45 replies to this topic

[mttvolcano]

According to this: A Classic Bond For 23
It is supposed to be a classic Bond. Now what do you think? What elements create a classic Bond film? Gunbarrel in the beginning?

[Miles Miservy]

According to this: A Classic Bond For 23
It is supposed to be a classic Bond. Now what do you think? What elements create a classic Bond film? Gunbarrel in the beginning?

I've always believed that, once you strip away the beautiful women, the luxurious locations, the cool cars & ingenius gadgets, what ultimately makes a "Classic Bond" film is the VILLAIN.

You take someone like Carl Stromberg, Max Zorin or Franz Sanchez; these are very evil men, doing very evil things. Brad Whittaker is a drug/gun dealer... so? Kamal Khan smuggles fake jewelry for Mad Russian Generals... yeah, and? Fransisco Scaramanga was basically a hired thug.

I like a bad guy that likes to get his hands dirty. You want to enter the theater wondering, "Is THIS going to be the guy that kills 007?"

Edited by Miles Miservy, 02 August 2011 - 04:35 PM.

[Jim]

Hopefully more than that, as that lasts about seven seconds. Not paying ten quid for that.

Last time I did pay a tenner for seven seconds' entertainment was (redacted on the grounds of taste, decency, morality and because the wife'll find out)

[Dustin]

Actually you made a deal there. Seven seconds!

[TCK]

I don't really know what's a classic Bond. Each film is different. The perfect formula doesn't exist. The only films which look alike are Dr No and From Russia with love, plus Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace. By the way, the two latest movies were probably the most "classic" James Bond since The living daylights. I take the "classic" word as "faithfulness to Ian Fleming's novels plus consideration of the time". So, I don't know what they could add to Craig's Bond's formula to make it more classic... Oh yes, perhaps they will add things which aren't classic... I know, some people will say that as there wasn't the gunbarrel at the beggining, Q, Moneypenny, a dark-haired actor, silly gadgets, or whatever, we haven't had a "classic Bond" since Die another day.

...

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

Classic for me is doing all the things the series does best: the best locations, stunts, exotic women, production design etc etc. Above all though the film must have Bond and the series concretely and confidently asserting it's place in modern cinema. Should be a film that could be made by no one else than Eon.

[AMC Hornet]

If Craig has a scene in THE DEATH COLLECTOR where he kills in cold-blood an assassin at a pheasant shoot, turns to the villain and says: "As you said, such good sport", then yes, THE DEATH COLLECTOR will be "classic".

Do you know something we don't, Grav?

I thought it was absolutely certain that the title is going to be RISICO - or is it THE PROPERTY OF A LADY - or is it THE HILDEBRAND RARITY - or 007 IN NEW YORK?

If they name it something else, are you going to insist on calling it THE DEATH COLLECTOR anyway?

Just so I know. I'll be watching for a scene like the one you mentioned from FOR YOUR EYES ONLY where Bond shoots the sniper at the pheasant hunt. (I know EON called the film MOONRAKER, but it was announced in 1977 that the next film would be FYEO - that makes FYEO its original, working title (I'm sure you understand).

All facetiousness aside, I hope you're right about THE DEATH COLLECTOR - I do like that title.

[Miles Miservy]

...we haven't had a "classic Bond" since Die another day.

...

Die Another Day... a virtual remake of DAF, could NEVER be considered a CLASSIC Bond movie. It was a pot-luck casserole of EVERY idea (good & bad alike) thrown into one, multi-million dollar stew. Poor concept, poor writing, poor directing and VERY poor editing (Not to mention by far, the CRAPPIEST title song EVER...). I dare say I believe half the budget must've been spent on special effects. Sadly, a rather poor chapter for Pierce Brosnan to have ended his 007 legacy.

(Move along people... Nothing to see here.)

If Craig has a scene in THE DEATH COLLECTOR where he kills in cold-blood an assassin at a pheasant shoot, turns to the villain and says: "As you said, such good sport", then yes, THE DEATH COLLECTOR will be "classic".

Do you know something we don't, Grav?

I thought it was absolutely certain that the title is going to be RISICO - or is it THE PROPERTY OF A LADY - or is it THE HILDEBRAND RARITY - or 007 IN NEW YORK?

If they name it something else, are you going to insist on calling it THE DEATH COLLECTOR anyway?

Just so I know. I'll be watching for a scene like the one you mentioned from FOR YOUR EYES ONLY where Bond shoots the sniper at the pheasant hunt. (I know EON called the film MOONRAKER, but it was announced in 1977 that the next film would be FYEO - that makes FYEO its original, working title (I'm sure you understand).

