Like no franchise other than, perhaps, “Star Wars,” James Bond is beloved by fans for its nostalgia: the retro kitsch, the elegance, the womanizing, the Cold War crime solving. But in a tiresome effort to modernize 007, they’ve stripped away these distinguishing factors, making the character not all that distinct from Matt Damon’s Jason Bourne, or Liam Neeson in anything, really.
I reckon MI is more appealing to younger movie goers? Bond might feel a tad old fashioned, perhaps?
One possible route to go - a 'tonal' reboot when Bond #7 is cast. Drop the Craig Bond elements, the backstory 'don't go seeing revenge' or 'Blofeld is your relative' type storylines and up the fantastical element. Embrace the absurdity of James Bond. I don't mean go Die Another Day invisible car route (!) but embrace the elements that made Bond such a cultural icon. Charming, playboy type spy with a ruthless licence to kill. Ethan Hunt is not a playboy spy. Bond is. Perhaps that's what we need to see more of in future Bonds. Bond with less gritt, more glamour... and some cool action scenes, of course.
Like no franchise other than, perhaps, “Star Wars,” James Bond is beloved by fans for its nostalgia: the retro kitsch, the elegance, the womanizing, the Cold War crime solving. But in a tiresome effort to modernize 007, they’ve stripped away these distinguishing factors, making the character not all that distinct from Matt Damon’s Jason Bourne, or Liam Neeson in anything, really.
I reckon MI is more appealing to younger movie goers? Bond might feel a tad old fashioned, perhaps?
One possible route to go - a 'tonal' reboot when Bond #7 is cast. Drop the Craig Bond elements, the backstory 'don't go seeing revenge' or 'Blofeld is your relative' type storylines and up the fantastical element. Embrace the absurdity of James Bond. I don't mean go Die Another Day invisible car route (!) but embrace the elements that made Bond such a cultural icon. Charming, playboy type spy with a ruthless licence to kill. Ethan Hunt is not a playboy spy. Bond is. Perhaps that's what we need to see more of in future Bonds. Bond with less gritt, more glamour... and some cool action scenes, of course.
Don't think we need a reboot to do any of that, I hope that at least some of that finds expression in 25. Perhaps not the Playboy element, although the flirting with that very appealing Hotel receptionist in CR could provide a blueprint. It suited Daniel very well.Shame that we never saw that again (possible exception with Fields although that hokey covered in oil shtick undermined it)
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
There's a media website called Digital Forum and one of the reviews praises MI:Fallout and says Bond 25 must up its game. This is just one person's review but if the general consensus (if there is such a thing!) is Bond is less exciting than the current MI films then I feel EON should listen. I don't think they should scrap Bond 25's screenplay and start again - it's too late with the filming beginning at the end of the year - but they can alter some of the action or whatever is needed to keep up with movies like Fallout.
It's ironic that people are praising Fallout as outdoing Bond when virtually every action scene in Fallout has been done in previous Bond movies!
There's a media website called Digital Forum and one of the reviews praises MI:Fallout and says Bond 25 must up its game. This is just one person's review but if the general consensus (if there is such a thing!) is Bond is less exciting than the current MI films then I feel EON should listen. I don't think they should scrap Bond 25's screenplay and start again - it's too late with the filming beginning at the end of the year - but they can alter some of the action or whatever is needed to keep up with movies like Fallout.
It's ironic that people are praising Fallout as outdoing Bond when virtually every action scene in Fallout has been done in previous Bond movies!
The main difference is that the lead actor is actually doing all of those stunts on screen like skydiving, flying a helicopter, jumping across buildings, etc. Which is obviously resonating with audiences unlike Spectre's lukewarm action because Fallout is already being called one of the "best action films ever made". The Bond crew should be glad they're not competing with MI again this year. Dont get me wrong Bond is certainly better then MI and Ethan Hunt, but at the moment MI is doing thrilling action/adventure entertainment better then Bond.
There's a media website called Digital Forum and one of the reviews praises MI:Fallout and says Bond 25 must up its game. This is just one person's review but if the general consensus (if there is such a thing!) is Bond is less exciting than the current MI films then I feel EON should listen. I don't think they should scrap Bond 25's screenplay and start again - it's too late with the filming beginning at the end of the year - but they can alter some of the action or whatever is needed to keep up with movies like Fallout.
It's ironic that people are praising Fallout as outdoing Bond when virtually every action scene in Fallout has been done in previous Bond movies!
I recall Orson Wells in a conversation with Eon at the time of DN saying that they (Eon) have made a new kind of film, and that ultimately others will catch up and do it better. Having seen the MI movie it continues in mining of Bond is quite shamless and bordering on pastiche. They do however do it really well. As a popcorn experience it's pretty faultless. Agree that n some ways (action in particular) Bond does need to up its game. However give me Bond over Hunt anyday.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
From the MI trailers I've seen, it looks like they nicked the idea of a fight in a public restroom from CR.
