34 replies to this topic

[AndrewBond]

I've recently been thinking of the similarities between the production of Skyfall and The Spy Who Loved Me. This worries me, because I don't really like The Spy Who Loved Me, or any of the Lewis Gilbert Bond movies. Hear me out:

Back in 1975, Roger Moore had taken over the Bond films after an immensely successful run with a popular actor. His debut in Live and Let Die was successful enough, showing that someone besides Sean Connery could take on Bond and play him very differently, although a vocal minority resented this. While LALD was well enough received and did great at the box office, it's follow up, The Man with the Golden Gun, was condemned as awful, with more critical reviews of Moore's sneering comedy. Coproducer Harry Saltzman sold his stake in the franchise and Bond soon encountered massive legal battles. The series went on a hiatus of two and a half years, which at the time was the longest ever. After resolving legal issues, The Spy Who Loved Me arrived, directed by character drama director Lewis Gilbert (although he had directed one previous Bond film) and blew everyone away. Roger Moore was the same sardonic Bond, but the tone of the film was evened out into an epic format with a love/betrayal story that resonated really well with the public. The Moore era was now for sure a success.

Cut to today. I don't think I need to explain today's situation; you can see the similarities. New Bond takes over with a brand new take that's controversial, after a strong first showing and an awful second showing, hiatus occurs, with a lot to prove and an auteur director. I think Skyfall, especially with the 50th anniversary, is aiming to be epic, and in my book. That's fine. That's what the series needs right now. But I wonder, since I never liked The Spy Who Loved Me (I always thought it was soulless and really slow), if I'll look back someday and think, "God, that movie's overdone".

Obviously there are differences here, but for me personally, I fear Sam Mendes is an unknown variable, and as Lewis Gilbert's direction gave me three movies in common I don't care for, the similarities worry me. What are your thoughts? Are "Spy" fans excited for Skyfall with all its similarities? Or are the differences too great to make a rule? Does it not matter either way?

[Captain Tightpants]

So, because of coincidental similarities in the timeline of production between SKYFALL and THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, SKYFALL will be of the same or similar quality to THE SPY WHO LOVED ME?



Hey guys, I hear that production of SKYFALL involves a director using cameras to capture actors on film, just like the production of DIE ANOTHER DAY! So I think SKYFALL is going to be as bad as DIE ANOTHER DAY, because both films were made the same way!

[/sarcasm]

[Guy Haines]

There's a lot of quite understandable speculation about Skyfall, on this site and elsewhere, but the whole production seems to be so locked down that it is hard to know which former Bond film it reminds you of at this early stage.

All we've been fed are enigmatic slivers of information revealing, really, very little about what kind of Bond film Skyfall will be. For example, we don't even know the name of the chief villain or the slightest inkling of what Bond will be taking on.

By contrast, since TSWLM is mentioned on this thread, I can remember that early on in production, in 1976, we knew that Bond would be collaborating with a Russian female agent, he would be driving a white Lotus Esprit, and that the chief villain owned a giant supertanker which could swallow nuclear submarines - the media in the UK went to town when the 007 sound stage was opened at Pinewood by former Prime Minister Sir Harold Wilson, with Roger Moore and Barbara Bach in attendance against a backdrop of three mock up submarines. A pretty heavy clue there that we were in for an epic Bond film.

My point is we can't draw any comparisons yet because we don't know enough of what to expect from Skyfall - a quite deliberate policy on the part of the film makers, it would appear. That's why, at this stage, I don't have any strong feelings about it one way or another.

[Henry-Jones-Sr]

If Skyfall is anything like The Spy Who Loved Me, I'll be the happiest little Bond fan in the whole land.

But seriously, folks, Sam Mendes has been talking a lot about how he's trying to make a 'real' Bond movie based on his love of all the classic elements. This sounds great, but in truth we have heard this before when Marc Forster was making Quantum Of Solace. The problem is that QOS turned out not to have any of those elements at all, not even the Bond theme!

So we'll have to see, eh?

[SecretAgentFan]

First: Neither TMWTGG nor QOS was awful.

Second: While TMWTGG had disappointing box office results, QOS did not. CR and QOS are huge money makers. EON can approach SKYFALL with extreme confidence. They don´t have to prove anything.

