Does the setting of the film affect if you like them?

MilleniumForce

It does for me. The GE setting of Russia makes feel darker, more grim. The SF setting of London I love because I live in London, and it's fun to see Bond in places you know. The OP setting of India, especially in the hotel, feel bright.

But then, films I don't like as much. QoS is set in the dessert, which I don't think is stunning and doesn't offer a lot for Bond to do. And TWINE is partially set in Istanbul, which doesn't appeal to me. Maybe it's because a lot of it is not actually outside in Istanbul.

broadshoulder

MilleniumForce wrote:

It does for me. The GE setting of Russia makes feel darker, more grim. The SF setting of London I love because I live in London, and it's fun to see Bond in places you know. The OP setting of India, especially in the hotel, feel bright.

But then, films I don't like as much. QoS is set in the dessert, which I don't think is stunning and doesn't offer a lot for Bond to do. And TWINE is partially set in Istanbul, which doesn't appeal to me. Maybe it's because a lot of it is not actually outside in Istanbul.

I believe you have QoS wrong. The desert is sublime. The colours, textures etc create an alien landscape. I believe the locations for twine - Istanbul wasnt used but those pumping rigs at the beginning were pure tedium

AlphaOmegaSin

MR has undoubtedly some of the best Locations in Bond History -{

Jarvio

Yes, for me, the locations/setting make a big difference.

I love the jungles in LALD. I love San Francisco in AVTAK. I love Cuba in GE.

MooseWithFleas

If the locations are boring and more importantly not displayed in a visually impressive/fascinating way, then yes it greatly effects my enjoyment.

For instance, LALD has locations of Harlem and New Orleans, not what you would consider exotic locations. However, the way they use Harlem and the character of NYC makes it an interesting locale. In addition, how they use the gator farm and the lousiana bayou makes, along with exploring cultural aspects such as a New Orleans funeral makes it a very fun locale.

TND uses Thailand which could be a great location but doesn't work for me because the look and feel of the film is studio bound. I don't get the feeling that I am immersed in Thailand and it takes me out of the film. So good location, but bad 'setting'

Films like YOLT and MR are examples of Bond using locations at its best. You could criticize the location hopping, but Japan, Rio, Venice are all so beautiful and they shoot the film in a beautiful and interesting way.

broadshoulder

MooseWithFleas wrote:

TND uses Thailand which could be a great location but doesn't work for me because the look and feel of the film is studio bound. I don't get the feeling that I am immersed in Thailand and it takes me out of the film. So good location, but bad 'setting'

.

It was seeing Thailand as a 10 year old which sharpened my appreciation. I had to backpack round it later in life. Can you think of many generic films which feature Thailand?

AlphaOmegaSin

LALD had a brilliant, balanced Mix of Urban, Jungle and Swamp -{

chrisisall

AlphaOmegaSin wrote:

LALD had a brilliant, balanced Mix of Urban, Jungle and Swamp -{

And Jane was another great location for Roger.

AlphaOmegaSin

Yes

Gassy Man

That's a very interesting question. I notice that I tend to like the films better if they are set in Europe or, in the case of the 1960s, Asia. I've liked the films less if they're set in Latin or Central America or Southeast Asia. For some reason, the productions seem to find seedier and less attractive places when they stray outside of Europe. The same seems to go for Asian locations after the beautiful scenery in You Only Live Twice. The stories seem to reflect this, too.

To be fair, though, many of the more contemporary Bond films don't feel like they're strongly set in the locations they claim anyway. More time is spent on sets or in relatively narrow geographic confines that simply suggest the location. Compare this to the early Bonds, such as From Russia with Love, where Istanbul seemed almost as much a character -- you could almost smell the coffee and spices and delight in the architecture. The same general idea goes for Japan in You Only Live Twice and the Alps in On Her Majesty's Secret Service.

Napoleon Plural

Once again I find myself in agreement with Gassy Man. It's partly due to the Fleming source material; he seemed to be more in favour of European locations and you never saw him behind the Iron Curtain (of course) or South Africa or Germany or the Middle East or Australia and still we don't see much of Bond doing that.

You could argue that in days gone a film could immerse itself in the locale and milk it, even if scenes weren't filmed there, I mean Casablanca is filmed on the back lot and nowhere near the actual city, but they knew how to express it.

