51

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

"Cons:

Vague, lumbering, unfocused plot"

Seemed pretty straight forward to me : if they get no extortion money they drop a bomb on a city

52

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

ajb007/lol  concise scripting.   ajb007/martini

“I didn’t lose a friend, I just realised I never had one.”

53

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

Grindelwald wrote:

"Cons:

Vague, lumbering, unfocused plot"

Seemed pretty straight forward to me : if they get no extortion money they drop a bomb on a city

It shouldn't take forever to get to that point. Like I said - vague, lumbering and unfocused.

54

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

I just watched this yesterday. Didn't enjoy it as much as anticipated. The good bits were as I remembered

Pros:
- THE SCRIPT! "sharp little eyes", "licensed trouble shooter", "burn you up on the road", "she's just dead", "know a little about women", etc etc etc. One of the funniest. Good and not ridiculous funny like DAF.
- The characters - Volpe, Largo, Domino mainly
- PTS fight
- Plot is standard and too parodied these days but I like it
- The score (trumpets get irritating sometimes but KKBB and TB themes are fantastic)

Cons
- Weird edits sometimes, frames skipping
- Narrative conveniences/inconsistencies. Punching Felix then Bond says "007" right afterwards. Conveniently hitching a lift from Volpe. Several more examples which don't distract (can't even remember them now) but it marks the beginning of the ridiculousness
- Sound like a sheep but it's sllloooowww, film could be an hour shorter.
- The end Disco Volante fast footage is poor but it doesn't bother me much

It's a good film but my main issue is not the slow scenes - rather, there's no major Bond moments in between to look forward to. There's some enjoyable scenes and dialogue but no standout croc jump, barrel roll, skydive, car chase, etc that are present in many entries, including lower quality ones. So it will be interesting to see where TB ends up ranking

2019 Bondathon...in progress (6) FRWL (7) GE (8) FYEO (9) TND (10) MR (11) GF (12) LALD (13) DAF (14) LTK (15) TMWTGG (16) TB (17) TSWLM (18) DAD (19) AVTAK (20) YOLT (21) QOS (22) SF (23) TWINE (24) SP

55

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

Most of the cons fall right at the feet of the director and screenwriters.  As far as the editing - the editor only does want the director wants so I put all editing decisions back on the director.  By the time they made this film it had gone through a lot of changes and the director was forced to make it has coherent as he could given the size of the production, but I think the whole thing sort of overwhelmed him and for the most part he just to decided to have as much fun as he could making it, and when you let that take over your mind set as a director you end up not caring so much for the integrity of the character or the script.  At the point in time this film came out he was almost guaranteed it would make big box office, so although I'm sure he still worked it as a seasoned professional director, it's obvious on repeated viewings that the whole film wasn't taken as seriously as the first two he directed.  A lot of that attitude had to do with GF.  EON made film history with that entry and cemented the Bond formula, so Young did only had to follow the chalk line put down by Guy Hamilton.

56

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

CmdrAtticus wrote:

Most of the cons fall right at the feet of the director and screenwriters.  As far as the editing - the editor only does want the director wants so I put all editing decisions back on the director.  By the time they made this film it had gone through a lot of changes and the director was forced to make it has coherent as he could given the size of the production, but I think the whole thing sort of overwhelmed him and for the most part he just to decided to have as much fun as he could making it, and when you let that take over your mind set as a director you end up not caring so much for the integrity of the character or the script.  At the point in time this film came out he was almost guaranteed it would make big box office, so although I'm sure he still worked it as a seasoned professional director, it's obvious on repeated viewings that the whole film wasn't taken as seriously as the first two he directed.  A lot of that attitude had to do with GF.  EON made film history with that entry and cemented the Bond formula, so Young did only had to follow the chalk line put down by Guy Hamilton.

Actually directors rarely have much influence once a film has wrapped. The editor spends weeks sifting through hours of footage finally compiling a rough cut for the producers. Famously, the first cut of YOLT was over 4 hours long and OHMSS was approaching 4 hours.

It is unfortunate that Peter Hunt was not available due to his working on The Ipcress File otherwise we would have a much tighter cut for TBl.

Having said that I still think TB is a top Bond film I will add my pros and cons at  a later date to each of the threads as it's been some time since I have seen them.

Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.

57

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

Thunderball is Epic, it must have been like filming one of those big
WW2 movies. With so many underwater scenes  with so many stunt
Actors etc. Visually it still looks amazing.  ajb007/martini  and combined with the
Fantastic music score of John Barry.  ajb007/cheers   Magical.

“I didn’t lose a friend, I just realised I never had one.”

