I got this issue yesterday. It's a must have for any Bond fan.
Maxim Saves 007
Started by
Von Hammerstein
, Dec 14 2004 03:41 PM
33 replies to this topic
#31
Righty007
-
- Veterans Reserve
-
- 13051 posts
Discharged.
- Location:Station CLE - Cleveland
Posted 28 December 2004 - 03:14 PM
#32
Sam Fisher
-
- Crew
-
- 409 posts
Sub-Lieutenant
Posted 29 December 2004 - 07:21 AM
I have to agree with everything stated in the article. Die Another Day was a bona fide P.O.S.
If I were in charge of the franchise I'd fire Purvis and Wade and start looking for new potential writers who can revamp the series and work up from there.
Don't just cut back on the CGI, dump it completly.
If the direction is to get back to basics then that means showing that Bond is a flesh and blood human, Bond gets hurt, Bond bleeds and his bones get broken but nevertheless Bond gets the job done by hook or by crook.
And while we're sacking the crap: DEFENATELY sack the generation X stunt sequences. So people won't just nod thier heads and walk out of the theater.
Enough of the "let's see Bond's sensitive side" We already know he does. Enough please. If Bond wore his heart on his sleeve he'd be dead long ago. Bond is a ruthless cold hearted bastard who does what he does, why explore his inner psyche and let the man do his job?
If I were in charge of the franchise I'd fire Purvis and Wade and start looking for new potential writers who can revamp the series and work up from there.
Don't just cut back on the CGI, dump it completly.
If the direction is to get back to basics then that means showing that Bond is a flesh and blood human, Bond gets hurt, Bond bleeds and his bones get broken but nevertheless Bond gets the job done by hook or by crook.
And while we're sacking the crap: DEFENATELY sack the generation X stunt sequences. So people won't just nod thier heads and walk out of the theater.
Enough of the "let's see Bond's sensitive side" We already know he does. Enough please. If Bond wore his heart on his sleeve he'd be dead long ago. Bond is a ruthless cold hearted bastard who does what he does, why explore his inner psyche and let the man do his job?
#33
DavidSomerset
-
- Crew
-
- 879 posts
Lieutenant
- Location:Moonbase Alpha
Posted 29 December 2004 - 07:28 AM
Wait here... It is just because the CGI was bad..the funny ice skiing flying scene..but imagine some CGI house like ILM doing the CGI. Was LTR or SW bad because of the CGI? No they were better because of the director, story, acting and finally the picture perfect CGI. So long as Bond has the correct actor, director and the correct story, so long as the CGI is not laughable as in DAD or some save Michael Wilson's money kind of hotchpotch, the CGI would work.Don't just cut back on the CGI, dump it completly.
#34
Jack Bauer
-
- Crew
-
- 561 posts
Lieutenant
- Location:Illinois
Posted 30 December 2004 - 04:36 AM
Wait here... It is just because the CGI was bad..the funny ice skiing flying scene..but imagine some CGI house like ILM doing the CGI. Was LTR or SW bad because of the CGI? No they were better because of the director, story, acting and finally the picture perfect CGI. So long as Bond has the correct actor, director and the correct story, so long as the CGI is not laughable as in DAD or some save Michael Wilson's money kind of hotchpotch, the CGI would work.Don't just cut back on the CGI, dump it completly.
I think what he meant was that he wanted an older style Bond film, where CGI wasn't used at all, or if it was, done very poorly (
).I agree with you, though.