Jump to content

No Time To Die (James Bond #25)


Jay

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

I hate dour Bond.

 

I don't. The only reason I occasionally watch films that aren't serious, is if they are comedies or as the occasional palette cleanser.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as it's entertaining, it's valid. I love Quantum and that one is basically about a depressed violent drunk Bond murdering people without just cause. All because of some broad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Richard said:

Say what you like about the film (and a lot has been said about it) but Michel Lonsdale is a class act.

"May I press you to a cucumber sandwich?" 


He is, yes. 

Thing about MR is that for every 'good' (Lonsdale, how Moore plays the aftermath of the centrifuge sequence/the scene at the bird-shoot, 'I think he's attempting re-entry') there's a 'bad' (Jaws trying to 'fly' when he accidentally destroys the parachute ripcords, Drax having been able to build a huge space-station apparently unnoticed, that bloody double-taking pigeon ... ) .  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Just naming another guy without a lot of his own personal style that has experience directing big budget Hollywood films

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

I still say it's a mistake to hire "name" directors for Bond movies.  These are producers movies.  I bet Stephen Sommers would make a great Bond movie.

 

Sam Mendes is a name director and he made the best Bond movie since The Spy Who Loved Me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 05/12/2017 at 10:05 PM, Nick1066 said:

 

Sam Mendes is a name director and he made the best Bond movie since The Spy Who Loved Me.

HALF a good Bond movie.

But that second half: Home Alone with bad guy winning because Q is an idiot of the extreme kind...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:)

It has ... Bond hitting rock-bottom but coming back with characteristic swagger and humour, a villain who is both old-school grandiose in the series tradition (he takes over a whole island) but also very modern (he's a bisexual cyber-terrorist), 21st-century-appropriate reintroductions of Moneypenny and Q and the re-establishment (again with a modern spin) of Bond's 'bantering' relationship with them both, some absolutely gorgeous cinematography, fine action (in particular the pre-credits sequence and everything at and around Skyfall itself), a Bond girl who is in it just to give Bond info about the bad guy, sleep with him and then get killed (something I'm quite surprised they did in an era where they like to present the love interest as Bond's 'equal' in some way), several extremely pleasing 50th-anniversary nods to the series history, and a very moving close to M and Bond's 'surrogate mother/son' relationship. Plus it's patriotic,but not in a dickish UKIP way.       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I'm glad that Boyle is in the frame, and that Nolan is, now, not.

I'll explain: it's not that I don't like Nolan, because I do. I think THE PRESTIGE, and MEMENTO are great, and that INSOMNIA, and INSTELLAR are good. I only have a problem with that trilogy...

I digress.

What the Bond films want - need - are journeyman directors, people who will produce a competently-made film, but whose personal technique will remain invisible.

The minute that Nolan becomes involved, it ceases to be a Bond film, and becomes a Nolan film. The man wouldn't be able to help putting his stamp on the film.

Above all, Nolan is, to his credit, a director who wants you to think about what is presented to you. All that the producers of the Bond films want you to do is to sit in a movie theater with your nachos, and your Milk Duds, and your Baby Ruth, and your hot dog, and your popcorn, and your overpriced, watered-down Mountain Dew, and have a good time. Thyat not what Nolan is about.

Of course, he could easily tone down the personal, and up the commercial, but I'm not sure if he'd be prepared to do that.

If Boyle takes the gig, then I wish him well. I hope that he makes the best Bond film he can make. We'll find out, in about 18 months...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

If anything I'm interested in the fact that Purvis & Wade aren't working on the script this time. After the last few films, it's good to get some new blood on the series, so I approve of it. 

 

Hopefully Arnold returns to score too. It's almost criminal that he hasn't scored a film in years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's pretty impressive the same guys have been involved with the writing of every James Bond film made after Tomorrow Never Dies.  They must be filthy rich

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think EON just has a routine, and relies on the usual same people for each film, especially when it comes to writing. It's no different then when say Richard Maibaum was co-writing or writing most of the Bond scripts back in the old days. It's basically like a team effort. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should be able to ask Arnold directly considering he's at this years Krakow Film Music Festival and I'll be attending, and I can hope for any sort of answer to whether he's interested in the first place and whether he's heard anything at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EON does like to work with people that it feels comfortable with (the Lamonts, the Courbolds), and it is nothing if not loyal.

My dream choices for Bond 25 would be Lamont Jr (since dad's not doing it, anymore), Phil Meheux, and Stuart Baird, and...oh, yeah...some guy called David Arnold!

Purves and Wade were often hit-and-miss, but when they hit, they were great.

No Logan? No Butterworth? That's probably a good thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Margo Channing said:

I'd be happy with a other Tommy Newman score. Some parts of SPECTRE are really funky.

 

I like both Newman scores. It's good - sometimes great - music, but I don't think that it's Bond music. It takes more that just a few brass hits, to make a Bond score. Arnold understands Bond music, at an almost sub-atomic level;  something that a lot of other Bond composers fail to do. The Mendes/Newman team worked well, but let's have Arnold back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.