58

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

Thunderpussy wrote:

Thunderball is Epic, it must have been like filming one of those big
WW2 movies. With so many underwater scenes  with so many stunt
Actors etc. Visually it still looks amazing.  ajb007/martini  and combined with the
Fantastic music score of John Barry.  ajb007/cheers   Magical.

It was the last of the ultracool 60's Bonds IMO. It was big, but not TOO big for Bond. YOLT's production was the star, not Bond. And of course why Connery left.

Dalton & Connery rule. Brozz was cool. Craig is too.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.QOS 4.DN 5.GF/GE 6.SP 7.FRWL 8.TB/TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT

59

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

The opening sequence of "Thunderball" was the best fight scene.  It surprised all that "Mrs. Boitier" was the colonel and the fight was great.  I believe that Colonel Jacques Boitier should be reinvented in the new series.

60

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

CoolHandBond wrote:
CmdrAtticus wrote:

Most of the cons fall right at the feet of the director and screenwriters.  As far as the editing - the editor only does want the director wants so I put all editing decisions back on the director.  By the time they made this film it had gone through a lot of changes and the director was forced to make it has coherent as he could given the size of the production, but I think the whole thing sort of overwhelmed him and for the most part he just to decided to have as much fun as he could making it, and when you let that take over your mind set as a director you end up not caring so much for the integrity of the character or the script.  At the point in time this film came out he was almost guaranteed it would make big box office, so although I'm sure he still worked it as a seasoned professional director, it's obvious on repeated viewings that the whole film wasn't taken as seriously as the first two he directed.  A lot of that attitude had to do with GF.  EON made film history with that entry and cemented the Bond formula, so Young did only had to follow the chalk line put down by Guy Hamilton.

Actually directors rarely have much influence once a film has wrapped. The editor spends weeks sifting through hours of footage finally compiling a rough cut for the producers. Famously, the first cut of YOLT was over 4 hours long and OHMSS was approaching 4 hours.

It is unfortunate that Peter Hunt was not available due to his working on The Ipcress File otherwise we would have a much tighter cut for TBl.

Having said that I still think TB is a top Bond film I will add my pros and cons at  a later date to each of the threads as it's been some time since I have seen them.

The director's influence on how the film appears on release depends on whether they have the final cut in their contract.  This was unusual for director's like Young to have since studios like UA and EON did not like the practice.  Usually only auteur directors who often also produced their films have this power - Spieberg and Lucas are examples of this.

The rough cut is not assembled for the producers - it is the first pass (assembly edit) of what the final film will be when it reaches picture lock.  This is the point where the director is responsible for creating the "director's cut" - the time that is set aside where the film editor's first cut from the rough cut is molded to fit the director's vision. While collaborating on this stage of the editing, the director and the editor go over the entire movie in great detail; scenes and shots are re-ordered, removed, shortened and otherwise tweaked to obtain the director's vision. 

In the final cut stage, sometimes subsequent edits are supervised by one or more producers, who represent the production company and/or movie studio.  In normal cases, these are usually quite minor tweaks dealing with such things as maintaining the rating of the film (overseeing the violence and sex and pc situations) so it keeps in line with how they want the film to appear to conform to the corporate image of the people financing the project.

It is rare for producers at this stage to demand so many changes of the final cut to the extent that it would be totally unlike the director's vision.  The main influence EON held over their director's and writers was making sure all the films after GF had all the cliches in them (Q gadgets, meglomaniac villain with lair, large explosive third act, casino scene, etc).  Outside that they usually let the director's do their job.

I still maintain most of the negatives points about TB that people point out and agree on were the responsibility of Young's direction - including his choice of his edits in his director's cut. The script itself may have had some weaknesses, but it does not inform the director how to cut a film.  He was responsible for the overuse of undercranking in scenes (such as the Disco Volante finale) and the overlong running time due to uneven, often too slow pacing of scenes.  Ernest Hosler was the film editor and yes, Peter Hunt was his supervising editor, but Young was the the man who decided whether the pacing and edits in his cut were how he wanted it to look.

61

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

Con:
VARGAS

"Mango, banana and tangerine. Sugar and ackee and cocoa bean!"

62

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

^^^ he was useless

Top 10 Bond Films
1. Thunderball 2. FRWL 3. Casino Royale 4. TLD 5. OHMSS 6. SkyFall 7. GF 8. TSWLM 9. GE 10. FYEO

63

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

I didn't realise how disliked Vargas is. I've seen a few comments about his uselessness lately. I suppose he is a bit forgettable but he's around such a good cast of villains that it doesn't matter.