Personally, I would rather Bond get more down to earth than amping up the wild stunts. More trade craft, hand to hand fights, shoot outs, maybe Bond assassinating a bad guy, a bit more cloak and dagger if you will. There's room for both franchises. The MI films are sort of like James Bond's soulless son amped up on steroids with the volume on 12.
Just back from MI6, and would give it a solid 8 out of 10. The bathroom fight reminded me of True Lies but yes
plenty of nods to Bond, and even Cliffhanger.
On H Cavill, He's definitely in it, ........... but that's about it, no impact and anyone could have played the part.
Honestly, Bond has nothing to get worried about. MI6 has been massively over hyped, If you go simply expecting
a good action movie, you won't be disappointed.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
I don’t think Bond can compete with MI in terms of full throttle action. And I don’t think they should even try! Something akin to FRWL would be a breath of fresh air and wouldn’t require them to try to manufacture spectacle. Daniel Craig at 50 is not equipped to compete with Tom Cruise’s physicality. But he’s a good actor and he gets Bond’s character as Fleming wrote him, so they should exploit those strengths.
Just wondering Zaphod99, you were waiting to see Cavill in MI to see if you thought might be potential Bond7! What did you think?
I agree with TP in as much as he did not have much impact or gravitas. He was however much more convincing in the fisticuffs department. Hitherto I had dismissed him as a pretty boy only. He suggests a kind of Brosnan type Bond to me so depending on whether Pierce was your cup of Darjeeling or not would decide that for you. It would not be the end of the world if he got the part, but nothing to throng the streets about either. Mrs Zaphod did not dig the 'pornstache'
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Going to see it this weekend, think most films are overhyped these days TP, sky fall for example although still enjoyed it, think we all tend to forget it's only a bloody film as my wife says )
Daniel Craig at 50 is not equipped to compete with Tom Cruise’s physicality.
You do know Cruise is 6 years older...? ?:)
DC looks WAY better than Cruise does.
I am aware of that. I agree that Craig looks better than Cruise, but he can’t match Cruise’s ability to perform stunts. That’s not a knock on Craig - Cruise is insane. My point is why try to make a movie that forces you to compete with that? A more stripped down spy thriller and less of an action blockbuster would play to Craig’s (and Bond’s) comparative strengths. As many have remarked, Hunt is a pure cipher. The spectacle is needed because there’s nothing else there. Bond is a much more fleshed out character.
Daniel Craig at 50 is not equipped to compete with Tom Cruise’s physicality.
You do know Cruise is 6 years older...? ?:)
DC looks WAY better than Cruise does.
I am aware of that. I agree that Craig looks better than Cruise, but he can’t match Cruise’s ability to perform stunts. That’s not a knock on Craig - Cruise is insane. My point is why try to make a movie that forces you to compete with that? A more stripped down spy thriller and less of an action blockbuster would play to Craig’s (and Bond’s) comparative strengths. As many have remarked, Hunt is a pure cipher. The spectacle is needed because there’s nothing else there. Bond is a much more fleshed out character.
You are right i feel. The smart move would not be to try and as I have said to 'piddle in the same pool' I'd love a stripped down thriller with genuine tension. Part of the problem is that Craig/Eon have pitched Daniel as 'action Bond' much has been made about his physicality. I'm pretty sure that Daniel is a skillful enough actor to widen the scope and not have to try and out Cruise Cruise. He has 'given at the office ' and bears the scars so to speak. That last injury was pretty serious I think, and I doubt if he wants to do it again. Of course action is an important part of the mix, but I'm sure the right balance can be struck.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Just back from MI6, and would give it a solid 8 out of 10. The bathroom fight reminded me of True Lies but yes
plenty of nods to Bond, and even Cliffhanger.
On H Cavill, He's definitely in it, ........... but that's about it, no impact and anyone could have played the part.
Honestly, Bond has nothing to get worried about. MI6 has been massively over hyped, If you go simply expecting
a good action movie, you won't be disappointed.
As so often in movies, perhaps the deal with MI6 is that the previous film in the series was pretty much ignored critically but audiences (including me) loved it, causing some re-evaluation and the critical pack being determined not to get caught out again. I'm looking forward to the new one as both four and five were very solid action thrillers.
I am aware of that. I agree that Craig looks better than Cruise, but he can’t match Cruise’s ability to perform stunts. That’s not a knock on Craig - Cruise is insane. My point is why try to make a movie that forces you to compete with that? A more stripped down spy thriller and less of an action blockbuster would play to Craig’s (and Bond’s) comparative strengths. As many have remarked, Hunt is a pure cipher. The spectacle is needed because there’s nothing else there. Bond is a much more fleshed out character.