Take a book like the last Bond novel. Much is set in Africa, and I just don't care for it as a Bond location.

Much of the films used to have a great colour scheme too, you can just conjure it up in your mind's eye. Like GF is black, green, yellow. To have a brunette in that film for instance just wouldn't work imo. Brozzer's films had kind of muted colours though.

O07

Hmm, the best locations I can think of... Jamaica in Dr. No, a real slice of exotic life, especially if you're in dreary 1962 Britain!

Istanbul is another where you can feel the place, the Hagia Sophia scenes are breathtaking.

Thunderball and Nassau.

YOLT and Japan.

OHMSS and the Alps.

LALD Jamaica again.

TSWLM Egypt.

MR Venice/Rio.

FYEO Cortina/Greece.

OP India/East and West Germany.

AVTAK San Francisco.

LTK Miami.

SF Shanghai/Scotland.

So the answer would be yes and no.

superado

As an American, I find scenes filmed in the USA boring, except those in Florida. In the books, however, I enjoy the segments in America because Fleming had a curious eye when he collected material from his travels and as an outsider he picked up on wonderful nuances of American life that became time capsules for us to enjoy.

AlphaOmegaSin

I really do wish that Jamaica does return as a Location. I don't see it appearing in Bond 25, maybe Bond 26?

002

I don't mind any location as long as it makes sense to the storyline. However, I do really enjoy the films set in the Caribbean and the Alps.

Spoff

It can do somewhat, although the Bonds rarely feature a location I am not keen on.

Settings I loved:

DN: Jamaica
FRWL: Istanbul/ Orient Express
GF: all of it )
TB: Caribbean
YOLT: all of Japan
OHMSS: Piz Gloria
DAF: LAs Vegas
LALD: New York/ Louisiana bayou
TMWTGG: Thailand
TSWLM: Sardinia
MR: Venice & Rio
FYEO: Greece
OP: India
AVTAK: Paris & San Francisco
TLD: Gibraltar/ Vienna/ Tangier/ Afghanistan
LTK: Florida Keys
GE: Monte Carlo
TND: Hamburg/ China
TWINE: Bilbao/ London
DAD: Iceland
CR: All of it
QoS: Italy
SF: Istanbul/ London

Settings I did not care for:

DAF: Oil rig thingy
TSWLM: Egypt
GE: Russia
TWINE: Azerbaijan
SF: Supposed Skyfall lodge in Scotland (although Glencoe is lovely).

Spoff

AlphaOmegaSin wrote:

MR has undoubtedly some of the best Locations in Bond History -{

Agree -{

Blackleiter

Gassy Man wrote:

To be fair, though, many of the more contemporary Bond films don't feel like they're strongly set in the locations they claim anyway. More time is spent on sets or in relatively narrow geographic confines that simply suggest the location. Compare this to the early Bonds, such as From Russia with Love, where Istanbul seemed almost as much a character -- you could almost smell the coffee and spices and delight in the architecture. The same general idea goes for Japan in You Only Live Twice and the Alps in On Her Majesty's Secret Service.

I second that. {[]

AlphaOmegaSin

And the Jungle in LALD

chrisisall

Blackleiter wrote:

Gassy Man wrote:

To be fair, though, many of the more contemporary Bond films don't feel like they're strongly set in the locations they claim anyway. More time is spent on sets or in relatively narrow geographic confines that simply suggest the location. Compare this to the early Bonds, such as From Russia with Love, where Istanbul seemed almost as much a character -- you could almost smell the coffee and spices and delight in the architecture. The same general idea goes for Japan in You Only Live Twice and the Alps in On Her Majesty's Secret Service.

I second that. {[]

More "we can create it" than "let's GO there". 8-)

Matt S

The setting can indeed make a difference, but it's how they use the setting in the story that counts. Most of the older Bond films made the locations part of the stories:

DN was about Jamaica
FRWL was about Istanbul
TB was about the Bahamas
YOLT was about Japan
OHMSS was about the Swiss Alps
DAF was about Las Vegas (and they showed off Amsterdam nicely as well)

The Moore films often featured multiple locations, but they were still really important to the stories.
LALD took great advantage of NYC, Louisiana and Jamaica
TMWTGG was about Bond's adventure through different parts of Asia
TSWLM was all about Egypt and the Mediterranean
MR took great advantage of Venice, Rio de Janeiro and outer space
FYEO was less about the locations than the previous Bond films, though Greece was certainly used very well in the story
OP was about India and East Germany
AVTAK made excellent use of Paris and San Francisco