2019 Bondathon...in progress (6) FRWL (7) GE (8) FYEO (9) TND (10) MR (11) GF (12) LALD (13) DAF (14) LTK (15) TMWTGG (16) TB (17) TSWLM (18) DAD (19) AVTAK (20) YOLT (21) QOS (22) SF (23) TWINE (24) SP

64

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

His death does give Bond one of his best quips.  ajb007/biggrin

“I didn’t lose a friend, I just realised I never had one.”

65

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

Thunderpussy wrote:

His death does give Bond one of his best quips.  ajb007/biggrin

You do have a point  ajb007/wink

66

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

DevilMayCare007 wrote:

^^^ he was useless

Of course he was.  He didn't DO anything..according to Largo (does not smoke, does not drink..).

67

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

CmdrAtticus wrote:
CoolHandBond wrote:
CmdrAtticus wrote:

Most of the cons fall right at the feet of the director and screenwriters.  As far as the editing - the editor only does want the director wants so I put all editing decisions back on the director.  By the time they made this film it had gone through a lot of changes and the director was forced to make it has coherent as he could given the size of the production, but I think the whole thing sort of overwhelmed him and for the most part he just to decided to have as much fun as he could making it, and when you let that take over your mind set as a director you end up not caring so much for the integrity of the character or the script.  At the point in time this film came out he was almost guaranteed it would make big box office, so although I'm sure he still worked it as a seasoned professional director, it's obvious on repeated viewings that the whole film wasn't taken as seriously as the first two he directed.  A lot of that attitude had to do with GF.  EON made film history with that entry and cemented the Bond formula, so Young did only had to follow the chalk line put down by Guy Hamilton.

Actually directors rarely have much influence once a film has wrapped. The editor spends weeks sifting through hours of footage finally compiling a rough cut for the producers. Famously, the first cut of YOLT was over 4 hours long and OHMSS was approaching 4 hours.

It is unfortunate that Peter Hunt was not available due to his working on The Ipcress File otherwise we would have a much tighter cut for TBl.

Having said that I still think TB is a top Bond film I will add my pros and cons at  a later date to each of the threads as it's been some time since I have seen them.

The director's influence on how the film appears on release depends on whether they have the final cut in their contract.  This was unusual for director's like Young to have since studios like UA and EON did not like the practice.  Usually only auteur directors who often also produced their films have this power - Spieberg and Lucas are examples of this.

The rough cut is not assembled for the producers - it is the first pass (assembly edit) of what the final film will be when it reaches picture lock.  This is the point where the director is responsible for creating the "director's cut" - the time that is set aside where the film editor's first cut from the rough cut is molded to fit the director's vision. While collaborating on this stage of the editing, the director and the editor go over the entire movie in great detail; scenes and shots are re-ordered, removed, shortened and otherwise tweaked to obtain the director's vision. 

In the final cut stage, sometimes subsequent edits are supervised by one or more producers, who represent the production company and/or movie studio.  In normal cases, these are usually quite minor tweaks dealing with such things as maintaining the rating of the film (overseeing the violence and sex and pc situations) so it keeps in line with how they want the film to appear to conform to the corporate image of the people financing the project.

It is rare for producers at this stage to demand so many changes of the final cut to the extent that it would be totally unlike the director's vision.  The main influence EON held over their director's and writers was making sure all the films after GF had all the cliches in them (Q gadgets, meglomaniac villain with lair, large explosive third act, casino scene, etc).  Outside that they usually let the director's do their job.

I still maintain most of the negatives points about TB that people point out and agree on were the responsibility of Young's direction - including his choice of his edits in his director's cut. The script itself may have had some weaknesses, but it does not inform the director how to cut a film.  He was responsible for the overuse of undercranking in scenes (such as the Disco Volante finale) and the overlong running time due to uneven, often too slow pacing of scenes.  Ernest Hosler was the film editor and yes, Peter Hunt was his supervising editor, but Young was the the man who decided whether the pacing and edits in his cut were how he wanted it to look.

Nice copy and paste job about film making, CA.
Where do you have the proof that Young oversaw the editing process because I remember reading that he left the TB shoot to helm "Danger Grows Wild" immediately after wrapping the movie?
I don't have any proof of this only what I remember reading - I still maintain that TB is slower than it should be due to the lack of Peter Hunt's input not anything else - just my opinion of which I am entitled to  ajb007/smile

Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.

68

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

I do agree, that Peter Hunt, knew pacing and how to drive a story forward.  ajb007/martini

“I didn’t lose a friend, I just realised I never had one.”

69

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

Terence Young did leave TB before editing was completed. Accounts vary as to the exact point he left and how much Peter Hunt had to make decisions on.