All facetiousness aside, I hope you're right about THE DEATH COLLECTOR - I do like that title.

I've often wondered about that scene. What is the range of a double barrelled shotgun, anyway?

[TCK]

...we haven't had a "classic Bond" since Die another day.

...

Die Another Day... a virtual remake of DAF, could NEVER be considered a CLASSIC Bond movie. It was a pot-luck casserole of EVERY idea (good & bad alike) thrown into one, multi-million dollar stew. Poor concept, poor writing, poor directing and VERY poor editing (Not to mention by far, the CRAPPIEST title song EVER...). I dare say I believe half the budget must've been spent on special effects. Sadly, a rather poor chapter for Pierce Brosnan to have ended his 007 legacy.

(Move along people... Nothing to see here.)

Agreed. The worst James Bond to me with Moonraker and Live and let die.

[Dustin]

Precisely why we won't get THE DEATH COLLECTOR as a title; it's too easy and too smart of a decision for EON to make,

Much more likely it will not be named THE DEATH COLLECTOR because the largest part of the target audience cannot comprehend what a dead collector has to do with the things on screen, and the alternate title COLLECTOR OF DEATH baffles them by the use of "OF".

Therefore it will be released as BOND 23, based on the assumption that even those audiences have met with the concept of the numbers 2 and 3 at some time in their lives, with a surprisingly large percentage (>4 %) having mastered the numeral concept of double figures even.

[AMC Hornet]

Thank you, Grav, for not taking offence. I was just feeling a little prickish today.

Even when the title announcement comes out, there will be misquotes and misunderstandings for the first few weeks until the actual title is established by a second EON announcement. The same thing happened with "FROM A VIEW TO A KILLING" (and other such variations) back in '84-85. I even wrote to Richard Schenkman at the JB 007 Fan Club of America (of which I was a member, back when it existed) to get clarification.

A friend told me she'd heard that Bond 18 was going to be called "Aurora" something, but she must have misheard "Tomorrow" - or the disc jockey reporting it on the local pop station did, which is more likely.

So even when an initial announcement is made, I'll wait for the second mention by EON before I take it as gospel.

Back to being prickish: my spellchecker doesn't recognize the word 'edmunicate.' Did you make it up?

[Santa]

Last time I did pay a tenner for seven seconds' entertainment was (redacted on the grounds of taste, decency, morality and because the wife'll find out)

Actually, Jim, you still owe me a quid for that. You're always coming up short.

More than anything I hope for Bond 23 to be a 'classic Bond' - MY idea of a classic Bond, that is. Which is of course not the same as anyone else's idea of a classic Bond. That's one of the problems with Bond, these days - it's grown so big and clumsy that it's become almost impossible to define what makes it classic anymore. For me it's more a feeling than anything tangible like this character or that title sequence or hair colour. I haven't had much of that feeling for a long time - I got a little tickle in CR but QoS felt more like indigestion.

[DR76]

What exactly is a "Classic Bond"?

That's one of the problems with Bond, these days - it's grown so big and clumsy that it's become almost impossible to define what makes it classic anymore.

The Bond movies have had a habit of changing in style since the early years. Someone had commented that DR. NO and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE were similar in style. I certainly don't think so. If they were, I would have liked both films, instead of just FRWL.

Why on earth do we need to recognize what is "classic" in the first place?

[AMC Hornet]

Why on earth do we need to recognize what is "classic" in the first place?

...Because believing (or hoping) it will be so should bring in/back those who despised QoS for deviating from the 'classic' formula. That's how we got OHMSS after YOLT, FYEO after MR, GE after LTK...and DAD after TWINE.

And BTW, Grav, you didn't misspell 'edumicate' - I did. Shame on me, nit-picker of other people's spelling and diction!

[Harmsway]

I've said it before and my thoughts have been very consistent on this matter: THE DEATH COLLECTOR will the 21st century version of TWINE, as TOMORROW NEVER LIES is the equivalent of THE FILM THAT SHALL NOT BE NAMED. If you liked TWINE as I do, then you'll probably be okay with THE DEATH COLLECTOR (though I'm of the opinion that the series doesn't need a Sam Mendes-type director, even if the director is Sam Mendes). If you detest and deplore TWINE then you will probably hate THE DEATH COLLECTOR.

