The James Bond Thread: RIP Robbie Coltrane

[CheapJon]

Of Craig's movies, I've only seen Casino Royal and that was around the time it came out, remember it as pretty good. Figured I'd give them a chance but I've never been a big Bond fan. Do they tie into each other at all?

[James Bond]

39 minutes ago, CheapJon said:

Of Craig's movies, I've only seen Casino Royal and that was around the time it came out, remember it as pretty good. Figured I'd give them a chance but I've never been a big Bond fan. Do they tie into each other at all?

Quantum of Solace is a direct sequel, but it feels more like an epilogue than a complete Bond film. I've come to appreciate it more with time, but in 2008 it was underwhelming compared to the mighty Casino Royale. The writer's strike definitely took its toll on the script and production. It should have been pushed to 2009.

Skyfall is a standalone and right up there with Casino Royale. It was a pure crowd pleaser. The plot is ridiculous but somehow it all works and Craig is at his most relaxed.

SPECTRE resumes the story arc from CR/QOS (just as Thunderball continued the SPECTRE story after no mention of them in Goldfinger), and it's mostly fine. However, Sam Mendes was clearly burnt out and the writing is clunky. It feels like a collection of set pieces much like the Brosnan films after GoldenEye. The worst bit is how he tries to retcon Skyfall into the overall story. However, Craig is still brilliant in it and overall there's much to enjoy.

[Powerage5]

6 hours ago, James Bond said:

Quantum of Solace is a direct sequel, but it feels more like an epilogue than a complete Bond film. I've come to appreciate it more with time, but in 2008 it was underwhelming compared to the mighty Casino Royale. The writer's strike definitely took its toll on the script and production. It should have been pushed to 2009.

Skyfall is a standalone and right up there with Casino Royale. It was a pure crowd pleaser. The plot is ridiculous but somehow it all works and Craig is at his most relaxed.

SPECTRE resumes the story arc from CR/QOS (just as Thunderball continued the SPECTRE story after no mention of them in Goldfinger), and it's mostly fine. However, Sam Mendes was clearly burnt out and the writing is clunky. It feels like a collection of set pieces much like the Brosnan films after GoldenEye. The worst bit is how he tries to retcon Skyfall into the overall story. However, Craig is still brilliant in it and overall there's much to enjoy.

My take on QOS over the years has become that it's an excellent action film, if not an excellent Bond film. Fast-paced and to the point, but pretty thin in the writing department (Understandable given the circumstances surrounding it). It's by no means a terrible film though, and certainly not the worst Bond film as many people seem to suggest. 

 

I still love SPECTRE despite it's flaws. It's absolutely ridiculous, up there with the wackiest of the Moore films (Maybe not quite reaching the ridiculousness of the Brosnan films though), but it's just a lot of fun still. And the PTS is still one of my favorites. 

[James Bond]

1 hour ago, Powerage5 said:

My take on QOS over the years has become that it's an excellent action film, if not an excellent Bond film. Fast-paced and to the point, but pretty thin in the writing department (Understandable given the circumstances surrounding it). It's by no means a terrible film though, and certainly not the worst Bond film as many people seem to suggest. 

 

I still love SPECTRE despite it's flaws. It's absolutely ridiculous, up there with the wackiest of the Moore films (Maybe not quite reaching the ridiculousness of the Brosnan films though), but it's just a lot of fun still. And the PTS is still one of my favorites. 

I agree, Quantum by no means ranks as the worst of the Bond films as its reputation might have some people believe. To me it very much ranks somewhere in the middle of the pack. An enjoyable enough action romp! Essentially Craig's TND. Non-threatening villain, a writer's strike hindering production, and an over emphasis on action.

SPECTRE's good definitely outweighs the bad. I still maintain that the Mr. White scene might be one of the best scenes in the entire series.

[action]

just finished watching "a view to a kill" again (in two sittings) and I must say I enjoyed every minute of it. the music in this is hugely underrated. moore's relaxed / quirky portrayal has aged like fine wine in this last movie of his. He's said he thinks this is his least favorite bond movie, but I'd kindly object. I can't quite put my finger on it, but I think his acting is brilliantly entertaining here. the scenes with his "driver / ally" seem like classic duo comedy.

Also, pretty stunning bond girls here with tanya roberts being absolutely gorgeous. Great villains in may day and zorin. And i find nothing to complain about the setpieces. even the story I find food for thought, and is actually very actual to this day, with the shortage of memory chips. 

So we've got great music, great bond girls, great vilains, pleasing acting by moore, bucketloads of humour, great story...

moore too old? he looks mean and lean here and full of jokes. Not sure a "young" bond would have added anything. I guess it's just the fashion to hate on this movie.

Edited January 9, 2021 by action

[James Bond]

A View To A Kill is the product of a tired series, but I would actually agree that it is unfairly maligned. In light of Tanya Roberts' recent passing, I do feel like she in particular gets way more hate than she deserves. She was fine, and people only seem to remember the fire hall scene (or the blimp sneaking up on her which is not so much her fault as the over the top writing).

Moore is definitely too old though, and he looks it. His performance doesn't lack, but he looks just as tired as the series had become whenever a stuntman isn't on screen. Even the man himself said so! Night and day between his looks in this and Octopussy (my personal favourite Moore film). Hard to believe this was only two years later.

That said, I agree that the film as is would not have benefitted from a younger Bond. I'm not sure Dalton or Brosnan would have been any better placed in the film as is. The series was in dire need of a shake-up regardless of who was Bond. This film is basically just Goldfinger-lite.

