97 replies to this topic

[Pierce - Daniel]

What do people think of the comdeic old woman who drops her fruit, did she jsut walk off the set off MR?

Edited by Pierce - Daniel, 01 December 2008 - 11:50 PM.

[JimmyBond]

She didnt drop her fruit. Something Mitchell did caused it to fall.

[Double-0-7]

I have yet to find M comedic, but old and a woman - yes.

[Cody]

She didnt drop her fruit. Something Mitchell did caused it to fall.

Cherries just aren't safe around that guy.

[sharpshooter]

I thought it felt a tad out of place. Especially since the chase sequence is rather frenetic and no nonsense. It’s a piece of reactionary humour that is to be found in a Roger Moore film, not necessarily a Daniel Craig film.

[Harmsway]

I didn't think it out of place at all. But then again, I didn't really find it humorous. I found it sad.

[CaptainPower]

It was just to emphasise that Mitchell was a bastard. Trying to shoot M in the face.. fair game.. but knocking that old lady's fruit onto the floor was a step too far.. after that I had no problem with him being killed.

[sharpshooter]

I didn't feel anything, my emotions and facial expression remained the same. The moment fell flat on its face. I just wanted the chase to resume. For Craig film action sequences, I want 100 percent undiluted grit. Get the scene out of there, it serves no real purpose. It only just works against the atmosphere of the sequence.

[Harmsway]

Get the scene out of there, it serves no real purpose. It only just works against the atmosphere of the sequence.

I disagree. It reinforces the kind of destructive nature of what's going on, and that there are broader consequences beyond what's going on immediately with Mitchell and Bond. It's very much in keeping with the moment where the bystander is shot. The chase has an effect on other people.

For Craig film action sequences, I want 100 percent undiluted grit.

I fail to see how the moment isn't gritty. It's not unrealistic, by any stretch.

[Mister E]

I thought it was funny and breaks the serious nature of innocent by stander getting shot.

For Craig film action sequences, I want 100 percent undiluted grit.

Why ? That's boring. Nothing wrong with humor to break the tension for a secound just like Craig busting through the wall in CASINO ROYALE.

[sharpshooter]

Of course it is not unrealistic, that is certainly not being debated. I interpret the scene to be played for humour, something I am not in the mood for at that time. I want Bond to chase this man down and fast, in the way only Craig can.

Keep the scene with Mitchell shooting dead an innocent bystander, that’s fine. Far more gritty that’s for sure, and no way played for laughs. It maintains the atmosphere. But I could not care less of an old woman having a whinge about some smashed cherries. You can hardly compare the two. Human life, or some cherries? I know which scene I would delete.

[Publius]

The chase has an effect on other people.

Exactly. I like that the action scenes have moved away from the video game feel of some past Bond movies where reality is suspended while the participants play in their little sandbox.

There's also the moment just before that where Mitchell shoots into the horse race crowd without any regard to who he hits. We're not really shown what happened to whom, which I like because it feels like we're in the middle of this chaotic chase, not knowing what happens to the innocent bystanders we're passing by in a blur.

[Mister E]

Of course it is not unrealistic, that is certainly not being debated. I interpret the scene to be played for humour, something I am not in the mood for at that time. I want Bond to chase this man down and fast, in the way only Craig can.

Keep the scene with Mitchell shooting dead an innocent bystander, that’s fine. Far more gritty that’s for sure, and no way played for laughs. I could not care less of an old woman having a whinge about some smashed cherries. You can hardly compare the two. Human life, or some cherries? I know which scene I would delete.

What's so bad about breaking the tension for a bit ? The incident was not over the top, it's perfectly plausiable and keeps in line with the scene and yes, it even estasblishs realism. Just having a huge action scene with no humor feels un-realistic because in real life tradegy and comedy could occur at the same time.

We're not really shown what happened to whom, which I like because it feels like we're in the middle of this chaotic chase, not knowing what happens to the innocent bystanders we're passing by in a blur.

In that case it works but stuff like the boat chase and the dog fight should not be shot in a blur. You have to edit and shoot it like someone is watching a movie because the viewer has to know what is going on.

[sharpshooter]

It is alright to break the tension for a moment, if it is effective. I did not laugh at this scene; I did not find it mildly amusing. It is just out of place, and I have said that it is realistic - that is not an issue.

The moment in which Craig bursts through the wall during the Madagascar chase was amusing. It worked, because it adds to Bond’s personality. It was not a sideshow segement, the camera did not move away from the scene – Craig was in the heat of the chase. Momentum was moving forward. It was a new way of going about things, rather than reverting back to the Moore era briefly. The QoS scene goes out of its way to create humour, away from the chase. And fails.

[Mister E]

Whereas the QoS scene goes out of its way to create humour, away from the chase. And fails.

How ? She wasn't standing in a crowd like she would in a Moore film. She was right next to the action and she was victim of it.

[sharpshooter]

It does not matter one bit how many people are in the room. What matters is what is going on. The camera moves away from the chase, and focuses directly on her, for her reaction. Very much in line with the Moore era.

[Publius]

In that case it works but stuff like the boat chase and the dog fight should not be shot in a blur. You have to edit and shoot it like someone is watching a movie because the viewer has to know what is going on.

Well, some of us had no problem following along, and you can't please everyone.

[Mister E]

It does not matter one bit how many people are in the room. What matters is what is going on. The camera moves away from the chase, and focuses directly on her, for her reaction. Very much in line with the Moore era.

Yes it does. The level of intimacy is effected and that is important. The camera focuses on her obviously but she was in the way of the chase, the Moore moments are far more staged and people always move out of the way in time.

Well, some of us had no problem following along, and you can't please everyone.

You just thought you did, like others, and accepted what little you got out of it.

