Now, the movies in themselves are unique, of course, given the characters, gadgets and vehicles etc, and I love them for this reason too.
That is why I won’t disavow Skyfall for a poor gunbarrel placement.
However, EON is in possession of a world famous trademark, which is a celebrated and recognised way of opening a Bond movie.
To abuse this for whatever reason is, and I stress here this in my opinion, wrong.
The gunbarrel gets you excited that you are not watching just any old film, but that you are watching a Bond film and, for that 10 seconds or so, anything is possible. Other films can open with tense music and nice camera angles but Bond has this wonderful trademark and it seems stupid not to use it, especially for the 50th anniversary and especially given the film’s promotion material relied heavily on it.
We’re told by people on here, and other fora, that all will become clear when we see the film – and I’m fully prepared for that.
If it makes sense, then I’ll admit it. If it doesn’t, I’ll say so.
However, there’s too many contradictory statements out there from producers, directors and those who have already seen the film, as to why the sequence is placed where it is.
I know the natural response to this post will be, ‘just see the f**king film and shut up’, which is fair enough.
I just wanted to get my point across in a way that wasn’t aggressive or as part of a riposte.
Cheers.
There are inconsistancies in 'the reason' of where the gunbarrel is where it is, because EoN don't want to let too much cat out of the bag yet, and those who have seen it aren't supposed to blab about it either.
All this adds even more weight to the arguement to, how did you put it.....
i can understand your views, i just think you should hold judgement until you've seen it now though.
MG -{
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
Damn and here I was thinking I had figured it all out
But my guess about the logo was right though!
God you guys must be loving this teasing right now !
YouTube channel Support my channel on Patreon Twitter Facebook fanpage
But has it got 'poor gunbarrel placement' ? That is the question....but I guess it could just boil down to personal choice....
A much better reasoned post too -{
Was your theory that the gunbarrel merged into the 50th Anniversary logo ? I'm pretty sure it doesn't do that....
Yep...a much more obvious reason...some of you are trying to be WAY too clever
Enjoying the teasing ? Not really...it would be more fun to tell you all where and why...but I don't wish to spoil the movie...if you can stay away from spoilers....I would suggest you do so -{
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
and I strongly believe that it should be at the beginning of each film. It is a
brand identifier of a GREAT brand. As important as the big M of McDonalds or
the red can of coca cola. AND I will never really understand why the Bond producers
decided to f@@k about with it from LTK onwards. BUT, and this is a big BUT,
Skyfall works brilliantly as it is and stands out as one of the best Bond films ever
and I've had a ball today watching it irrespective of the placement of the gunbarrel
sequence. Go and enjoy it. You won't be disappointed...
I've seen 'Skyfall' now and accept that the 'adjustment' to which I referred has taken three movies to complete fully, not just two.
I've reserved judgment on the gunbarrel until seeing the film. I understand that the gunbarrel is important to be at the beginning to some people where as other people aren't totally fussed. I'm a gunbarrel at the start man and after watching Skyfall, I still see no reason why it wasn't at the beginning. The excuse from the director was he couldn't see it working with the opening shot. I say "rubbish." They could have easily faded the gunbarrel to black (like FRWL) and it would have worked perfectly. I felt like it was stuck on the end just to be there. The theme was half way through before we saw the white dots, and we didn't get those powerful BADAM notes.
However, the gunbarrel itself was good. I liked the design and much prefer the pace the Craig walked. Even liked his stance. We'll have to see where they go from here in relation to the films. I for one can do without another becoming Bond as I thought SKYFALL did it good enough. So next time gunbarrel where it belongs please.
I agree with you on everything there, apart from the design, which I didn't like either. I now know why everyone said it would make sense when we saw the film, and it did. Or at least I think it can be interpreted that way, as it isn't blatant.
In my opinion, the GB could have opened the film a la FRWL or GF, as you say.
At the end, I completely agree, the music seemed disassociated with the GB and it did have that tacked on feeling again.
But there was a reason for it being there, I agree there too.
So, no more excuses left for Bond 24 now. Everything suggests it will be at the start.
I'm going again on Sunday, so I'll comment more after a second viewing.
The film as a whole is brilliant, though. I can say that confidently.
I did say that the quote from Mendes was more of a double-bluff than anything else
It HAD to be where it is....no logical reason for it to be anywhere else...and it works there...and it's ridiculously obvious why it is there
I guess that is where we differ....for me...the gunbarrel HAD to be where they placed it...it wouldn't have made sense to place it anywhere else and it tied it all up....perfectly...each to their own though... -{
Same thing happened with me - although no-one blocked my view enough for me to fully miss it. Why do people leave when the gunbarrel starts? Film hasn't ended yet!
Anyway... My thoughts on the gunbarrel placing:
I personally would have had it at the start, but I can certainly see why it was placed where it was. I was going to add more, but I don't want to spoil anything, and I have no idea how to add spoiler tags (yes I've been here for almost 10 years and I don't know how to add spoiler tags
But yes, I can see both sides of the perspective with this now. And I would think that bond 24 will almost certainly have it at the beginning now...
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
After the MGM/Columbia logos, the dots appear across the screen, no music, then all we hear are craigs footsteps as he walks swiftly along with the gunbarrel, after he turns and shoots we hear those two opening notes of the films score exactly the same way as the movie starts in reality, then the blood flows quickly down and the barrel either cuts straight to the opening show or there is a zoom into the barrel then we cut sharply to the first shot.
I understand why it was where it was but this is what I would like to of seen now I have seen the film. I may do a fan-edit when the film is released on home media.
To me the sequence was forgettable, as was the design, it wasnt in time with the (for some reason re-used) The Name is Bond, James Bond music from Casino Royale, they should of used 'Breadcrumbs' from the films score. It had no 'pop', I found that Quantums barrel was actually much more effective this way but the scene that precedes the Skyfall barrel makes up for this. I also didn't like the barrel just fades out mid blood-stream.
Agreed. Also felt stance was odd and odd again in titles sequence.