796 replies to this topic

[Pussfeller]

I agree with Jean-Luc. I don't care if my sock drawer is alphabetized.

[FredJB007]

I might as well throw my two cents in here.......everyone has their own opinions.......yes,
and as I have been around to see all 22(now 23)films in the theater, here we go......
I do like the gunbarrel at the beginning........and I do like to hear the Bond theme scattered
every so often in the film. I don't think that Casino Royale really suffered with only having the
theme right at the very end and that was a pretty darn good movie.
Everything said about Skyfall is that its going to be a great Bond film. The reviews so far have
been stellar. So, if the gunbarrel is at the end and we have an awesome experience with this film, then
I really don't care. Just give me(us)a great 007 movie. That's all I want. There's my two cents.

[univex]

Oh no, another "enter" lover...

[FredJB007]

Geez.........

[Sunraker]

You don't mess with the gunbarrel opening.

I'm sorry but to me there's no excuse, especially at the 50th anniversary. You can make Bond a black female agent (not like Jinx!) BEFORE you mess with the gunbarrel, I'm serious here. I will no doubt adore Skyfall, but no gunbarrel at the start for the 3rd time in a row is just a smack in the face. Well, my face at least.

It's like EON forgot it was there at the beginning for 20 films in 40 years.

To each his or her own Bond staples of course.

EDIT: Spelling

Edited by Sunraker, 16 October 2012 - 10:15 PM.

[univex]

Geez.........

I do agree with your post Fred. Although I miss the gunbarrel at the beginning.

[JCRendle]

You can make Bond a black female agent (not like Jinx!) BEFORE you mess with the gunbarrel, I'm serious here.

I get you're serious about the gunbarrel - but you can not be serious about that.

[x007AceOfSpades]

Oh no, another "enter" lover...

Hilarious!

[JimmyBond]

I'm judging a BOND film, not an action film. Therefore "Skyfall" has already a -1 point for the barrel at the bottom. You can agree with me or not, but I was uncomfortable enough with that "modern" dull and boring "put the music with the Columbia logo" Charlie's Angels style "Quantum of Solace" opening.

So Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace were'nt Bond films? Just action films (well, you could make a case for Quantum, but still...)? I can understand being disappointed about the gunbarrel not opening the film. I was expecting it back in the front too, so I was a bit bummed when I found out it wasn't there, but it's not going to impact my feeling on the film.

Edited by JimmyBond, 16 October 2012 - 10:55 PM.

[Sunraker]

You can make Bond a black female agent (not like Jinx!) BEFORE you mess with the gunbarrel, I'm serious here.

I get you're serious about the gunbarrel - but you can not be serious about that.

Okay slight exaggeration, a caucasian woman then But yeah of all the Bond staples the gunbarrel is definately in the Top 5 for me.

[00Twelve]

I apologize in advance; I simply cannot see how the gunbarrel can be this major of a deal. Maybe it's because I'm an optimist who wants to trust the filmmakers' judgement on where they use it (or if they even use it) because they know what tone they intend to strike and because the rest of the film appears to be so wildly fantastic.

When we haven't even seen the thing, how is it possible to cite tradition and say it stands above the experience to which we don't even know yet how we'll react? This just reminds me of the blonde thing back in '05-'06. So many fans freaked out because the idea of Bond having a different hair color just couldn't possibly work, and heavily doubted the idea that the actor could be as good as the producers had seen. It felt like a minority were willing to trust that casting, and it feels like a minority (of us fanboys) are willing to trust the editing of the film and the placement of this small, short piece of tradition. Of course the gunbarrel is a thrill; I'm hoping that the jolt it will give on the way out makes me want to run back as soon as I can.

Further,

Spoiler

We've seen in CR that Bond was becoming the man we knew, and that the placement of the gunbarrel at the end of QOS symbolized that Bond had finally understood not only the big picture, but how to overcome his insatiable hate, and is now JAMES BOND 007, the one and only.