[sharpshooter]

Bond and Mitchell are visible. Big deal. What occurs is still predictable and irrelevant. She is demanding the attention in the frame.

[Mister E]

Bond and Mitchell are visible. Big deal. What occurs is still predictable and irrelevant. She is demanding the attention in the frame.

How was it predicatble ? Did you see in advance the fruit that was going to fall ? That is again a Moore-ism that was not in the scene. Also the fact that Bond and Mitchell are visible is a big deal, you see that incident is a direct result of those two. An incident that happened when an innocent person gets in the way just like the women being shot, ergo it's relevant.

[Judo chop]

I like it. It's a nice glimpse into reality, as already said. And it's not meant to be funny, I don't think. It's not the dude from AVTAK screaming in French after Bond takes his car. It's reality. The image it conjures is an old, tired, possibly widowed woman who has probably spent a considerable amount of time purchasing her produce and hoisting it up the stairs because she can't carry it, and therefore it's all a bit sad. As already said.

I think it's placed where it is to break a long, trembling sequence in two. First part is the chase. The second part is the hand to hand action.

[Mister E]

I like it. It's a nice glimpse into reality, as already said. And it's not meant to be funny, I don't think. It's not the dude from AVTAK screaming in French after Bond takes his car. It's reality. The image it conjures is an old, tired, possibly widowed woman who has probably spent a considerable amount of time purchasing her produce and hoisting it up the stairs because she can't carry it, and therefore it's all a bit sad. As already said.

I think it was possibly meant for some dark humor at least. Humor in Bond films doesn't have to be OTT.

[CaptainPower]

Is it just me or are people taking this a little too personally?

[Mister E]

Is it just me or are people taking this a little too personally?

Who is ? It's just a debate.

[Judo chop]

I like it. It's a nice glimpse into reality, as already said. And it's not meant to be funny, I don't think. It's not the dude from AVTAK screaming in French after Bond takes his car. It's reality. The image it conjures is an old, tired, possibly widowed woman who has probably spent a considerable amount of time purchasing her produce and hoisting it up the stairs because she can't carry it, and therefore it's all a bit sad. As already said.

I think it was possibly meant for some dark humor at least. Humor in Bond films doesn't have to be OTT.

Did you laugh at it? Or, rather, did you really want to laugh at it?

I mean, if it were a younger guy who drops his wine bottle and flowers on the way to a date, and who shakes his fist at the passing assailants... then, sure. The guy doesn't even have to do his AVTAK fist waving. He could just have an expired look on his face, and that'd be amusing.

But an old woman losing her groceries? It all seems rather cheerless to me. A bad pick if your aim is comedy, even dark comedy, IMO.

[Mister E]

Did you laugh at it? Or, rather, did you really want to laugh at it?

I mean, if it were a younger guy who drops his wine bottle and flowers on the way to a date, and who shakes his fist at the passing assailants... then, sure. The guy doesn't even have to do his AVTAK fist waving. He could just have an expired look on his face, and that'd be amusing.

But an old woman losing her groceries? It all seems rather cheerless to me. A bad pick if your aim is comedy, even dark comedy, IMO.

Yes I did laugh because how ed up it was. I laughed when Bond dumped Mathis in a dumpster and I laughed even harder when Bond stole his money.

[Judo chop]

Did you laugh at it? Or, rather, did you really want to laugh at it?

I mean, if it were a younger guy who drops his wine bottle and flowers on the way to a date, and who shakes his fist at the passing assailants... then, sure. The guy doesn't even have to do his AVTAK fist waving. He could just have an expired look on his face, and that'd be amusing.

But an old woman losing her groceries? It all seems rather cheerless to me. A bad pick if your aim is comedy, even dark comedy, IMO.

Yes I did laugh because how ed up it was. I laughed when Bond dumped Mathis in a dumpster and I laughed even harder when Bond stole his money.

Ok, well... from this I think we can conclude that you have a peculiar sense of humor, but I don't think we can conclude that Forster and team intended to make you laugh.

[Mister E]

Did you laugh at it? Or, rather, did you really want to laugh at it?

I mean, if it were a younger guy who drops his wine bottle and flowers on the way to a date, and who shakes his fist at the passing assailants... then, sure. The guy doesn't even have to do his AVTAK fist waving. He could just have an expired look on his face, and that'd be amusing.

But an old woman losing her groceries? It all seems rather cheerless to me. A bad pick if your aim is comedy, even dark comedy, IMO.

Yes I did laugh because how ed up it was. I laughed when Bond dumped Mathis in a dumpster and I laughed even harder when Bond stole his money.

Ok, well... from this I think we can conclude that you have a peculiar sense of humor, but I don't think we can conclude that Forster and team intended to make you laugh.

I guess you can debate if Forster intended humor but I honestly can't see how they didn't. Then it does depend on what a person would find funny.

[sharpshooter]

How was it predicatble ? Did you see in advance the fruit that was going to fall ? That is again a Moore-ism that was not in the scene. Also the fact that Bond and Mitchell are visible is a big deal, you see that incident is a direct result of those two. An incident that happened when an innocent person gets in the way just like the women being shot, ergo it's relevant.

Her reaction was predictable. If we did not have these cherries fall, we would not have this scene. On the surface it is played for humour and it doesn’t work, for me at least. Bond and Mitchell being in the frame does not change one thing. You say it does, I say it doesn’t. And I’ll say it again, it doesn’t. The entire reason of the shot is to capture this old woman’s reaction to the smashed cherries. She is front and centre, and irrelevant.

[Harmsway]

On the surface it is played for humour and it doesn’t work, for me at least.

Frankly, I don't see how it's played for humor. It's just presented, but there's nothing especially humorous about it.