39 replies to this topic

[Four Aces]

Please, no unbelievable gadgets!

[Vauxhall]

Agreed! Clever gadgets I approve of, but don't think unbelievable gadgets would be a good move in this day and age of realism in the action genre.

[darkpath]

Agreed! Clever gadgets I approve of, but don't think unbelievable gadgets would be a good move in this day and age of realism in the action genre.

I'd like to see the gadgets stay firmly within the realm of plausibility, with no violations of physics. I don't want to see a laser in a watch able to cut steel because I know bloody well there is no way a chemical power supply of that size is going to get the job done. Conversely, I'd be fine with fake cigarettes containing thermite.

[Judo chop]

Seriously. Did you really think Craig was going to go 3 films with out a single Bondian feature in the car? Would you really want that?

A Walther P99 drawer and that defibrilator aren't Bondian features?

Not especially Bondian.

Yes. We see Aston Martins with silenced Walthers and fly-by-wire life support systems with 24-hour medical staff (to attend to one's potential imminent death) every single day.

It's utterlly common place.

I've also seen it all over on the regular terrestrial tv shows to boot!

Plus I see an Aston Martin driving by every 2 minutes.

I didn't say it was commonplace. Who would? I said it wasn't especially BONDIAN. Meaning "James Bond like". There are regular espionage thrillers, and there are Bond movies. A compartment fitted for a firearm in a car is not espeically Bondian. I could see that occuring in any spy film. The Aston Martin is obviously special to Bond, but then the make of car is not what the conversation was about. If you are going to try to impress us with such advanced humor as sarcasm, do yourself a favor and stay focused on the topic; it'll help your cause.

[Major Tallon]

Sorry to disagree, but I think it's particularly Bondian. Remember that the Aston Martin in Goldfinger came equipped with "a long-barelled Colt .45 in a trick compartment under the driver's seat."

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

Ok, you've gone from "there might be a gadget in the car next film" to "invisible cars careening through ice palaces".

There is a middle groud. Even a lower-middle ground. We can relax. DAD won't happen with Craig. Not in the next 2 films at least.

Exactly....everybody needs to read this post.

A few gadgets can still be realistic without Bond being able to to teleport.

[Judo chop]

Sorry to disagree, but I think it's particularly Bondian. Remember that the Aston Martin in Goldfinger came equipped with "a long-barelled Colt .45 in a trick compartment under the driver's seat."

No need to apologize for having an opinion. I'll even admit that I may be wrong if a good argument is presented. Maybe Bond could take credit for the idea of a drawer fitted for a gun in a car? Your example is a very good one, although now we are talking about the Bond on paper vs. the Bond on screen and I

Edited by Judo chop, 15 January 2007 - 04:47 PM.

[dodge]

We need to be careful about which Broadway tunes we croon here: 'Don't Rain On My Parade' is certainly appropriate. But it's way too soon for us to break out in 'Camelot'. With cool and well-picked gadgets, built into the stories, there'll be a shining spot...known as Camelot...for at least a trilogy.

If Craig does a fourth, we can be on our guard. For that one will mark the transition, I think, and point very clearly to what lies in wait.

Dark Bond/Light Bond/Dark Bond/Light Bond...must we go through that again?

[Blisster Shoots]

Now now... keep in mind that he also rejects the idea of "rockets shooting out of the car". Whatever they do in the next film, I have a feeling (read: "trust") that it will be tasteful. It will be within the bounds of possibility, and not over-the-top gadgetry just for the sake of gadgetry.

I'm excited to see how they slowly - but in a realistic and practical way - move back into the Bond formula.

Seriously. Did you really think Craig was going to go 3 films with out a single Bondian feature in the car? Would you really want that?

The Bond formula is old.

All I care is that the personality of Craig's Bond and all future Bonds do not slip into the emotionless, super heroic style of Connery, Moore, & Brosnan.

Seriously. Did you really think Craig was going to go 3 films with out a single Bondian feature in the car? Would you really want that?

I wouldn't. It would be like "we're going to have a Batman film but he will never wear his Batman costume, there will be no Wayne Manor or Batcave, no Alfred, no Batmobile, no villains, no action sequecnes, etc., etc. and we will set it in Keokuk, Iowa instead of Gotham City. We don't want to be too reliant on the formula."

I think the Batman analogy is a bit extreme.

[Blisster Shoots]

If you honestly expected requisite elements like gadgets, Q, Moneypenny, etc. to stay mothballed forever because this film succeeded with a bare bones,

Yes....but we don't have to see them immediately. I think that if they show up in the next film, then it would be immediate.

However, since this is a "re-boot" I wouldn't mind a total recharacterization of Q and/or Moneypenny. Perhaps make Q, Bond's contemporary? Or make not have a single character named "Q", rather "Q" just being a department....I dunno, just an idea.