TOMORROW NEVER DIES and QUANTUM OF SOLACE have very little in common beyond sloppy screenplays. If BOND 23 does indeed represent a tonal shift from QUANTUM, like that we saw from film-to-film in the Brosnan era, it's going to be something more like the switch to DIE ANOTHER DAY from THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH. Something lighter, something more colorful, something more fun. Many of those groaning about QUANTUM groaned about its dourness.

[Jack Spang]

As has been said, Craig/Brosnan are told to say all these wonderful things about each movie. It happens everytime and each movie since the Dalton era, excluding CR, has turned out to be pretty much a disaster. I won't believe any of it until I see it. For me though a classic Bond film isn't a very light hearted film. I loved the tone of QOS and its level of humour. The dialogue was superior to CR too. CR is a much better film overall though as QOS is merely a non-stop action romp.

For me, a good, classic Bond film would still be dark (atleast no less dark than FRWL, TLD, OHMSS and CR) with the gritty realism in terms of action we have been getting in the Craig era but with Moneypenny and Boothroyd who are introduced in a natural way that doesn't resort to cheese. Or they should just be there like with Tanner in QOS. Also, a surreal, exotic fortress belonging to the villain that isn't blown up 30 seconds after first seeing it. I would like the quartermaster to just look over guns with Bond at the firing range in the bowels of the SIS. It would have good dialogue like in QOS (one of the few things I liked about this film) and natural humour that is in the right place, once again like in QOS. Of course it would atleast have the same action to dialogue ratio of OHMSS - no more action than what is in this film accompanied with the nice character movement. Perfectly realistic for today’s audiences. Pigs might fly too.

Edited by Jack Spang, 02 August 2011 - 11:31 PM.

[Dell Deaton]

To me, "classic" means not just the right number of elements, but a certain way in which those elements mix. There's latitude within that. Following are what I consider the best models to which I'd refer someone asking for a guide to creating a truly "classic Bond."

1. Goldfinger
2. Tomorrow Never Dies
3. The Living Daylights
4. From Russia with Love
5. The Man with the Golden Gun
6. The World Is Not Enough
7. The Spy Who Loved Me

Feel free to drop From Russia with Love (not as good as the book) and The World Is Not Enough (although the whole Elektra thing has a certain message to be taken) if "7" isn't a number that works for you.

[Matt_13]

Last time I did pay a tenner for seven seconds' entertainment was (redacted on the grounds of taste, decency, morality and because the wife'll find out)

Actually, Jim, you still owe me a quid for that. You're always coming up short.

To me, Casino Royale is contemporary cool, and "Classic Bond." If it's tonally similar to that one, I'll be a happy camper.

[AMC Hornet]

Not a bad guideline, but as stated earlier, everyone has their own idea of what constitutes a 'classic' Bond film (for example, as much as I love TMWTGG, I wouldn't consider it a 'classic' model myself).

My list (not an attempt to supercede yours, Dell, just another opinion) would include:

Doctor No (for making the most of a tight budget)
Goldfinger (for pacing)
Thunderball (for locations and spectacle)
On Her Majesty's Secret Service (for storytelling and scope)
Diamonds are Forever (for wit and slickness)
The Spy Who Loved me (for improving on the OTT aspects of YOLT)
Octopussy (fun factor - balancing fantasy with [then] current affairs)
The Living Daylights (for character development and sophisticated plot)
Casino Royale (same as OHMSS & TLD)

Some of the latter mentioned above are actually examples of films based on the earlier models.

That's all I have to say - for now.

Edited by AMC Hornet, 03 August 2011 - 02:54 AM.

[DR76]

...Because believing (or hoping) it will be so should bring in/back those who despised QoS for deviating from the 'classic' formula. That's how we got OHMSS after YOLT, FYEO after MR, GE after LTK...and DAD after TWINE.

You see, I don't see the need to bring back "classic Bond" after QoS. I enjoyed the movie very much. And contrary to what many might believe, there are a good number of moviegoers who feel the same as I do. So this need to "bring back the classic Bond" to make up for QoS seems like a lot of crap to me.

[Dell Deaton]

...Because believing (or hoping) it will be so should bring in/back those who despised QoS for deviating from the 'classic' formula. That's how we got OHMSS after YOLT, FYEO after MR, GE after LTK...and DAD after TWINE.

You see, I don't see the need to bring back "classic Bond" after QoS. I enjoyed the movie very much. And contrary to what many might believe, there are a good number of moviegoers who feel the same as I do. So this need to "bring back the classic Bond" to make up for QoS seems like a lot of crap to me.