TLD's story was dependent on Afghanistan more than it was on the other locations, but Bratislava, Venice and Tangiers were certainly a big part of the story as well
LTK made great use of Key West, and the story was depended on being set in a place like Mexico

GE made Russia an important part of the story
TND made China an important part of its story, though I found it one of the less successful locations. If they wanted to change the location they could have
TWINE had some of the least interesting locations, and they weren't important to the story. The Thames chase was the best use of a location
DAD made fantastic use of Cuba, but Iceland could have been anywhere that's frozen in the winter. And though Korea was a cool idea, there's nothing to see of it.

I feel like the Daniel Craig Bond films could take place anywhere and still tell the same exact stories. TB made you feel like you were in the Bahamas much more than CR did. Moonraker shows off Venice far more than Casino Royale does. And why Madagascar and Montenegro? They have no importance to the story.

The desert can be great, and it was used to much greater effect in TSWLM than in QoS. The desert in QoS still served a purpose, but it was far less interesting in the way it was used.

Istanbul gave a lot more character to FRWL than it did to SF. The SF opening really could have been in any busy city. And then Bond went to Shanghai and Macau, right? The setting looked cool on the few occasions they showed it, but the location had no bearing on the story. The same story could have been set somewhere completely different. London and the Scottish countryside were used to great effect in SF, though I didn't get the feeling that any of the other locations in Daniel Craig's Bond films mattered. From what we've seen from Spectre, it sounds like the locations will be much more important this time and integrated into the stories. At least it looks that way from the photos I've seen. Grand locations are much more impressive when they matter to the story.

broadshoulder

Matt S wrote:

The setting can indeed make a difference, but it's how they use the setting in the story that counts. Most of the older Bond films made the locations part of the stories:

DN was about Jamaica
FRWL was about Istanbul
TB was about the Bahamas
YOLT was about Japan
OHMSS was about the Swiss Alps
DAF was about Las Vegas (and they showed off Amsterdam nicely as well)

The Moore films often featured multiple locations, but they were still really important to the stories.
LALD took great advantage of NYC, Louisiana and Jamaica
TMWTGG was about Bond's adventure through different parts of Asia
TSWLM was all about Egypt and the Mediterranean
MR took great advantage of Venice, Rio de Janeiro and outer space
FYEO was less about the locations than the previous Bond films, though Greece was certainly used very well in the story
OP was about India and East Germany
AVTAK made excellent use of Paris and San Francisco

TLD's story was dependent on Afghanistan more than it was on the other locations, but Bratislava, Venice and Tangiers were certainly a big part of the story as well
LTK made great use of Key West, and the story was depended on being set in a place like Mexico

GE made Russia an important part of the story
TND made China an important part of its story, though I found it one of the less successful locations. If they wanted to change the location they could have
TWINE had some of the least interesting locations, and they weren't important to the story. The Thames chase was the best use of a location
DAD made fantastic use of Cuba, but Iceland could have been anywhere that's frozen in the winter. And though Korea was a cool idea, there's nothing to see of it.

I feel like the Daniel Craig Bond films could take place anywhere and still tell the same exact stories. TB made you feel like you were in the Bahamas much more than CR did. Moonraker shows off Venice far more than Casino Royale does. And why Madagascar and Montenegro? They have no importance to the story.

The desert can be great, and it was used to much greater effect in TSWLM than in QoS. The desert in QoS still served a purpose, but it was far less interesting in the way it was used.

Istanbul gave a lot more character to FRWL than it did to SF. The SF opening really could have been in any busy city. And then Bond went to Shanghai and Macau, right? The setting looked cool on the few occasions they showed it, but the location had no bearing on the story. The same story could have been set somewhere completely different. London and the Scottish countryside were used to great effect in SF, though I didn't get the feeling that any of the other locations in Daniel Craig's Bond films mattered. From what we've seen from Spectre, it sounds like the locations will be much more important this time and integrated into the stories. At least it looks that way from the photos I've seen. Grand locations are much more impressive when they matter to the story.