Third: After TMWTGG the partnership between Cubby and Saltzman came to an end that was a long time coming and had lots of other reasons. Other problems around that time: the Bond films as a franchise had to prove that they were still a force to reckon with after a wave of spy films had diminished its impact AND a generational change had taken place. The big box office was generated by the newly created blockbusters such as JAWS. And while Moore had been welcomed as Bond, his third film was the decisive factor for his long tenure. Craig has already proven himself, critically and financially. SKYFALL will only be another argument for his success in the role.

Fourth: The financial problems of MGM have nothing in common with the legal situation after TMWTGG.

Fifth: There is nothing official yet how SKYFALL will shape up. From all the rumors one seems to get the impression that SKYFALL will rather be in the personal, character-based spy story mold of FRWL and not the epic, globe-trotting adventure of TSWLM.

[SteveBolton]

If Skyfall is anything like The Spy Who Loved Me, I'll be the happiest little Bond fan in the whole land.

But seriously, folks, Sam Mendes has been talking a lot about how he's trying to make a 'real' Bond movie based on his love of all the classic elements. This sounds great, but in truth we have heard this before when Marc Forster was making Quantum Of Solace. The problem is that QOS turned out not to have any of those elements at all, not even the Bond theme!

So we'll have to see, eh?

I have to agree, i loved TSWLM, it's everything i expect from a Bond movie. I like the fact that i know very little about Skyfall, and i try to avoid the spoilers, but i believe Sam Mendes is the right man for the job. If Skyfall is gonna be another TSWLM then that's great, lets just hope we don't get another Moonraker afterwards.

[thecasinoroyale]

First: Neither TMWTGG nor QOS was awful.

Second: While TMWTGG had disappointing box office results, QOS did not. CR and QOS are huge money makers. EON can approach SKYFALL with extreme confidence. They don´t have to prove anything.

Third: After TMWTGG the partnership between Cubby and Saltzman came to an end that was a long time coming and had lots of other reasons. Other problems around that time: the Bond films as a franchise had to prove that they were still a force to reckon with after a wave of spy films had diminished its impact AND a generational change had taken place. The big box office was generated by the newly created blockbusters such as JAWS. And while Moore had been welcomed as Bond, his third film was the decisive factor for his long tenure. Craig has already proven himself, critically and financially. SKYFALL will only be another argument for his success in the role.

Fourth: The financial problems of MGM have nothing in common with the legal situation after TMWTGG.

Fifth: There is nothing official yet how SKYFALL will shape up. From all the rumors one seems to get the impression that SKYFALL will rather be in the personal, character-based spy story mold of FRWL and not the epic, globe-trotting adventure of TSWLM.

Well said SAF!

Have to agree with Points 1 and 2 most heartily.

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

I also agree with the first and second points made above me.
People often look for patterns and similarities in the Bond films when they are not really there. I have a feeling Skyfall will end up being quite a unique Bond film, and nothing like TSWLM at all.

[Mr_Wint]

EON can approach SKYFALL with extreme confidence. They don´t have to prove anything.

True, they don't have to prove anything and that's very different from the TSWLM-production which was under heavy pressure to "deliver or die". If you are looking for a pattern: The more confident EON are, the more bland is the end result...

[PPK_19]

I've recently been thinking of the similarities between the production of Skyfall and The Spy Who Loved Me. This worries me, because I don't really like The Spy Who Loved Me, or any of the Lewis Gilbert Bond movies. Hear me out:

Back in 1975, Roger Moore had taken over the Bond films after an immensely successful run with a popular actor. His debut in Live and Let Die was successful enough, showing that someone besides Sean Connery could take on Bond and play him very differently, although a vocal minority resented this. While LALD was well enough received and did great at the box office, it's follow up, The Man with the Golden Gun, was condemned as awful, with more critical reviews of Moore's sneering comedy. Coproducer Harry Saltzman sold his stake in the franchise and Bond soon encountered massive legal battles. The series went on a hiatus of two and a half years, which at the time was the longest ever. After resolving legal issues, The Spy Who Loved Me arrived, directed by character drama director Lewis Gilbert (although he had directed one previous Bond film) and blew everyone away. Roger Moore was the same sardonic Bond, but the tone of the film was evened out into an epic format with a love/betrayal story that resonated really well with the public. The Moore era was now for sure a success.