You are right i feel. The smart move would not be to try and as I have said to 'piddle in the same pool' I'd love a stripped down thriller with genuine tension. Part of the problem is that Craig/Eon have pitched Daniel as 'action Bond' much has been made about his physicality. I'm pretty sure that Daniel is a skillful enough actor to widen the scope and not have to try and out Cruise Cruise. He has 'given at the office ' and bears the scars so to speak. That last injury was pretty serious I think, and I doubt if he wants to do it again. Of course action is an important part of the mix, but I'm sure the right balance can be struck.
I agree that Bond shouldn't even try to compete with MI in the action stunt department. I also agree that Bond 25 should be stripped down of massive set pieces for a more FRWL feel. I think it was one of the producers who once said something like "We start out making a film like FRWL but then it turns into Thunderball by the end". So hopefully with B25 they can actually adhere to that from start to finish and not be so concerned with tacked on set pieces even though that's unfortunately part of the expectation now. A recent example where less massive set piece action worked well for Bond was Skyfall. Where besides the PTS and finale the film had relatively small scale action throughout it.
I had a dream that I watched 25 last night... I can't recall any detail except DC was really fat and he had grown his hair long and dyed it dark brown. The film was awful and I felt hatred for DB for making such a terrible Bond and for DC for letting himself go so badly for his last outing )
Seeing Logan Lucky last night, which was a great, fun, watch, may have triggered it... I think it was my first ever Bond dream.
I had a dream that I watched 25 last night... I can't recall any detail except DC was really fat and he had grown his hair long and dyed it dark brown. The film was awful and I felt hatred for DB for making such a terrible Bond and for DC for letting himself go so badly for his last outing )
Seeing Logan Lucky last night, which was a great, fun, watch, may have triggered it... I think it was my first ever Bond dream.
Seek professional help. # quick nurse the screens!
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Saw MI:Fallout last night and all I'll say is that by the finale the lady who was sitting next to me was watching it through her fingers. Hopefully B25 can get a similar reaction out of an audience.
More tradecraft in the Bond films would be great, but the films have rarely gone in that direction. Of course, Fleming used little tradecraft in the books, so I suppose it's a tradition by now.
Saw MI:Fallout last night and all I'll say is that by the finale the lady who was sitting next to me was watching it through her fingers. Hopefully B25 can get a similar reaction out of an audience.
I was doing that with Spectre...…………………..for really different reasons. )
I had a dream that I watched 25 last night... I can't recall any detail except DC was really fat and he had grown his hair long and dyed it dark brown. The film was awful and I felt hatred for DB for making such a terrible Bond and for DC for letting himself go so badly for his last outing )
Seeing Logan Lucky last night, which was a great, fun, watch, may have triggered it... I think it was my first ever Bond dream.
oh I've had a few, mainly featuring myself,BarberaBach, a tubof peanut butter, wetsuits and furry handcuffs ) ;% :v
oh I've had a few, mainly featuring myself,BarberaBach, a tubof peanut butter, wetsuits and furry handcuffs ) ;% :v
Great!... some get Bond girls, peanut butter.... and other unmentionables ......... I get a fat Daniel Craig. I'm clearly doing something very wrong )
Mind you, with the world going the way it is, maybe an obese Bond is the way forward to relate to current generation.... a way to distance him from those other, 'unrealistic' action/spy heroes... Go for it Danny, let us see JB in an XXL suit :007)
Bond has nothing to get worried about. MI6 has been massively over hyped, If you go simply expecting
a good action movie, you won't be disappointed.
Having now seen Fallout, I largely agree with this and would add that Fallout rips hugely from Bond films, and I found that a bit disappointing as I would prefer something different.
The Fallout action scenes, especially at the end, were amazing, but the movie overall, if you have seen Spectre, Skyfall, A View to a Kill, and a few other Bond films, you've already seen Fallout.
I won't give the game away, but there are elements to the plot of Fallout that have been taken directly from Spectre and Skyfall. I'm sure they'll be discussed in this forum soon.
I haven't read that NYT article, but I don't feel I need to because having seen Fallout it's obvious from the article's title it is absolute [expletives].
Comments
https://nypost.com/2018/07/25/why-mission-impossible-kicks-james-bonds-ass/
I reckon MI is more appealing to younger movie goers? Bond might feel a tad old fashioned, perhaps?
One possible route to go - a 'tonal' reboot when Bond #7 is cast. Drop the Craig Bond elements, the backstory 'don't go seeing revenge' or 'Blofeld is your relative' type storylines and up the fantastical element. Embrace the absurdity of James Bond. I don't mean go Die Another Day invisible car route (!) but embrace the elements that made Bond such a cultural icon. Charming, playboy type spy with a ruthless licence to kill. Ethan Hunt is not a playboy spy. Bond is. Perhaps that's what we need to see more of in future Bonds. Bond with less gritt, more glamour... and some cool action scenes, of course.
