The 3rd act - is it a ...?
#1
Posted 04 November 2012 - 12:20 AM
The 3rd act of Skyfall, is it actually a Western?
#2
Posted 04 November 2012 - 12:45 AM
#3
Posted 04 November 2012 - 01:19 AM
Possibly. At any rate, it certainly isn't a Bond film.
Well OHMSS' ending isn't a Bond ending but since it is Flemmmmming and classic Bond then it is OK.
#4
Posted 04 November 2012 - 01:23 AM
#5
Posted 04 November 2012 - 01:39 AM
#6
Posted 04 November 2012 - 08:48 AM
I don't really associate westerns with helicopters and explosives, but I guess I can see a stylistic connection. Javier Bardem in a long coat, Daniel Craig running around in a field with an old-timey gun. But nothing about it strikes me as a cliche from any genre. That's one of the things I love about it. It's odd and original. You can tell it's original because reviewers, grasping for parallels, have likened it to both Straw Dogs and Home Alone. That's sort of like comparing a scene to both Jaws and PT 109.
Certainly no helicopters in a Western The equivalent might be Santa Anna's large cannons in "The Alamo". But explosives are a regular, think about the finale of the aforementioned "Rio Bravo", with John Wayne, Dean Martin and Walter Brennan smoking out the bad guys with some dynamite, for example.
#7
Posted 04 November 2012 - 09:13 AM
Just because it's something new and different, it still felt Bondian in the execution.Possibly. At any rate, it certainly isn't a Bond film.
#8
Posted 04 November 2012 - 11:07 AM
#9
Posted 04 November 2012 - 12:31 PM
Just because it's something new and different, it still felt Bondian in the execution.
Possibly. At any rate, it certainly isn't a Bond film.
It didn't feel that way to me. But, yes, if it were something new and different (which it is) and felt Bondian in the execution, I'd love it.
I don't disagree with the western comparison, but as Pussfeller indicates, the third act of SKYFALL is also reminiscent of other genres. Personally, I was reminded more of the horror genre.
#10
Posted 04 November 2012 - 01:30 PM
#11
Posted 04 November 2012 - 03:15 PM
Possibly. At any rate, it certainly isn't a Bond film.
I think it is a Bond film final quarter turned upside down. How many times have we watched the last part of a Bond film as 007, and allies, have assaulted the villain's HQ? Times many. On this occasion, it is the villain attacking, if you will, Bond's HQ. And Bond hasn't got the endless supply of men and materials (Unlike Silva). Just M, Kincade and some ancient, makeshift weapons. And a certain car. I liked what they did with that part of the film. It was "the same" but very different.
#12
Posted 04 November 2012 - 03:56 PM
#13
Posted 04 November 2012 - 04:39 PM
Rant over, had a couple of rose glasses so that´ll show on the writing...just saying
For such a grand rant, I'd have rather expected a claret.
#14
Posted 04 November 2012 - 04:48 PM
#15
Posted 04 November 2012 - 05:23 PM
Ahh yes, the platonic ideal of "the Bondian", the timeless and eternal category which embraces everything that appeared in a Bond film before, and strictly excludes everything that has not appeared in a Bond film yet. If only more fans had defended the sanctity of the Bondian ideal during the formative years of the franchise, most Bond films would never have been created, and a lot of fun would have been safely prevented.
Rant over, had a couple of rose glasses so that´ll show on the writing...just saying
For such a grand rant, I'd have rather expected a claret.
Or maybe a Chianti, but not with sole.... ;-)
#16
Posted 04 November 2012 - 07:31 PM
#17
Posted 04 November 2012 - 08:08 PM
Oh, by no means did I start the thread to imply that the third act is not a Bond film. It's a great movie, and I especially like the third act. Maybe I should have asked the question wether it was "inspired by the Western genre". It was just a chain of thoughts that occurred to me and I was interested if I was just seeing things, or if other people around here see the same analogies.Again with this "it´s not a Bond Film" crap? What the hell is a Bond film? ...