14 replies to this topic

[Pushkin]

Well hello to everyone. I read through some of the other reviews and found them quite interesting. I have only some small points of my own. But first a little background on me: I have been a Bond fan for about 25 years (I'm 38). I have read all of the Fleming stories, Gardner, and 3 of the books by Benson. My favourite Bond is Dalton but Craig could well become my favourite.

I would rank the film along with the classics which for me are FRWL, GF, FYEO, TLD, and Goldeneye. I think this is an excellent film but I have some minor issues I would like to see corrected next time out. The first two have to do with toying a little too much with the formula.

1) The Gun Barrel sequence.... This is a classic piece of cinema. I am all for reworking the films but I think the gun barrel sequence to kick off the film should have been there.

2) James Bond Theme. I have only been once thus far but if I recall correctly, the James Bond theme was only blaring at the end during the credits. Again, an all time film classic. It doesn't have to be used everywhere (and in the past its been over used sometimes) but it should be used.

3) Suaveness. I like Daniel Craig as James Bond... to me he is going in the same direction as Dalton ... probably taking Dalton's thrust even further. I However, I think they need to give Craig more of an opportunity to be suauve. This is not a knock against Craig - I just don't think that was written into the part as much as it could be. Having said that, I certainly would like to avoid the Roger Moorish levels that once existed (personally, I think Moore could have been a tougher Bond if they had written it that way - they did once with FYEO).

4) The one truly weak point in the film for me was the romance between Bond and Vesper. Its pretty clear to me from the get go that he wants to sleep with her.... I just found the leap to him falling in love with her. I would say that's the only part of the film that could use some serious improvement. Sure there are other inconsistencies in the film but there are going to be inconsistencies in any film.... just like real life.

Very pleased with this film. I feel bad for Brosnan who I thought could have done a film like this (i.e. a more plot focussed serious film like the beginning of DAD.) Looking forward to Bond's conversation with Mr. White in 2008.... I will be 40.... gives me something to look forward to.

Cheers. Love the site!

Edited by Pushkin, 22 November 2006 - 02:53 AM.

[MattofSteel]

1) I agree, I like my gunbarrel at the start, but I LOVED, loved, loved the way it was used in CR. It will be put back.

2) I love the theme, but I'm glad we got a film without the overload. "Binge and purge" theory completely in effect there. It will be a tad more prominent in Bond 22, I'm sure.

3) Suavness, really? I think Daniel Craig was every bit as suave as any other Bond. Look at the way he moves, especially in the Bahamas and the Casino. When he's around high rollers, he's in his element. There's nothing particularly rough about his scenes there, he's as suave as Pierce Brosnan or any other Bond ever managed, and he does it without an eyebrow raised.

4) I personally thought the romantic progression was as good as you're going to find in a 2 hour film also limited by the fact that it's a BOND movie, and the love story will never be plot A. This is as close as we're ever going to get, and I thought the execution was brilliant. Bond's initial attraction (and hearty measures of respect, well acted by Craig) are evident from the moment on the train. YOu have the moment in the shower, where he begins to genuinely feel protective and caring. That leads to the 4AM (?) dinner prior to her capture, where his feelings essentially start to emerge, and he starts to recognize them himself ("He's a very lucky man," referring to her Algerian boyfriend). Then you have post-torture, where he's nearly died and isn't hiding behind his wall anymore. She's "stripped him of all his armour," so to speak;).

I don't see how that execution could have been improved, without seriously altering the film. IMO, it was as perfect as it could have been.

Just a few points, otherwise I loved the film as much as you! Cheers!

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

There was a point to the theme not being used until the end though. He isn't supposed to really become Bond until then...

[JimmyBond]

There was a point to the theme not being used until the end though. He isn't supposed to really become Bond until then...

On that note, there is also a reason the gunbarrel is placed where it is. It doesnt pop up until he gets his two kills, solidifying him as a Double-Oh.