[Powerage5]

The biggest hindrance in AVTAK is the plot (Or lack thereof). I mean it’s literally a cheating horse jockey decides to blow up Silicon Valley, it’s nuts  But I love it - for my money it’s the most entertaining Bond film I don’t consider “legitimately” good. 

[action]

the story in tweaked form could have been written today. earthquakes, silicon valley, shortage of memory..... 

I'm not going to say it was ahead of it's time, but there surely are worse stories in the series.

and the last thing I'm going to say about tanya roberts, in her first scenes she legitimately looked the part with those deep blue eyes. she's no ursula andress, but she can easily compete with her.

anyway, to sum it up. it's a personal favorite of mine, and my brother. Great laughs when we watch it together.

[Dazey]

On 12/28/2020 at 9:19 AM, action said:

From russia with love had the briefcase and the train scenes which also rank among the defining moments of the franchise (does casino royale have similar moments?)

The poker game. 

[Crazyman]

The Chinese Democracy of movies is shockingly delayed yet again:

October 8th now

Edited January 22, 2021 by Crazyman

[rocknroll41]

They really should’ve just taken the $400 million deal for Apple TV+ and just called it a day...

[Powerage5]

I honestly don’t even really care about the film at this point. I can’t get excited about it because every time they announce a new release date I’m not confident it will actually be released then. The thing is, I don’t feel like sitting on the film until it can be released in cinemas is going to end up being a cost effective strategy. It doesn’t matter how you cut it, I don’t see the film being a financial success. The cost on promotion has to be astronomical alone - there was the initial promotional campaign for April 2020, then immediately after the delay a shorter promotional campaign about the change to November, another promotional campaign for November as that date loomed closer before it got delayed to April 2021. Fortunately they were smart enough to not actively promote the April 2021 date, but when it does actually come out they’ll need to do a massive promotional campaign. The thing is, I just don’t see anything but apathy from a lot of people over it. It’s not gonna set any box office records when it finally gets released. How is all of this more cost effective than striking a streaming deal?

[James Bond]

1 hour ago, Powerage5 said:

I honestly don’t even really care about the film at this point. I can’t get excited about it because every time they announce a new release date I’m not confident it will actually be released then. The thing is, I don’t feel like sitting on the film until it can be released in cinemas is going to end up being a cost effective strategy. It doesn’t matter how you cut it, I don’t see the film being a financial success. The cost on promotion has to be astronomical alone - there was the initial promotional campaign for April 2020, then immediately after the delay a shorter promotional campaign about the change to November, another promotional campaign for November as that date loomed closer before it got delayed to April 2021. Fortunately they were smart enough to not actively promote the April 2021 date, but when it does actually come out they’ll need to do a massive promotional campaign. The thing is, I just don’t see anything but apathy from a lot of people over it. It’s not gonna set any box office records when it finally gets released. How is all of this more cost effective than striking a streaming deal?

All of this. They clearly had their sights on a billion dollar box office but I don't think any film is going to be hitting that again for a long time. The thing is, nobody is going to look at any film right now and call it a failure. It is unprecedented times for everything, and indeed the film industry as well. Just put the film out for rent on the VOD services and call it a day. Sure, Bond is a very special "cinema experience" as it were but now is the time to make an exception.

October is also somewhat silly as well. If it's that close to the year's end, they might as well just bump it to a few months later and put it out in 2022. There's your 60th anniversary film.

[PatrickS77]

Will there ever be a time for no time to die? Apparently not. ;-)

[James Bond]

Daniel Craig at the No Time To Die premiere:

 

[Crazyman]

I think the reason they're so adamant on a theater release is because one of the distributors (MGM? idek who makes it anymore) has a big stake in theater chains so they also likely have deals in place that basically forces them to do it. 

Or at least that's what I hope the case is, otherwise there's no reason for them to not sell the rights to a streaming service. If it actually comes out this time it'll be 23 months after the initial release date...the fucking theme song will have been out for a year and a half by then!

[PatrickS77]

Well. If the date holds, at least it comes out at the right time of the year.

[rocknroll41]

Apparently the new movie might have to do reshoots now cause all the tech Bond has in the film (his phone, his watch, etc) is 2-3 years outdated now and the sponsors want him to have the latest tech.

That’s according to the UK newspaper The Sun, at least.

[James Bond]

The Sun has been saying the whole time that there are going to be reshoots. I'm sure next there will be a story about how the film will be reshoot with Tom Hardy.

[rocknroll41]

2 hours ago, James Bond said:

The Sun has been saying the whole time that there are going to be reshoots. I'm sure next there will be a story about how the film will be reshoot with Tom Hardy.

Oh ok. Good to know that they’re full of shot then!

[James Bond]

19 minutes ago, rocknroll41 said:

Oh ok. Good to know that they’re full of shot then!

Yeah I wouldn't put too much faith in them! Granted, I don't know much about the contracts of product placement deals by any means, but even if they did need to update the products I would think they'd just use CGI for any visible shots. Reshoots would seem fairly cost prohibitive for such a thing.

[FuriousStyles]

For any hardcore Bond fans, this is a must-read. A great look at the nebulous 6 year gap between LTK and Goldeneye and the saga of what went into the lost Dalton films.

 

 

[James Bond]

Been meaning to get that!

[Crazyman]

Me too. It's interesting to me that they almost rebooted with Dalton (no wonder they call him the original Craig) and set it in 1972.

Parts of the other 2 possible movies got merged into Brosnan films, mostly Tomorrow Never Dies, apparently. 

[Sosso]

I don't mind the serialized storytelling from the Daniel Craig movies. However, I hope that they will return to stand alone episodes with the next Bond. 

Just my two cents.