Now, here is Skyfall, picking up several years and many missions later, and Bond is worn down and upon return, is not himself anymore. He's weak, he's nearly compromised; certainly moreso than M feared in the last movie. It will cost him more than he thought possible to become that man walking through the leather door, ready to return to work "with pleasure." In this way, Bond is again cementing who he is, and I can understand that the gunbarrel ending may symbolize that not only has Bond become 007, but he's now returned to classic form, ready to be called in to investigate the death of Strangways.

Just me, of course. Carry on.

[Rich Douglas]

LoL... that is all. With the Jean-Luc meme...this thread is officially awesome.

[tdalton]

I repeat the same. I was hoping Skyfal to be the best bond since GoldenEye. Now that I've learned the barrel thing, it can NEVER be better than GoldenEye, Tomorrow Never Dies and even The World is not Enough.

Well put JimmyBond.

I honestly don't view the gunbarrel as being anything more than another logo they show before the film, much like the MGM logo or the Sony/Columbia Pictures logo that precedes the films. How this particular logo is presented, or not presented, has zero influence over how good or bad the film that follows (or precedes in the case of QOS).

[jamie00007]

Couldnt agree more with Captain Picard. I'm never going to understand this importance some Bond fans put on the gunbarrel. We're on the eve of the release of what has got to be the most acclaimed Bond movie of all time, a movie that seems to be pleasing critics as well as long time Bond fans (who had problems with other recent Bond films), it really appears that they've hit it out of the park on this one and going to the various Bond message boards and communities instead of excitement all there seems to be is fan-rage about the placement of the gunbarrel. Frankly, it makes me feel a little embarrassed to be a Bond fan.

Its not that I dont care about the gunbarrel, I love the feeling of sitting in a cinema when that dot starts going across the screen. The same thing I feel when I see the big yellow "Star Wars" logo at the start of a SW film or the Paramount mountain transitioning into a real mountain in an Indiana Jones movies. But they're all just trimmings that really have no impact at all on the overall film. Would I prefer the gunbarrel at the start? Yes. But to say it "can never be as good as x movie now" is just ridiculous.

[Ernst Stavro Blofeld Jr.]

I don't think its not that gunbarrel makes the film. Its more that its simply not only a tradition, but something that has no barring on the film so why is it at the end where it serves no purpose? In Casino the origins of the sequence were told if you would, so it made sense. In Quantum, its just tacked onto the end for no reason. It serves no purpose at the end. In the beginning, it signifies that this is a Bond film and it literally opens up into the action. In Quantum (and presumably Skyfall) it does nothing but say, "You know this film you just spent two hours watching? In case you weren't aware it was a Bond film. Now here's a cool transition into the end credits even though we don't need one."

I think if the gunbarrel wasn't attached to the film period it would be less of a distress than being misused and serving no real purpose.

[jamie00007]

Well we dont know that yet. If it is just pointlessly tacked onto the ending ala QoS than I'd agree, thats stupidity on their part (not that it would have any affect on my overall enjoyment or opinion of the film) but I've got it on fairly good authority that that isnt the case and that theres a method to the madness. So we'll just have to wait and see. And Mendes isnt Forster, who seemed to want to make a Bond movie that wasnt a Bond movie (from what I've read he didnt want the gunbarrel at all but Michael and Barbara did and putting it at the end was the compromise) , Mendes has continually gone on about being a Bond fan and wanting to make a Bond movie with a capital B etc. I find it hard to believe he wouldnt have the gunbarrel at the start unless he was planning something special.

Edited by jamie00007, 17 October 2012 - 05:27 AM.

[Jim]

Patently the four years of whining about the one in Quantum of Solace hasn't had an appreciable impact, so it's unclear what any moaning about this one will achieve.

[Catching Bullets]

If it is of any consolation, my book has a gunbarrel sequence. Right at the beginning.

[DominicGreene]

Well we dont know that yet. If it is just pointlessly tacked onto the ending ala QoS than I'd agree, thats stupidity on their part (not that it would have any affect on my overall enjoyment or opinion of the film) but I've got it on fairly good authority that that isnt the case and that theres a method to the madness. So we'll just have to wait and see. And Mendes isnt Forster, who seemed to want to make a Bond movie that wasnt a Bond movie (from what I've read he didnt want the gunbarrel at all but Michael and Barbara did and putting it at the end was the compromise) , Mendes has continually gone on about being a Bond fan and wanting to make a Bond movie with a capital B etc. I find it hard to believe he wouldnt have the gunbarrel at the start unless he was planning something special.