Actually I'm going to bring you up to date on the Craig locations

Casino Royale

The Bahamas were well used with the exclusivity at the beach and the gaming tables. Venice made an epic closing finale with that collapsing palazzo and the hunt through the narrow streets with after Gettler. Madagascar was used as they were in the Bahamas and needed somewhere exotic. And Montenegro? Well, if you are filming in Prague and need somewhere more exotic.
Plus all the filming they did outside Prague

Quantum of Solace

This is where it gets confusing. Chile was Bolivia, Panama was Haiti only Siena stayed the same. I like Bolivia. I love those desert scenes. They feel integral to the plot. Wasn't QoS about the use of water in the desert? Plus I think the desert was a useful climax for Greene as doesn't he expire in the desert? Panama is slightly less dangerous then Haiti and Siena. Well, you get the famous Palio racecourse

Skyfall

The first one where Britain is used sparingly. I supposed if you are going to use 'a Hearing' and the National gallery then this is the place to do it. Also the central theme is MI6 exploding and taking out all those people. it draws him back to London. And of course we get the chase on the underground. So disagree with you about London - its integral to the story. Shanghai is a favourite of mine - that grand sweep but they only use one building; and we have the inside of the casino in Macau. But Scotland is far away from London that they can have a gunfight.

So there are locations which are used but not enough ie Haiti,Macau, Montenegro etc. But the big locations add to the story..

Thunderpussy

The only problem with QOS locations are the south American ones all
Look so similar. ( only a minor gripe)

Matt S

broadshoulder wrote:

Skyfall

The first one where Britain is used sparingly. I supposed if you are going to use 'a Hearing' and the National gallery then this is the place to do it. Also the central theme is MI6 exploding and taking out all those people. it draws him back to London. And of course we get the chase on the underground. So disagree with you about London - its integral to the story. Shanghai is a favourite of mine - that grand sweep but they only use one building; and we have the inside of the casino in Macau. But Scotland is far away from London that they can have a gunfight.

So there are locations which are used but not enough ie Haiti,Macau, Montenegro etc. But the big locations add to the story..

I think you misread me on Skyfall. I think Britain was used wonderfully in Skyfall. And I think you meant to say that Skyfall is "the first one where Britain is not used sparingly" since it was indeed used in a large portion of the film and was integral to the story. I still don't feel that way about any of the locations in Craig's other films, especially not with Casino Royale. That film could have taken place anywhere and still told the same exact story.

AlphaOmegaSin

The large use of Britain in SF, is very similar to the MR Novel.

GF has the breathtaking Views of the Swiss Mountains -{

Spoff

AlphaOmegaSin wrote:

GF has the breathtaking Views of the Swiss Mountains 

One of my favourite scenes that is...

AlphaOmegaSin

1+

It's unappreciated.

MilleniumForce

Spoff wrote:

AlphaOmegaSin wrote:

GF has the breathtaking Views of the Swiss Mountains 

One of my favourite scenes that is...

Yes - one of my favourite parts of Goldfinger. The DB5 and Rolls Royce look fantastic driving around the mountains.

Gassy Man

Well, one of the possible reason why European (and perhaps American) locales fare better than others is because of the economic stakes. One could argue that for an Anglo production, it benefits those concerned to make Europe look as attractive as possible as a vacation destination. In countries with less western influence of investment, perhaps not so much. Certainly, John Cleese's idiotic comments about Asians not understanding Bond movies suggests there may be an us-them mentality behind the scenes, and this could include choosing to find the most picturesque places in some areas versus others.

The Red Kind

Definitely makes a difference for me. My favourite locations are;

Italy
Bahamas
UK
Switzerland

Would love to see Bond spend some time in Scandanavia.

broadshoulder

Gassy Man wrote:

Well, one of the possible reason why European (and perhaps American) locales fare better than others is because of the economic stakes. One could argue that for an Anglo production, it benefits those concerned to make Europe look as attractive as possible as a vacation destination. In countries with less western influence of investment, perhaps not so much. Certainly, John Cleese's idiotic comments about Asians not understanding Bond movies suggests there may be an us-them mentality behind the scenes, and this could include choosing to find the most picturesque places in some areas versus others.

Please do not pay attention to Cleese's utterances - the man is a fool.

Also, they are not conventional Hollywood movies. The writers, crew, producers are all based over here and have a different way of looking at things. Hollywood stumps up the money and claws back the cash - but the crew are wholey European