[MattofSteel]

Exactly, on those last two points. I'm glad they favoured logic over blind tradition...that was sort of the entire point of this film, no?

[Johnboy007]

There was a point to the theme not being used until the end though. He isn't supposed to really become Bond until then...

Indeed. It does show up when the Venice house collapses; signifiying that our bulletproof super-hero is here.

[MattofSteel]

The base line shows up at all the proper moments. Some of those scenes are the best/most iconic in the entire franchise, and Arnold was right minded in realizing that, probably for the purpose of their legacy, something needed to be there.

Plus it IS a Bond film.

[Pushkin]

Thanks for all your responses. I think I need to see the film again. Its always hard to make judgements after the first time and especially with what appears to be my faulty memory (at 38 that does not bode well!) Overall I am very happy with the direction they took.

In some ways my favourite portayal of Bond was Dalton in License to Kill. While I thought there was significant problems with the film itself, I like Dalton's portrayal. The first time I saw that film I had a weird reaction. Took me my second and third viewing to see it.

[MattofSteel]

I enjoyed Dalton as well, but I was never a fan of the writing he got. It never suited his skills.

The CR screenplay is the best since early Maibum, in terms of Bond's character and dialogue, and not only that, but seems to be the screenplay Daniel Craig was born for - it suits him better than the Dinner Jacket Vesper has made for him;). Didn't hurt, either, that he absolutely ran with it and made a phenomenal performance of the job.

Problem is, now, if the future scripts are lacking, we'll notice readily:(. Bring back Mr. Haggis!

[delfloria]

Goldfinger did not use the main James Bond theme except for the the gunbarrel and nobody ever complained.

[booyeah_]

Goldfinger did not use the main James Bond theme except for the the gunbarrel and nobody ever complained.

the entire pre-title sequence featured the theme(track 5 on the CD). To me, considering this is the first film since 02 and Craig's first, there should have been an emphasis on the theme(wouldnt it had been great during the airport sequence?). Perhaps I feel adament on this because the song the score was based on, I hate but thats just me.

[00golf]

Two things that I liked about CR and first is that the Suaveness is a work in progress. Remember, this is the story of how Bond first became a 00. Secondly, it frees up the character to not have to carry so much of it. Certainly being suave is a big part of Bond, but not all of what he is. The movie character, especially Moore's renditions and Brosnan's put much more emphasis on the Suave part of Bond than what was originally created.

The movie series truly had more or less exhausted the path they were on. Something different had to be done. Otherwise and what was basically happening was that Bond was becoming indistinquishable from other action movies. The beauty of CR is that Bond is not being redefined, it is merely the untold story of the beginning of his career. It gives Eon freedom to build the character and yes to a point it has freed them up from the limitations that had been put on the movies because Bond had become so perfect.

[Mr Woodpigeon]

My favourite Bond is Dalton ...

You are more than welcomed here! Dalton is the man

And it is a great site, lots if interesting reading & people.

[Stylo]

I think Daniel Craig was every bit as suave as any other Bond. Look at the way he moves, especially in the Bahamas and the Casino. When he's around high rollers, he's in his element.

Yes, it was very well done with all the big smiles and "Good Evening", he was very smooth. At the poker game in the Ocean Club he was so silky when he sat down, but I wondered, "what would those other players think if they knew this guy beat someone to death recently?"

....the love story will never be plot A. This is as close as we're ever going to get, and I thought the execution was brilliant. Bond's initial attraction (and hearty measures of respect, well acted by Craig) are evident from the moment on the train.

Yep. It wasn't so obvious to me that he wanted to sleep with her from the get go. He gives that head shake and a little snort after she leaves the car, as if he's wondering what the heck just hit him. I also think the progression of the love story as plot B was just fine given the time limitations.

Edited by Stylo, 29 November 2006 - 06:16 AM.

[VeteransAbroad]

In the book, Bond is sometimes as nervous as a teenager with Vesper.