Cut to today. I don't think I need to explain today's situation; you can see the similarities. New Bond takes over with a brand new take that's controversial, after a strong first showing and an awful second showing, hiatus occurs, with a lot to prove and an auteur director. I think Skyfall, especially with the 50th anniversary, is aiming to be epic, and in my book. That's fine. That's what the series needs right now. But I wonder, since I never liked The Spy Who Loved Me (I always thought it was soulless and really slow), if I'll look back someday and think, "God, that movie's overdone".

Obviously there are differences here, but for me personally, I fear Sam Mendes is an unknown variable, and as Lewis Gilbert's direction gave me three movies in common I don't care for, the similarities worry me. What are your thoughts? Are "Spy" fans excited for Skyfall with all its similarities? Or are the differences too great to make a rule? Does it not matter either way?

Predictable argument, and i disagree.

TSWLM is the Goldfinger, the Living Daylights and the Casino Royale of the franchise. Bond at its very best.

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

EON can approach SKYFALL with extreme confidence. They don´t have to prove anything.

True, they don't have to prove anything and that's very different from the TSWLM-production which was under heavy pressure to "deliver or die". If you are looking for a pattern: The more confident EON are, the more bland is the end result...

I'm not really sure confidence = bland. Anyway, despite how confident Eon may or may not be, given their respect for cinema audiences, I think they're always aware of making the best film possible out of the particular circumstances of each production.

[MattofSteel]

If Skyfall is anything like The Spy Who Loved Me, I'll be the happiest little Bond fan in the whole land.

But seriously, folks, Sam Mendes has been talking a lot about how he's trying to make a 'real' Bond movie based on his love of all the classic elements. This sounds great, but in truth we have heard this before when Marc Forster was making Quantum Of Solace. The problem is that QOS turned out not to have any of those elements at all, not even the Bond theme!

So we'll have to see, eh?

But those 'real elements' or lack thereof aren't what sunk QOS. QOS was practically script-less, or, at the very least, it was terribly rough and unfinished.

Given that's been rectified - and multiple stakeholders have lauded the script - and repeatedly referenced the 'Classic Bond' atmosphere, I have every reason to believe Skyfall will seem impressively *real* alongside QOS, but without many of the content-related failings.

[Napoleon Solo]

Over on another thread, there was a reference to images Skyfall call sheets that had been posted on the James Bond Brasil site and then taken down. Based on the bits of information there, it doesn't sound like Skyfall is going to be in the vein of The Spy Who Loved Me.

[AMC Hornet]

I don't like The Spy Who Loved Me, or any of the Lewis Gilbert Bond movies... I fear Sam Mendes is an unknown variable, and as Lewis Gilbert's direction gave me three movies in common I don't care for, the similarities worry me.

Sam Mendes is directing Skyfall, not Lewis Gilbert. Has Mendes already directed a Bond film that you don't like?

Captain Tightpants wrote:
"Hey guys, I hear that production of SKYFALL involves a director using cameras to capture actors on film, just like the production of DIE ANOTHER DAY! So I think SKYFALL is going to be as bad as DIE ANOTHER DAY, because both films were made the same way!"

I know you were being facetious, TP, but your argument still presupposes that DAD was a bad movie, and there I don't agree with you.

Henry Jones Sr. wrote:
"If Skyfall is anything like The Spy Who Loved Me, I'll be the happiest little Bond fan in the whole land."

Me too.

Edited by AMC Hornet, 09 March 2012 - 08:04 PM.

[mttvolcano]

I think Skyfall will be a great movie. We have to remember that not all Bond fans or people who see the movie are super into the series like we are, they don't care and don't really try to dig around comparing films to others.
I think that's all that matters that it will be a big box office success, by how much I have no idea, but I am confident of it.

[Vanish]

I think the similarities are purely superficial and circumstantial at this point. I'm not a fan of The Spy Who Loved Me for a variety of reasons, but I'm not worried about Skyfall resembling it in the slightest.

[Satorious]

While TMWTGG had disappointing box office results, QOS did not. CR and QOS are huge money makers. EON can approach SKYFALL with extreme confidence. They don´t have to prove anything.

