16 replies to this topic

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

Now that the current decade is finishing, as long with its retro 80's inspiration, it seems appropriate to remind the characteristic of its direct predeccesor. The nineties had the 60's as its major 'role model', tendency that was reflected in the UK with the Britpop and Cool Britannia movement, and in the US to some extent with the- hippie influenced- grunge.

Now going back to Bond... the thing is that Brosnan era tried to encapsulate all of this retro feel, particularly with GE (and the reappearance of the Aston Matin DB5, for instance), but IMO they never really achieved to revive s true sixties vibe- perhaps because Brosnan never accomplished the roughness of Connery's Bond-.

While CR seems one of the most retro sixties Bond, starting with the costumes- espeacially in 'Montenegro', with Vesper's dresses, hat and make up included-, following, among other things, with the colorful cinematography, very much in tone with DN, GF and YOLT. And maybe ending with Chris Cornell... right, this artist wasn't a start on the sixties, but he was the leader of a very representative grunge group from the 90's, and I think that mix is what this retro style is all about.

I mean if CR have would have been made in the nineties (let's say 1997) with the same crew and cast of 2006, it would not turn out to be so different to what was finally made. And overall, I think that CR seems more like a film of the nineties- one of the good ones, not like the flick that EON actually did in that time-, while QOS seems more characteristic of the current decade.

[Safari Suit]

In some ways I'd say CR was more like an 80s action film, with its harer-edged action. The 90s was more the era of PG-13 thrillers and the beginning of watered down action.

We've already had quite a bit of ninties nostalgia in the UK. There was even a bit of a Britpop revival in 2003. You know; about five years after the scene originally ended. Ridiculous, but fun.

[Turn]

I think CR fits better in the current decade than the '90s. Terrorism is seen as a bigger threat everywhere than it was then in light of the 9/11 attacks. And the poker/gaming craze were in full swing when CR was announced, so that fit as well.

[Daddy Bond]

"the film that the 90's deserved but never have it"???

I be thinking you is right.

[DamnCoffee]

I think CR fits better in the current decade than the '90s. Terrorism is seen as a bigger threat everywhere than it was then in light of the 9/11 attacks. And the poker/gaming craze were in full swing when CR was announced, so that fit as well.

I completely agree. The terrorism angle wouldn't have had much of an impact. Plus I think the whole Post 9/11 reboot thing was a brilliant choice. Darker, grittier etc...

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

I think CR fits better in the current decade than the '90s. Terrorism is seen as a bigger threat everywhere than it was then in light of the 9/11 attacks. And the poker/gaming craze were in full swing when CR was announced, so that fit as well.

I completely agree. The terrorism angle wouldn't have had much of an impact. Plus I think the whole Post 9/11 reboot thing was a brilliant choice. Darker, grittier etc...

That could be the exception of what I exposed, but I was talking more about 90's style, than a just plot point, that could have been easily change it for some leftovers of the Cold War ala GE (taking the chance, at the same time, to be even more close to the novel).

And then again, whereas terrorism become a bigger issue in USA since their 9/11, in the rest of the world was already an important concern since a long time ago, particularly in Europe with IRA and ETA, for instance.

Edited by Mr. Arlington Beech, 21 January 2009 - 06:45 PM.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

In some ways I'd say CR was more like an 80s action film, with its harer-edged action.

I disagree. If CR would look like a regular 80's action movie, then it would look very much like LTK. And I think that Craig's debut is very different to Dalton's second entry.

Edited by Mr. Arlington Beech, 24 January 2009 - 09:37 PM.

[Colossus]

Well i like GE over CR anyway so i'm not worried about CR being some movie we never got in the 90s anyway.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

My main point here, is that CR is the most retro sixties Bond in the series, and that the decade when retro 60's style reach its peak were the nineties. Hence, this movie seems to fit pretty much with the recent past decade, than with the current one (unlike QOS).

[stamper]

The terrorism angle wouldn't have had much of an impact.

