76

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

Matt S wrote:
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.

It's at times like these when I forget on what kind of topic I'm on  ajb007/lol .

"...I have the oddest feeling we will be meeting again sometime..."
-Roger Moore's James Bond. RIP.
I have a YouTube channel on all things Bond (amongst other things, coming soon™).
The name's Bond and Beyond. It's currently on hold, though.

77

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

Yeah Matt. I actually like Octopussy overall. I don't personally think the train scene is that bad. I just find it obvious and too explicit in what its saying. It's not subtle at all really.

What would you say is the best written film in the franchise?

That's true...Seller's could be great. I've yet to see Craig do anything great though. I don't think he's capable of it myself.

78

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

jim78 wrote:

Yeah Matt. I actually like Octopussy overall. I don't personally think the train scene is that bad. I just find it obvious and too explicit in what its saying. It's not subtle at all really.

What would you say is the best written film in the franchise?

That's true...Seller's could be great. I've yet to see Craig do anything great though. I don't think he's capable of it myself.

I think From Russia with Love is the best-written Bond film.

79

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

If you think CR06 is well written I'd love to know why you think that Dirty Punker?

80

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

I'd agree with that Matt. From Russia With Love's my favourite Bond film.

81

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

I had a couple comments about the foster brother thing, but see that hasn't been the topic for two pages now, but since I'm thinking them I might as well post:

the first Tim Burton Batman film was an early offender in this sort of plotting ... in the comics, Bruce Wayne's parents were killed by a random thug named Joe Chill, but Burton made a pre-freak-accident Joker the murderer, so that in the final scene the two antagonists could face each other and say "you made me" "no you made me" ... I never knew why they did that, but Burton did it again in the next film where both Catwoman and Penguin are related to Christopher Walken's character, who is Bruce Wayne's business rival

this is now typical of almost all comic book films, I think all of Spiderman's villains were somehow related to Peter Parker; in the 1st Iron Man film, evil Jeff Bridges in Tony Starks business partner; in Captain America the Red Skull becomes another supersoldier formula test subject 

for some reason the hero's  origin always starts a chain of repercussions leading to the creation of antagonists who would not otherwise exist, as if a random universe in which evil pre-exists would be so difficult for an audience to comprehend

so now James Bond follows this plot structure too ... maybe next film they should reveal the Soviet Union only existed because of something Bond did as a child?

82

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

I agree Caractacus but at least when Batman89 was released such connections hadn't become jaded by then.

I LOVE The Dark Knight screenplay and one of the reason's it work's is because the Joker just show's up with no backstory, which is probably one reason why Ledger's Joker is considered so iconic. The only explanation we need is Alfred describing what kind of man he is ( which says as much about what Bruce doesn't know about his foe, great writing ). It's also probably one of the reason's Bond became so iconic in the 60's...he just show's up fully formed...no justifications needed. This naval gazing in modern cinema is just time wasting in my opinion. I believe storytelling in action cinema should be about economy, such as how Bond was conveyed in Dr No.

It's mindboggling to me that the Broccoli's don't realise that their painting the Bond franchise into a corner, I could see where it was heading in 2006 when I saw CR. I have to admit though, I never thought it would get as idiotic as it got in Skyfall and especially Spectre. I hadn't seen Spectre until last week because I lost interest in Bond because of the contrived, nonsensical writing. I only watched it because I picked up the DVD on the cheap. I felt my intelligence had been insulted so badly I was compelled to reply to the topic here.

I know it happen's in many film's nowaday's and it's just as small minded, short sighted and contrived as it is in Bond. That's what really annoy's me about modern Hollywood. Those people are garnering awards and becoming millionaires for it yet they don't know how to write a decent script. World building it's called, so why does it all feel so small? I could go into a long detailed post about how these last four Bond film's are systematically ruining the character of Bond but it's actually getting worse now. By connecting everything like that they are also ruining the world he inhabits. I wouldn't mind but it's not even consistent from film to film. Seeing Bond looking at all the pictures of the previous films characters I was thinking 'Am I supposed to be involved in this film? Am I supposed to care?' I mean it got ridiculous. It felt like cynical manipulation at it's worst, so I disengaged from the film ( which I was getting bored with anyway ). Bond films in the past might not have been 'gritty' and 'realistic' but at least most of them had internal logic so I felt involved in the story. Look at Skyfall. Bond figure's out the BG was a sex slave which obviously was traumatic for that character. The film made me care about her...so what does Bond do? He shows up unannounced in her shower. Then he make's a daring escape from Silva just after Silva kills her ( and Bond says a bad joke while as usual Craig delivers the line without making an acting choice to convey to me what Bond is thinking ), not before. You tell me...why should I care about Bond? It's no wonder I gave up on these films.