Hmmm - I'm not so sure EON will be supremely confident and judging by the number of interviews already where Daniel has voiced his disappointment with QOS (be it forced marketing speak or otherwise). Despite being a box-office success at the time (mostly off the back of CR), it's generally accepted these days that QOS gets a frosty reception from the general public and EON themselves know all was not entirely right last time. Factor in the newly reformed MGM who can't allow the jewel in their crown to fail! I think they still have an awful lot to prove personally. The good news is that the team they have working on it are technically superb and (perhaps this is marketing speak again) everyone seems much happier with the script this time. That's a very good foundation to begin with.

Edited by Satorious, 10 March 2012 - 11:43 PM.

[Captain Tightpants]

interviews already where Daniel has voiced his disappointment with QOS (be it forced marketing speak or otherwise).

I don't think Craig is the kind of person who would bow to that. He's always come across as a kind of straight shooter - if he think it's rubbish, he'll say as much. Now, if we were talking about Pierce Brosnan, then maybe I could swallow the idea that this was publicocrap, but I just can't picture Daniel Craig thinking one thing and saying another because he has been told to.

[Satorious]

Hmmm - I'm sure if you look at interviews taken around the time of QOS' release, you will find plenty which contradicts his more recent take on it. That said, it's part of his job and I don't blame him for it. He is a lot more "straight talking" than most actors out there for sure...

[Captain Tightpants]

Craig was happy with QUANTUM OF SOLACE during production, but the finished product changed his mind. No film is ever made with the intention of being poor. Everyone going into production no doubt felt that the film was the best that it could possibly be; it was only once it was committed to film and released that the problems with its structure began to surface.

[SecretAgentFan]

True.

Still, for a massive production like QOS which had (reportedly) its "final draft" thrown out by director Marc Foster who demanded a re-write with only a few months before the threatened writers´ strike (which then happened), the film has a cohesive story. Taking off where CR ended seems to have irritated those who did not remember CR that well or hadn´t even seen it. Of course, as a direct sequel that nevertheless tried to tell its own story it seemed a bit patchy. Then again, most sequels (who have to end the plot line) face similar problems. And the editing style did also anger some reviewers (which is strange but a typical sign for the fickleness of the zeitgeist, since the much worse Greengrass-editing had been hailed a few years earlier as the best possible way in which to tell a spy thriller).

Craig, probably with EON´s blessing, is following the "attack is the best defense"-strategy when he mentions he was not totally happy with QOS, thereby building up good will for SKYFALL which in his assessment will be great. But I do believe that QOS´ production itself was extremely complicated and therefore no fun for anybody, so maybe he is to be taken literally on that.

[SteveBolton]

The problem i feel with QOS is much of the fault of Marc Foster. Most of the problems were in post production. The editing as iv'e said before felt rushed, it's a shame because with a extra bit of care it could of been a lot better.

Skyfall has been given time to develop and looks like its going to be on par with CR.

[SecretAgentFan]

I can´t believe that anyone involved with such a big production could afford to be careless.

If anything it was a matter of too tight schedules, a result of the whole writers´ strike situation, delaying the shooting day after day.

[Miles Miservy]

There is certainly a lot to speculate with regards to what will follow an actor's sophmore release. No doubt, FRWL rode the coattails of Dr. No quite well; so much so, that they were even shot in similar fashion;
The contact to London when OO7's plane touches down in Kingston / Istanbul.
The covert surveilliance between Leigter/Quarrel tailing Bond / Jones... and Grant tailing Bond / Kerim Bey

Then Goldfinger was released and blew the roof off of the genre, raising the standards as well as the stakes for the next decade.

Similarities can also be found with Roger Moore's efforts.
LALD, while proving that the OO7 formula still works, with someone else bearing the "Licinse to Kill", had TMWTGG trying to follow as FRWL did. It did not fare as well. The film was mediocre, at best. In fact, I believe that were it not for Christopher Lee playing Scaramanga, the whole project might've collapsed under its own hype.

Then TSWLM came out and carved ot Roger Moore's future well into the mid '80s.

That cannot be said for Bronan's run, I'm afraid;
Goldeneye, to be sure, pumped some much needed life into the series and it was THIS era that, I'm grateful to say, got my kids hooked onto OO7. But each subsequent film after the other seemed to ride off the steam of the last until we were left with that laughable, Lee Tamahori train wreck.