There's no doubt that any number of people liked Quantum of Solace very much, saw it as the "right direction," see no need for change. At the same time, I think we must also agree that there is ample evidence in the marketplace at large that Quantum of Solace failed to deliver at a level that was consistent with expectations and previous installments. Now, yeah, some may say, "who cares?" But, eventually that's gonna mean the movies will stop being made, or will be made on decreased budgets; offensive as a concerning number of folks seem to find the concept, movie-making is a for-profit venture.

Here's what I see on IMDb.com:

Quantum of Solace is on par with--

1. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
2. Live and Let Die
3. For Your Eyes Only

Further, it is less-well received than (in ascending order), these films--

-. You Only Live Twice
-. Thunderball
-. GoldenEye
-. The Spy Who Loved Me
-. Dr No
-. From Russia with Love
-. Goldfinger

"Classic" Bond films.

[Miles Miservy]

If Craig has a scene in THE DEATH COLLECTOR where he kills in cold-blood an assassin at a pheasant shoot, turns to the villain and says: "As you said, such good sport", then yes, THE DEATH COLLECTOR will be "classic".

Do you know something we don't, Grav?

I thought it was absolutely certain that the title is going to be RISICO - or is it THE PROPERTY OF A LADY - or is it THE HILDEBRAND RARITY - or 007 IN NEW YORK?

If they name it something else, are you going to insist on calling it THE DEATH COLLECTOR anyway?

Just so I know. I'll be watching for a scene like the one you mentioned from FOR YOUR EYES ONLY where Bond shoots the sniper at the pheasant hunt. (I know EON called the film MOONRAKER, but it was announced in 1977 that the next film would be FYEO - that makes FYEO its original, working title (I'm sure you understand).

All facetiousness aside, I hope you're right about THE DEATH COLLECTOR - I do like that title.

"The Death Collector" sucks as a title. It conjers up an image about as exciting as "How I Spent My Summer Vacation". I think the producers should focus on what few Fleming titles they have left; after all... that's all they have left. Were it not for the Brosnsn pictures, they'd have run out by now.

[Jack Spang]

007 in New York is a terrible name for a Bond film and a Bond book. I don't know what compelled Fleming to use this. Property of a Lady is excellent. They should call Bond 23 this.

Edited by Jack Spang, 04 August 2011 - 02:55 AM.

[coco1997]

"The Death Collector" sucks as a title. It conjers up an image about as exciting as "How I Spent My Summer Vacation". I think the producers should focus on what few Fleming titles they have left; after all... that's all they have left.

"The Death Collector" is a Fleming creation.

[Single-O-Seven]

007 in New York is a terrible name for a Bond film and a Bond book. I don't know what compelled Fleming to use this. [i]Property of a Lady is excellent. They should call Bond 23 this.

"007 in New York" was the title for a very short story, not a book per say. Given the nature and theme of the story (more of a travelogue told through Bond's eyes) it fits quite suitably. I'm sure if Fleming had gone with his alternative title for this story, "Reflections in a Carey Cadillac" the uproar at the thought of using it for a film title would be even greater.

[DR76]

-. You Only Live Twice
-. Thunderball
-. GoldenEye
-. The Spy Who Loved Me
-. Dr No
-. From Russia with Love
-. Goldfinger

I don't view any of these films as "classic Bond". As far as I'm concerned, there are no "classic Bond" films. Just old ones. And I don't care how "QoS" matches up to them. Why should I? I either like the movie or I don't. And that goes for every person who has viewed Bond movies.

And if the franchise finally ends, it just does. Perhaps one day, we will all have to face that. It can't go on forever.

[mttvolcano]

It can't go on forever.

Yeah it can!

[Jim]

-. You Only Live Twice
-. Thunderball
-. GoldenEye
-. The Spy Who Loved Me
-. Dr No
-. From Russia with Love
-. Goldfinger

I don't view any of these films as "classic Bond". As far as I'm concerned, there are no "classic Bond" films. Just old ones. And I don't care how "QoS" matches up to them. Why should I? I either like the movie or I don't. And that goes for every person who has viewed Bond movies.

And if the franchise finally ends, it just does. Perhaps one day, we will all have to face that. It can't go on forever.

It's that happy-go-lucky skittish and sunshiney charm that wins me round every time.

[Dell Deaton]

Where did I cross the line in illustrating "classic"? Was it Goldfinger? or was I well-onto thin ice with From Russia with Love?

[TCK]

From my point of view, Goldfinger isn't a classic. And unlike most of the Bondfans, I think it's the film which started James Bond's decline, precisely !