51

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

I was disgusted after watching Spectre. These people who made this film live comfortably and are well paid yet don't know how to write good drama...so what are they earning money from it for?

Personal connections doesn't equal depth of character and higher stakes narrative thrust.

Seriously...what do you people think Ian Fleming would make of what they did to both Bond and Blofeld? It's lazy, amateurish writing. The fact that Austin Powers did it first ( which I always took to be Myers parody of the plot twist in The Empire Strikes Back ) only adds to how badly written Spectre was.

I'm surprised more Bond fans aren't up in arms about this. Giving Bond and Blofeld even loose familial connections ruins the integrity of both characters. Oh it's personal so the stakes are higher...give me a break. I'm a relatively intelligent adult, I expect more from my entertainments.

I guess 21st century Latte drinking hacks taking a character created in the 1950's and trying to add depth is asking too much. They obviously don't understand who Bond is. He's a professional but the writers obviously aren't.

52

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

jim78 wrote:

I was disgusted after watching Spectre. These people who made this film live comfortably and are well paid yet don't know how to write good drama...so what are they earning money from it for?

Personal connections doesn't equal depth of character and higher stakes narrative thrust.

Seriously...what do you people think Ian Fleming would make of what they did to both Bond and Blofeld? It's lazy, amateurish writing. The fact that Austin Powers did it first ( which I always took to be Myers parody of the plot twist in The Empire Strikes Back ) only adds to how badly written Spectre was.

I'm surprised more Bond fans aren't up in arms about this. Giving Bond and Blofeld even loose familial connections ruins the integrity of both characters. Oh it's personal so the stakes are higher...give me a break. I'm a relatively intelligent adult, I expect more from my entertainments.

I guess 21st century Latte drinking hacks taking a character created in the 1950's and trying to add depth is asking too much. They obviously don't understand who Bond is. He's a professional but the writers obviously aren't.

Most Bond fans hate this about Spectre.

I don't think the writers realise that the personal connection actually makes the stakes so much lower. It's no longer about Bond saving the world, only about him saving himself.

53

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

True. This world building nonsense franchises do nowadays has become so contrived. They've just made both Blofelds' and Bonds' world so much smaller. Then again, there hasn't been a tight, character driven script for Bond since Goldeneye IMO. Sean Beans line about the martinis silencing the screams of all Bonds' kills or whatever it was says more about Bond than all the women leading Bond by the hand in Casino Royale ever said...and don't get me started on Skyfall. Silva was a second rate Joker from The Dark Knight rip off. At least the Jokers plans didn't seem contrived by the script the way Silva's did.

All Craigs' films have demonstrated to me that they weren't written by true adults. Look at the scene that introduces Bond in Dr No. Can anyone point to one scene in any of the recent films that so economically drew character for it's audience? It's a lost art if you ask me ( although nobody asked but how and ever ).

54

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

I look forward to the next interpretation of Sherlock Holmes, as you could have Moriarty as in fact
A third Brother !  ajb007/wink

"Let his death be a particularly unpleasant and humiliating one."

55

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

jim78 wrote:

Look at the scene that introduces Bond in Dr No. Can anyone point to one scene in any of the recent films that so economically drew character for it's audience? It's a lost art if you ask me ( although nobody asked but how and ever ).

ajb007/cheers  And in the same movie, the scene where Bond meets Dr No himself.

56

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

Thunderpussy wrote:

I look forward to the next interpretation of Sherlock Holmes, as you could have Moriarty as in fact
A third Brother !  ajb007/wink

Well, it's better than Sherlock and Mycroft having a sister- that would be truly terrible!  Oh, wait....

57

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

Yeah  ajb007/lol . Maybe they should get the writers of Coronation Street to write a Bond or a Sherlock Holmes.  They obviously want contrived, nonsensical rubbish. Who better?

58

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

Yeah Barbel. I love Dr No. The only thing I don't like about it is that stuff about the dragon.

Blame Martin Cambell for how enjoyable Casino Royale is to watch. He took a badly written script and made a film so stylish very few people noticed.

59

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

I'd like to see Campbell back, of course.  Even if there's a dragon...

60

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

ajb007/lol  Yeah Barbel. Give Campbell a script as tight as Goldeneye and let him work his magic. Also get rid of Daniel Craig. He doesn't know how to play the character. I have a wine rack here that has more charisma than that Putin clone. Even at the most shallowest levels he fails. James Bond is supposed to look better than me in a suit...and what exactly were his choices as an actor? To keep it all contained or he simply doesn't know how to play the character? Fassebender would be perfect IMO. Watching Inglorious Basterds showed me that. Dangerous but charming.