So we'll see what Daniel Craig's 3rd film brings to the table. I figure we got 2 choices:

It will either: A) Blow the roof off & raise the bar... again.
or: be another "Same crap... different pile".

[Captain Tightpants]

Still, for a massive production like QOS which had (reportedly) its "final draft" thrown out by director Marc Foster who demanded a re-write with only a few months before the threatened writers´ strike (which then happened), the film has a cohesive story.

I believe Paul Haggis' original script had a few funny ideas in it that didn't go over well with production. In the final film, Bond finds his quantum of solace by preventing Corinne from falling victim to Yusuf's honeytrap the way Vesper did. But in the original draft, Vesper had a child and Bond found his quantum of solace by protecting it (the idea was shot down before a gender was settled upon). Likewise, Haggis wrote several scenes that would have worked well in a novel, but failed horribly in a script; the Tosca scene was originally a "UN-style forum" where Bond had to keep swapping radio frequencies to follow the Quantum members' discussion, catching snatches of conversations here and there as they changed channels. Foster simply couldn't visualise it on film, which is how we ended up with the Tosca sequence (which is arguably one of the most stylish scenes in the entire franchise).

So while Foster did have the script re-written, I don't think "demanded" is the right word to describe it. There were probably other changes in addition to the ones I listed, but if they were all like that, then I'd say they ultimately made the film better.

[SecretAgentFan]

Interesting - did you read the original draft?

I don´t like the "Bond´s child with Vesper"-idea (too much family reunion - see my remark on the SKYFALL thread). But the UN-style with Bond catching snatches of the Quantum conversation sounds very exciting. While I do love the TOSCA sequence I think that Foster´s rewrite demand of this is typical director´s idiocy ("I can´t make it visually interesting so the whole thing sucks!" meaning "I can´t make it visually interesting because I lack the ideas for that.")

[Vauxhall]

I don´t like the "Bond´s child with Vesper"-idea (too much family reunion - see my remark on the SKYFALL thread).

I don't believe it was intended to be Bond's child. I think the proposal was that Vesper already had a child, now orphaned, who Bond then tracked down. Glad they didn't pursue that particular option...

[Captain Tightpants]

I think the proposal was that Vesper already had a child, now orphaned, who Bond then tracked down.

Or it may possibly have been a child who was held captive by Quantum in case Vesper ever realised that Yusuf was a plant.

The hero having to protect a child is a fairly typical trope designed to show nobility in the hero because children are innocent. I don't think it would have worked for Bond with Paul Haggis' usual heavy-handedness in the script.

[Pussfeller]

I'm hugely grateful that they didn't take that approach. Unless it was a non-talking infant, it would have been utterly cringe-inducing.

[SecretAgentFan]

Bond: "Hey, I´m James. You´ll be allright now."
Kid: "Where´s my mommy?"
Bond: "Um, she loves you very much. This is my boss, by the way. She will take care of you now."
M: "What?"
Kid: "She looks like Grandma. I hated Grandma!"
Bond: "Gotta run..."
M: "Bond, this is your quantum of solace!"
Bond: "My what?"
Kid: "Solace! Don´t you know what solace means?"
Bond: "Q, um, could you google something for me? And by the way - didn´t the guys I hunted down call themselves Quantum?"
M: "So?"
Bond: "Weird. That you use their name as a word to describe my emotional state..."
M: "C´mon, you blunt instrument. I was reaching for something poetic. And you get all riled up as if the sky will fall because of that."
Bond: "I would like to flirt with Moneypenny now."
M: "Who?"
Bond: "God, I miss the cold war."
M: "Why, you were a teenager back then."
Bond: "But they had really great spy movies during that time."
Kid: "But they were totally like unrealistic. These days, movies are so gritty and down to earth."
M: "God, I miss musicals."
Bond: "Because you want to... sing? Meaning: confess something?"
M: "I saved your many times, you idiot. Someday you will have to save me, got it?"
Bond: "How about driving you to my family manor?"
M: "The way you say it sounds... cheap. And I like it."
Kid: "Awkward..."
Bond: "Shut up. Who are you again?"
M: "Let MI5 deal with it."