I don't think it's really about screenwriters thinking that the audience needs to understand where evil comes from, I just think Hollywood writers these days just don't know how to write character. They think connecting and explaining everything is the same as depth of character. It's very shallow time's we live in.

Yeah they should do that with Russia. Film heroes nowadays have a hand in creating the evil they fight. Afterall, who doesn't want their screen heroes to come across as less heroic? Like I said...those people are ruining Bond.

83

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

I agree with all that, Jim78!

I don't mean any offence, but it's a little difficult to read your posts with your frequent misuse of apostrophes. They are only used for possessives and contractions, just about never for plurals unless it's a letter like "There are two S's in Messervy". "film's" is a possessive, not a plural:

"The film's script was horrible." vs "There are 24 official Bond films."

Also "it's" and "its". The first is a contraction and the second is a possessive:

"It's the worst film because of its script."

84

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

Thats cool Matt. I'm just trying to get my opinions across. Obviously I have the same script editor as the Bond screenwriters!  ajb007/lol

85

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

jim78 wrote:

Thats cool Matt. I'm just trying to get my opinions across. Obviously I have the same script editor as the Bond screenwriters!  ajb007/lol

I certainly enjoy hearing your opinions!

86

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

Matt S wrote:
jim78 wrote:

Thats cool Matt. I'm just trying to get my opinions across. Obviously I have the same script editor as the Bond screenwriters!  ajb007/lol

I certainly enjoy hearing your opinions!

Me too  ajb007/martini
It's great to hear other's opinions and even though I do enjoy and love the Craig films quite a lot, I totally understand where you're coming from jim 78

“The scent and smoke and sweat of a casino are nauseating at three in the morning. "
-Casino Royale, Ian Fleming

87

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

Thanks Matt. Its mad to think that Skyfall and Spectre were made by the man that made Road To Perdition.

88

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

Actually Austin Powers parodied character backstory years before Spectre, except Doctor Evils backstory was more involving than 'Daddy gave you too much attention'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTJj4wbmAhk

89

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

I think it was a good idea to change the game from Baccarat to Poker. Where baccarat is purely a game of chance, poker is not and, although poorly executed, fits nicely in the movie.

What I don’t understand is why they had to make this Bond’s first assignment as a 00 agent. Nowhere in the novel was it mentioned that Bond had just became a 00. From the way I read the novel, Bond is an experienced agent in Casino Royale and they could have easily kept it that way in the movie. Wasn’t it Cubby himself who said that the audience didn’t want to see Bond as a blundering rookie?

1. Ohmss   2. Frwl   3. Op   4. Tswlm   5. Tld   6. Ge  7. Yolt 8. Lald   9. Cr   10. Ltk   11. Dn   12. Gf   13. Qos   14. Mr   15. Tmwtgg   16. Fyeo   17. Twine   18. Sf   19. Tb   20 Tnd   21. Spectre   22 Daf   23. Avtak   24. Dad

90

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

here's a compare-and-contrast

they finally get the rights to Casino Royale after decades of it being owned by a rival, and the story already having been filmed twice
they make an adaptation that treats the source material with almost Masterpiece Theatre style reverence
obviously they know how indebted they are to Fleming

they finally get the rights to McClory's intellectual properties, basically Thunderball, which has already been filmed twice
and they throw out everything except the meeting scene and instead adapt a well-known James Bond parody into the official James Bond canon

its almost like they did that deliberately as a big F.U. to McClory, as in "we'd rather adapt a Mike Myers plot than whatever you've claimed to have written"
all that Dr Evil & Mr Bigglesworth stuff was mocking the elements McClory claimed copywrite to, so instead of treating it with reverence like Fleming's ideas, they drew attention to how parody-worthy these precious concepts really were