People ridicule Roger Moore but I was born in the seventies so he was my Bond. Him and Connery had something Craig lacks...charisma...oh...and humour. Moore was the second worst Bond but Christ...was he entertaining. They figured that Craig was good for a brute that Vesper Lynd had to teach how to dress himself. Emasculated males nowadays...even Bond. It's pathetic really. Give me Connery any day. He was his own man. Craig can blame the writing on everything except his performance. My inner child still wants to buy into the fantasy of Bond. Between the horrid writing and Craigs interpretation ( and his Polish boxer looks ) I can't buy into the fantasy anymore. On top of that the filmakers want us to believe it's gritty and realistic. Cubby Broccoli understood what the cinematic Bond was. The current producers don't IMO,

61

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

I like your line about how "James Bond is supposed to look better than me in a suit"! It reminds me of  "Bond is what every man would like to be, and what every woman would like to have between her sheets"- when I was a boy ( a long time ago now) James Bond was Sean Connery; when I was a teenager he was Roger Moore. Charisma and humour, in varying degrees.
I watched the movies and read the books- James Bond was who I wanted to be, and the actors fulfilled that. Later, Dalton and Brosnan could arguably be seen as continuing in that vein. Only with Craig did that fail for me- I didn't want to be him. I am looking forward to the next Bond as being closer to the classic image.

This doesn't mean that I haven't enjoyed Craig's movies. I think CR06 is one of the classic Bond films, but that's because of ts Fleming content and despite Craig, and SF and to a lesser extent SP both work for me.

62

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

Exactly Barbel. We pay good money to the cinema because we want a couple of hours away from our lives...we want to be transported If I wanted 'realism' I'd go and start a fight in a pub.

To be honest I LOVE Timothy Dalton as Bond. Have you ever watched the Bond films in order? After Roger Moore watching Dalton is like e4xperiencing Bond in 3D...and Daltons' a good looking...you know the rest. He took Bond too literally though. Moved away from the cinematic Bond to much. I wish he had of brought the swashbuckling nature to his performance that he brought to Flash Gordon...but that was Daltons choice. As it stands I think his performance in The Living Daylights was the best performance by any Bond actor. Yet in terms of whose the best Bond? I would say Sean Connery...he defined the role. Between him and Terence Young they knew what a filmic Bond needed.

SP and SF work for me as action films, but I watched all the Bond films ( including the unofficial ones ) a few weeks ago. TBH Roger Moore knew when he was in a stupid film and acted accordingly. It was still entertaining to watch. Craig did QOS, SF and SP and didn't realise this simple truth, he took it seriously. Dalton took it too seriously too ( and he was capable of so much more, unlike Craig ).

TBH Roger Moore knew it was ridiculous and decided to play to the audience, so did Connery ( and Brosnan to a lesser degree ). Craig doesn't realise this. He's trying to internalise a character that comes from a time from over 60 years ago with out the context of where that characters coming from. I truely believe a real, gritty version of James Bond, that is true toi the source material, must be a period piece. That's who Bond truely is. Thats why Moore and Brosnan had to play him for jokes, because he's a type of man that doesn't exist in the 21st century. He's a man out of time. Craig doesn't realise this, so his performance is adrift, lost to the mechanicsa of bad scriptwriting.

If I was writing it I would make Bond a sexist in a wry way, like it doesn't really matter what Bond's views are. He gets the job done and he gets laid...no justification required. Modernise the character by leaving him the way he is. He's a spy....he can get away with it. The scrptwriters don't need to make excuses for him...just aknowledge what he is...it worked in Goldeneye for a reason.

63

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

Craig is a gritty Bond, but not a realistic Bond, but a lot of that is due to the writing and not just his wooden portrayal. Dalton had both grittiness and realism. I wouldn't mind both, but also with a touch of the classic cinematic Bond.

64

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

Craigs gritty simply because modern filmmaking makes him bleed matt. To be honest if I was as charmless as Craig I'd never get laid. I know in the older films all Roger Moore had to do was walk into a room and women would be throwing themselves at him...but is Craigs Bond any more realistic? At least Sir Rog tried to be charming...Craigs incapable of that, so what does he have? At least I could believe Moore disarmed women with his charm. Craig doesn't even have that...so what exactly does he have?

Yeah, I'd love a post post modern take on Bond, someone who succeeds in spite of his sexism and misogeny. Bonds an icon, if one wants to comment on whats outdated about him don't change Bond, give a more honest portrayal of how people react to him. Thats why Goldeneye worked like gangbusters IMO.

65

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

I can't say GoldenEye worked so well either. It was better as a video game than a movie. Brosnan was at his best in TWINE.

66

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

jim78 wrote:

Have you ever watched the Bond films in order?

Yes, but not for some years now.