I disagree. It was put there to show Bond finally letting go of Vesper and finally becoming the ruthless, giver of no that we all know and love, hence the gunbarrel at the end.

I literally have no idea why Mendes would put it at the end. Is there still the "becoming of Bond" we don't know about?

[The Shark]

I literally have no idea why Mendes would put it at the end. Is there still the "becoming of Bond" we don't know about?

Spoiler

Bond is getting his M and Moneypenny.

[Shaun Forever]

On a scale of 1-10 Shark, how big is your spoiler? because I am so tempted to read it lol, but am too scared.

[bonds_walther]

Shaun, I'd say it's a 10.

Edited by bonds_walther, 17 October 2012 - 05:52 PM.

[Shaun Forever]

Ah, will give it a miss then.

Cheers for the info.

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

I'm judging a BOND film, not an action film. Therefore "Skyfall" has already a -1 point for the barrel at the bottom. You can agree with me or not, but I was uncomfortable enough with that "modern" dull and boring "put the music with the Columbia logo" Charlie's Angels style "Quantum of Solace" opening.

So Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace were'nt Bond films? Just action films (well, you could make a case for Quantum, but still...)? I can understand being disappointed about the gunbarrel not opening the film. I was expecting it back in the front too, so I was a bit bummed when I found out it wasn't there, but it's not going to impact my feeling on the film.

"Casino Royale" is the only film without the barrel in it's right place I can accept as a "proper Bond film", because Campbell has explained the reason.

It doesn't happen the same with "Quantum of Solace" which made it worser than what it was...

And "Skyfall", that'll be slighly less great for me now.

[Dustin]

Well, in that case read the CATCHING BULLETS gunbarrel prior to the theatre - SKYFALL problem solved...

[DCI_director]

If the gunbarrel is missing from the beginning, I will be extremely disappointed. I've been waiting a long time to see that at the beginning of a Bond film. We haven't had a proper opening since Die Another Day or to ge even further, TWINE. I get why Casino Royale opened how it did. I understand that at the end of Quantum of Solace it closed with it because I thought Bond had FINALLY become Bond. I see no reason to put it at the end now, no matter what Bond is or isn't yet, what he has or doesn't have. I mean, come on!!! I thought they were done with the whole "he is still becoming Bond" thing. This is seriously getting old! I miss that exciting feeling when you sit down in a theatre and you see those dots go by with the James Bond theme. It's like a goose bump feeling. You know when you see it you are in for a great ride. No other movie series or action movie opens like that and that's such a great thing. I wish the producers realized that. It's such an important element to the movies that I think even non Bond fans know that's how the movies start - it's not just after the MGM/Sony logo it immediately goes into the movie like any other movie out there. If they are just tagging on the gunbarrel at the end for the sake of being different or really any other reason, I'm not a fan of this change. I mean hell, let's just turn Bond's Walther PPK into a cross bow and turn him from spy to a detective working for Scotland Yard with zero license to kill!? Call me a traditionalist, but I like the gunbarrel opening the movie.

[univex]

We haven't had a proper opening since Die Another Day or to ge even further, TWINE.

TWINE

[Satorious]

Not a fan of CGI bullets then univex? Actually I can't say I am either...

[JCRendle]

[univex]

Not a fan of CGI bullets then univex? Actually I can't say I am either...

Brosnan, doing a Gene Kelly and dancing with a freakin umbrella!

No, I am no fan. I´m no CR gunbarrel fan or QOS titles morphing gunbarrel fan. I´m affraid these gunbarrel changes don´t sit well with me, as JCRendle exemplifies^

I haven´t been vocal about it because frankly, I just wan´t a killer flick, which SF seems to be. Hence, the Rheth Butler rant "Frankly, my dear, I don´t give a damn" About the SF gunbarrel, that is.