It worked with True Lies, which was truly a visionnary movie about what Bond should be in the future, (ditching the family comedy of course)

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

The terrorism angle wouldn't have had much of an impact.

It worked with True Lies, which was truly a visionnary movie about what Bond should be in the future, (ditching the family comedy of course)

Totally agree.

[Turn]

The terrorism angle wouldn't have had much of an impact.

It worked with True Lies, which was truly a visionnary movie about what Bond should be in the future, (ditching the family comedy of course)

Totally agree.

True Lies was a visionary movie because it had a terrorist type in it? I can think of several other films that had more memorable terrorists than that True Lies including Die Hard and Seagal's Under Siege and did it before True Lies was ever out.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

The terrorism angle wouldn't have had much of an impact.

It worked with True Lies, which was truly a visionnary movie about what Bond should be in the future, (ditching the family comedy of course)

Totally agree.

True Lies was a visionary movie because it had a terrorist type in it? I can think of several other films that had more memorable terrorists than that True Lies including Die Hard and Seagal's Under Siege and did it before True Lies was ever out.

OK, that could be arguable, but the thing is that CR didn't need to be made it after the USA's 9/11, it could have worked perfectly in the 90's, especially if you have in mind its retro sixties style, that was so in fashion in the nineties.

[JimmyBond]

You're missing the point of what other's are saying. It could have been made pre-9/11 sure, but Terrorists would probably have not been used as the villians. Sure movies have been using terrorists for a long while now, but it's a bigger topic now than it's ever been.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

You're missing the point of what other's are saying. It could have been made pre-9/11 sure, but Terrorists would probably have not been used as the villians. Sure movies have been using terrorists for a long while now, but it's a bigger topic now than it's ever been.

Although for USA after your 9/11 terrorism become bigger topic there, in the rest of the world is an important menace since many time ago. SPECTRE was a terrorist organization and it perfectly worked for the sixties, Renard was a terrorist and it worked for the nineties... so I don't see your point.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

Now that the current decade is finishing, as long with its retro 80's inspiration, it seems appropriate to remind the characteristic of its direct predecessor. The nineties had the 60's as its major 'role model', tendency that was reflected in the UK with the Britpop and Cool Britannia movement, and in the US to some extent with the- hippie influenced- grunge.

Now going back to Bond... the thing is that Brosnan era tried to encapsulate all of this retro feel, particularly with GE (and the reappearance of the Aston Martin DB5, for instance), but IMO they never really achieved to revive s true sixties vibe- perhaps, because Brosnan never accomplished the roughness of Connery's Bond, and their films had too many CGI alongside with an overall a videogame feel to it-.

While CR seems one of the most retro sixties Bond, starting with the costumes- especially in 'Montenegro', with Vesper's dresses, hat and make up included-, following, among other things, with the colourful cinematography, very much in tone with DN, GF and YOLT. And maybe ending with Chris Cornell... right, this artist wasn't a start on the sixties, but he was the leader of a very representative grunge group from the 90's, and I think that mix is what this retro style is all about.

I mean if CR have would have been made in the nineties (let's say 1997) with the same crew and cast of 2006, it would not turn out to be so different to what was finally made. And overall, I think that CR seems more like a film of the nineties- one of the good ones, not like the flick that EON actually did in that time-, while QOS seems more characteristic of the current decade.

Anyhow, in my OP I was talking more about the style and tone of CR, as suited for the nineties, than about mere plot points.

Edited by Mr. Arlington Beech, 31 March 2009 - 08:33 AM.

[JimmyBond]

You're missing the point of what other's are saying. It could have been made pre-9/11 sure, but Terrorists would probably have not been used as the villians. Sure movies have been using terrorists for a long while now, but it's a bigger topic now than it's ever been.

Although for USA after your 9/11 terrorism become bigger topic there, in the rest of the world is an important menace since many time ago. SPECTRE was a terrorist organization and it perfectly worked for the sixties, Renard was a terrorist and it worked for the nineties... so I don't see your point.

Point taken. As an American it can be hard to see things from other cultures perspectives. My apologies.