67

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

jim78 wrote:

True. This world building nonsense franchises do nowadays has become so contrived. They've just made both Blofelds' and Bonds' world so much smaller. Then again, there hasn't been a tight, character driven script for Bond since Goldeneye IMO. Sean Beans line about the martinis silencing the screams of all Bonds' kills or whatever it was says more about Bond than all the women leading Bond by the hand in Casino Royale ever said...and don't get me started on Skyfall. Silva was a second rate Joker from The Dark Knight rip off. At least the Jokers plans didn't seem contrived by the script the way Silva's did.

All Craigs' films have demonstrated to me that they weren't written by true adults. Look at the scene that introduces Bond in Dr No. Can anyone point to one scene in any of the recent films that so economically drew character for it's audience? It's a lost art if you ask me ( although nobody asked but how and ever ).

I think the Train scene in CR has something of that quality without slipping into Pastiche. Like most things in the 'Bondiverse ' it has its fair share of admirers and those who don't care for it at all. For me however it got the tone right.

Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.

68

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

I ain't into video games so I never played Goldeneye the game Matt. I ain't saying Goldeneye was a masterpiece...but it was tightly written and shone a light on Bond's character without altering him.

I agree Brosnan was good in TWINE but some of the writing in that film undermined the character such as shoehorning Denise Richards into it. Her presence lessened the emotional impact of Bond killing Electra. The ending was played for laughs. It became a very shallow film IMO.

69

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

The train scene in CR was probably the best scene in that film Zaphod, but even then I'm reminded of the old writers rule 'show, don't tell'. The scene I referred to in Dr No wasn't about characters figuring out mini bios for each other. In that scene in Dr No we were shown Bond doing what Bond does, in the train scene in CR we were told who Bond was. Imagine if Die Hard took a break in the middle of the film for characters to tell each other who each other was? It would break the integrity of a tightly written film. We already know who John McClane is because his character was conveyed through his actions just like Bond in Dr No. The closest Die Hard came to explaining who it's hero was was Rickman mocking McClane because he grew up watching John Wayne, but Rickman never went on a ramble about McClanes childhood. What CRs train scene did was babble on but that's why I wasn't impressed with that script. If it had been more tightly written a lot of scenes in CR would become completely unnecessary IMO.

Also IMO the train scene was Craig's chance to really impress as Bond and he failed miserably. He's too uptight and unappealing for my liking.

70

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

jim78 wrote:

The train scene in CR was probably the best scene in that film Zaphod, but even then I'm reminded of the old writers rule 'show, don't tell'. The scene I referred to in Dr No wasn't about characters figuring out mini bios for each other. In that scene in Dr No we were shown Bond doing what Bond does, in the train scene in CR we were told who Bond was. Imagine if Die Hard took a break in the middle of the film for characters to tell each other who each other was? It would break the integrity of a tightly written film. We already know who John McClane is because his character was conveyed through his actions just like Bond in Dr No. The closest Die Hard came to explaining who it's hero was was Rickman mocking McClane because he grew up watching John Wayne, but Rickman never went on a ramble about McClanes childhood. What CRs train scene did was babble on but that's why I wasn't impressed with that script. If it had been more tightly written a lot of scenes in CR would become completely unnecessary IMO.

Also IMO the train scene was Craig's chance to really impress as Bond and he failed miserably. He's too uptight and unappealing for my liking.

If you think the train scene is the best scene in CR, you must dislike the film more than I do! It was so poorly written and so poorly acted. I agree with all your criticism about it.

71

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

Sorry Matt, I mean't the best dialogue scene...but even at that I find it was poorly written. I also hate the way Mathis explains the rules to Vesper during the poker playing. I understand some people needed it explained but God...did it come across as poker for dummies. Also I forgot about the torture scene, that was good.

My main gripe with CR is that Craig, at 38, was playing a character who was only learning how to behave like a responsible, cultured adult ( learning from women too not from his own experience lol ). Personally I learned how to behave by the time I was 23 so for me Bond's character arc was not only unbelievable, but immature. Craig was too old for that part IMO. Also deconstructing Bond's character by emasculating him flies in the face of who Bond is supposed to be. No wonder they never mentioned Bond was a Commander in Craig's film's. Having life experience before he met Vesper would fly in the face of NuBond's character arc.

In CR06 Bond is a very simplistic character with an unbelievable character arc. If they really wanted to update the character they should have made him an Iraqi war veteran or something IMO. Fleming was a WW2 veteran so he had a good footing in understanding the nuances behind a man like Bond. Purvis and Wade are merely hacks whose only experience of conflict is probably playing soldiers as children. Nothing in their lives has prepared them to understand a character like Bond and IMO this is reflected in their writing of him.