Don't think we need a reboot to do any of that, I hope that at least some of that finds expression in 25. Perhaps not the Playboy element, although the flirting with that very appealing Hotel receptionist in CR could provide a blueprint. It suited Daniel very well.Shame that we never saw that again (possible exception with Fields although that hokey covered in oil shtick undermined it)
It's ironic that people are praising Fallout as outdoing Bond when virtually every action scene in Fallout has been done in previous Bond movies!
I recall Orson Wells in a conversation with Eon at the time of DN saying that they (Eon) have made a new kind of film, and that ultimately others will catch up and do it better. Having seen the MI movie it continues in mining of Bond is quite shamless and bordering on pastiche. They do however do it really well. As a popcorn experience it's pretty faultless. Agree that n some ways (action in particular) Bond does need to up its game. However give me Bond over Hunt anyday.
Personally, I would rather Bond get more down to earth than amping up the wild stunts. More trade craft, hand to hand fights, shoot outs, maybe Bond assassinating a bad guy, a bit more cloak and dagger if you will. There's room for both franchises. The MI films are sort of like James Bond's soulless son amped up on steroids with the volume on 12.
plenty of nods to Bond, and even Cliffhanger.
On H Cavill, He's definitely in it, ........... but that's about it, no impact and anyone could have played the part.
Honestly, Bond has nothing to get worried about. MI6 has been massively over hyped, If you go simply expecting
a good action movie, you won't be disappointed.
I agree with TP in as much as he did not have much impact or gravitas. He was however much more convincing in the fisticuffs department. Hitherto I had dismissed him as a pretty boy only. He suggests a kind of Brosnan type Bond to me so depending on whether Pierce was your cup of Darjeeling or not would decide that for you. It would not be the end of the world if he got the part, but nothing to throng the streets about either. Mrs Zaphod did not dig the 'pornstache'
My life !
You do know Cruise is 6 years older...? ?:)
DC looks WAY better than Cruise does.
I am aware of that. I agree that Craig looks better than Cruise, but he can’t match Cruise’s ability to perform stunts. That’s not a knock on Craig - Cruise is insane. My point is why try to make a movie that forces you to compete with that? A more stripped down spy thriller and less of an action blockbuster would play to Craig’s (and Bond’s) comparative strengths. As many have remarked, Hunt is a pure cipher. The spectacle is needed because there’s nothing else there. Bond is a much more fleshed out character.
You are right i feel. The smart move would not be to try and as I have said to 'piddle in the same pool' I'd love a stripped down thriller with genuine tension. Part of the problem is that Craig/Eon have pitched Daniel as 'action Bond' much has been made about his physicality. I'm pretty sure that Daniel is a skillful enough actor to widen the scope and not have to try and out Cruise Cruise. He has 'given at the office ' and bears the scars so to speak. That last injury was pretty serious I think, and I doubt if he wants to do it again. Of course action is an important part of the mix, but I'm sure the right balance can be struck.
As so often in movies, perhaps the deal with MI6 is that the previous film in the series was pretty much ignored critically but audiences (including me) loved it, causing some re-evaluation and the critical pack being determined not to get caught out again. I'm looking forward to the new one as both four and five were very solid action thrillers.
Seeing Logan Lucky last night, which was a great, fun, watch, may have triggered it... I think it was my first ever Bond dream.
Seek professional help. # quick nurse the screens!
Really looking to seeing MI:Fallout if we can get a kiddie sitter... blooming summer holidays
I was doing that with Spectre...…………………..for really different reasons.
I'm dreaming I'm Barbara Bach !
You're dreaming of being married to Ringo???
Great!... some get Bond girls, peanut butter.... and other unmentionables
Mind you, with the world going the way it is, maybe an obese Bond is the way forward to relate to current generation.... a way to distance him from those other, 'unrealistic' action/spy heroes... Go for it Danny, let us see JB in an XXL suit :007)
Having now seen Fallout, I largely agree with this and would add that Fallout rips hugely from Bond films, and I found that a bit disappointing as I would prefer something different.
The Fallout action scenes, especially at the end, were amazing, but the movie overall, if you have seen Spectre, Skyfall, A View to a Kill, and a few other Bond films, you've already seen Fallout.
I won't give the game away, but there are elements to the plot of Fallout that have been taken directly from Spectre and Skyfall. I'm sure they'll be discussed in this forum soon.
I haven't read that NYT article, but I don't feel I need to because having seen Fallout it's obvious from the article's title it is absolute [expletives].