70

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

One of the things I find odd about the movie making process, is
the "Story board" which is supposed to have, the story, ideas on
Editing, camera angles etc.
  Yet even today you read of movies coming in at three or four hours
and having to be edited down to only 140 or 120 minutes.
I maybe wrong ( not for the first time) but isn't the idea of the story board
Supposed to stop this from happening ?  ajb007/smile

“I didn’t lose a friend, I just realised I never had one.”

71

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

Yes, in theory, they are supposed to - and they do help a lot in figuring out how to trim a film down to a reasonable running time - but this mainly works with action and animation films.

I was a storyboard artist on a few independent films.  The amount of the script that's boarded depends on how much the director wants.  Initially I produced them so they could get a clear idea of how some action scenes would play out visually.  In most instances, this was usually the only scenes I did the boards for.  For the regular "talking head" shots that make up a large piece of non-action films, the boards are not really necessary if one has a good director and DP.  Naturally, with films like the Bond series, there can be a lot of boards produced because there are so many location changes and so many action shots and stunts.  Director's like Hitchcock and Spielberg always loved a ton of board work on many of their films because they get very detailed as exactly how they want the whole film shot and framed.  Putting up an entire sequence on a wall to see how it flows really helps them to see if something can be cut out that might hinder the pace.  Hitchcock loved this process so much (he started out as an artist designing the title cards for silent films) that he felt once the script and boards were done he felt the movie was finished.  The whole filming of it to him was just work. I always thought he would have loved animation today as he could have boarded and directed a digital animated film and not have to deal with the filming process.  Spielberg relied on the boards on most of his big action films, but as he started to feel more confident in his ability of setting up scenes over the years by the time he got to films like Schindler's List, he felt he didn't need them for he thought if they were over planned he wouldn't get the spontaneity he needed.

The boards are great if you know exactly how you want a scene to look and want it to come out as close to that vision as you can.  The nice thing is they can be modified a lot or even discarded if during the actual shooting better ideas present themselves.  This happens more than one might think as drawing the idea on paper - which seems to look right when initially presented - sometimes just doesn't seem as good once it's shot and reviewed.  It might not even look right when duplicated on set and viewed through the camera.  Still, they're great for giving one the idea of what it should look like and they're also great for visually explaining the scene to actors and other crew members as to what the director and DP are aiming for.

Last edited by CmdrAtticus (7th Aug 2015 18:58)

72

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

ajb007/martini  Thanks for the information. CmdrAtticus. Really interesting.

“I didn’t lose a friend, I just realised I never had one.”

73

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

Watch TB for the first time ever over the weekend.  While there were some aspects I liked, for the most part I did not care for this film.

Pros:

- The PTS was great.  From Bond's suit to the revelation about Bouvar and subsequent fight.  Of course, the silly but it works escape via jetpack!
- The cinematography during the Bahama scenes was phenomenal.  Makes me yearn to return soon!
- Bond's quips.
- The skyhook rescue at the end.  I wonder if the Hong Kong scene from The Dark Knight was influenced by this.

Cons:

- The pacing was too long and slow.  By and large I found this installment to be boring and even dosed off once or twice.
- Didn't care for the underwater battles.

Speaking of the ending, what happened to Ladislav, the guy who rescued Domino?  We see Bond hand him a life saver, then push him into the water.  Yet only Bond and Domino get into the life raft.  Did 007 just leave him to fend for himself?

Last edited by Skyfell (26th Aug 2015 23:00)

74

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

Skyfell wrote:

- The skyhook rescue at the end.  I wonder if the Hong Kong scene from The Dark Knight w influenced by this.

Very possible considering that Chris Nolan is a Bond fand and explicitly confirmed that the beginning of "The Dark Knight Rises" was influenced by LTK.

Now I have to watch TB soon as I don't even remember that scene well...

"I'm afraid I'm a complicated woman. "
"- That is something to be afraid of."

75

Re: Pros and Cons: Thunderball

Number24 wrote:

I pretty much agre on what Calvin Dyson has to say about Thunderball, in other words it's very weak:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qW3uutVWf80

He is fantastic at the reviews, and also hilarious. Although I agree, there are worse Bond films that TB.

1. FYEO 2. OHMSS 3. TLD 4. FRWL 5. LTK 6. TSWLM 7. CR 8. OP  9. GF 10. DN 11. MR 12. SP 13. LALD 14. QOS 15. TB 16. SF 17. TMWTGG 18. GE 19. YOLT 20. AVTAK 21. TND 22. TWINE 23. DAF 24. DAD

1. Dalton 2. Connery 3. Moore 4. Craig 5. Lazenby  6. Brosnan