72

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

jim78 wrote:

Sorry Matt, I mean't the best dialogue scene...but even at that I find it was poorly written. I also hate the way Mathis explains the rules to Vesper during the poker playing. I understand some people needed it explained but God...did it come across as poker for dummies. Also I forgot about the torture scene, that was good.

My main gripe with CR is that Craig, at 38, was playing a character who was only learning how to behave like a responsible, cultured adult ( learning from women too not from his own experience lol ). Personally I learned how to behave by the time I was 23 so for me Bond's character arc was not only unbelievable, but immature. Craig was too old for that part IMO. Also deconstructing Bond's character by emasculating him flies in the face of who Bond is supposed to be. No wonder they never mentioned Bond was a Commander in Craig's film's. Having life experience before he met Vesper would fly in the face of NuBond's character arc.

In CR06 Bond is a very simplistic character with an unbelievable character arc. If they really wanted to update the character they should have made him an Iraqi war veteran or something IMO. Fleming was a WW2 veteran so he had a good footing in understanding the nuances behind a man like Bond. Purvis and Wade are merely hacks whose only experience of conflict is probably playing soldiers as children. Nothing in their lives has prepared them to understand a character like Bond and IMO this is reflected in their writing of him.

I think the train scene is one of the worst scenes of the entire Bond series!

I agree that Craig's Bond's character arc is unbelievable and makes little sense for someone in his late 30s. I don't mind the poker explanation so much, but I mind that they changed the game to poker to follow the poker boom of the time. The explanation of baccarat in the 1954 Casino Royale was good (and necessary for the audience), but it's also a much simpler game to explain and understand.

73

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

Why do you think it's the worst scene when there's thing's like Tarzan yells and CGI surfing in the franchise Matt?

I'm glad someone agrees with me. I get tired of people saying Craig's the best Bond ever and CR06 is the best Bond film. I know when a film's BSing me and CR06 is full of it IMO.

I would prefer if it was Baccarat too, it just feels much more classy than Texas Holdem to me ( I also don't like Texas Holdem personally, I prefer straight poker. I also think wearing sunglasses while your playing is cheating because the other player's can't intuitively read you. I refuse to play with anyone who wear's sunglasses ). As rubbish as CR67 is I thought Peter Sellers came across as more engaged than Craig opposite LeChiffre and he wasn't even on set at the same time as Orson Welles.

When it come's to screenwrting Hollywood's in an awful state IMO.

74

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

jim78 wrote:

Why do you think it's the worst scene when there's thing's like Tarzan yells and CGI surfing in the franchise Matt?

I'm glad someone agrees with me. I get tired of people saying Craig's the best Bond ever and CR06 is the best Bond film. I know when a film's BSing me and CR06 is full of it IMO.

I would prefer if it was Baccarat too, it just feels much more classy than Texas Holdem to me ( I also don't like Texas Holdem personally, I prefer straight poker. I also think wearing sunglasses while your playing is cheating because the other player's can't intuitively read you. I refuse to play with anyone who wear's sunglasses ). As rubbish as CR67 is I thought Peter Sellers came across as more engaged than Craig opposite LeChiffre and he wasn't even on set at the same time as Orson Welles.

When it come's to screenwrting Hollywood's in an awful state IMO.

The Tarzan yell is a short moment. The rest of the scene is at least entertaining. The CGI surfing is up there as one of the worst along with the train scene. The film makers of both thought they were doing something really special, and both turned out to be rubbish.

Peter Sellers was a far more talented actor than Craig ever has been or will be.

75

Re: So it did copy Austin Powers... (SPOILERS)

Matt S wrote:
jim78 wrote:

I was disgusted after watching Spectre. These people who made this film live comfortably and are well paid yet don't know how to write good drama...so what are they earning money from it for?

Personal connections doesn't equal depth of character and higher stakes narrative thrust.

Seriously...what do you people think Ian Fleming would make of what they did to both Bond and Blofeld? It's lazy, amateurish writing. The fact that Austin Powers did it first ( which I always took to be Myers parody of the plot twist in The Empire Strikes Back ) only adds to how badly written Spectre was.

I'm surprised more Bond fans aren't up in arms about this. Giving Bond and Blofeld even loose familial connections ruins the integrity of both characters. Oh it's personal so the stakes are higher...give me a break. I'm a relatively intelligent adult, I expect more from my entertainments.

I guess 21st century Latte drinking hacks taking a character created in the 1950's and trying to add depth is asking too much. They obviously don't understand who Bond is. He's a professional but the writers obviously aren't.

Most Bond fans hate this about Spectre.

I don't think the writers realise that the personal connection actually makes the stakes so much lower. It's no longer about Bond saving the world, only about him saving himself.

I Second Matt's statement, don't think I know anyone who didn't think that was a laughably stupid idea.