337 replies to this topic

[NiallJS99]

The only other times a James Bond film won an oscar were Goldfinger: Best Sound Effects Norman Wanstall

and Thunderball: Best Visual Effects John Stears.

[The Dove]

Right.. my thoughts on last night's Oscar's ceremony..

 

Overall, it was APPALLINGLY AWFUL!!    Seth MacFarlane was just TERRIBLE...A shame since I usually love Family Guy but last night his jokes were completely unfunny and some were borderline offensive...The "Jaws" theme being used to cut speeches short, to me, was downright annoying, insulting and rude (I remember about 20 years ago when Frank Sinatra got totally cut off mid speech so that the Oscar's could go to commercial break...that just isn't right)...Ok, the one exception to this was Quentin Tarantino..the less I have to hear spew from his mouth, the better!! LOL (By the way, I'm totally ok with ARGO winning best picture..saw it yesterday morning for the first time and was totally blown away!)

 

Now then to the part we all were excited for...the Bond 50th anniversary tribute...Overall, COMPLETELY underwhelming and very much a let down.. I've seen better retrospectives on the DVD special features. I'm still failing to understand why the producers of the Oscars would opt to go for something sub-par (and they promised us something very special) in the little retrospective and NOT try to gather all the 007's together onstage. Now of course Shirley Bassey was the highlight (wow, she's still got quite the impressive voice) and Adele was amazing too (albeit some problems with the sound mix, her voice seemed to disappear behind the band during the chorus)

 

But the best was obviously Skyfall winning TWO Oscars (for the first time since Thunderball) and both were rightly deserved...although how the hell you have a tie with Zero Dark Thirty for Best sound mixing award is somewhat puzzling.. Adele and Paul Epworth absolutely deserved the Oscar for Best Original Song.. Such a touching moment to see how moved Adele was.. Great, just great!  Like a few others, I too am at a loss at how Roger Deakins lost Cinematography to Life Of Pi, which was mostly CG...that was quite annoying! But we still should be thrilled that after 47 years, Bond is FINALLY getting some respect from the Academy Awards..

[AMC Hornet]

After 46 years, EON doubled its Oscar count in one night.

 

"Not bad for a start..."

[Double-0-Seven]

After 46 years, EON doubled its Oscar count in one night.

 

"Not bad for a start..."

 

Now there's a good way to look at it!

[bill007]

Dove said...... Bond is FINALLY getting some respect from the Academy Awards..

 

Agreed.  Five nominations, and 2 wins. T'was a good year for 007.  

[Catching Bullets]

FROM OSCAR WITH LOVE... and some thoughts on the 85th Academy Awards, Bassey, Bond, Skyfall and Hathaway's new bob....

 

http://www.out.com/e...-shirley-bassey

Edited by Catching Bullets, 28 February 2013 - 05:19 PM.

[Dustin]

Splendid piece!

[quantumofsolace]

South Bank Awards

winner best film: Skyfall

 

the awards ceremony will be broadcast on Sky Arts 1 HD on 14 March 9.30pm

[thecasinoroyale]

Brilliant! Another win - the awards cabinet must be pretty full for 'Skyfall' now.

[SecretAgentFan]

Wouldn´t it be shocking (and fantastic) if BOND 24 would not get any nomination and make no effort whatsoever to be prizeworthy but instead just go for a big entertainment-bonanza?

 

Somehow, after all the awards hoopla, I feel like having woken up and realizing that Bond should not be about any awards except my own personal "I HAD A GREAT TIME WATCHING YOU"-award...

[thecasinoroyale]

I don't know why it's won so many awards - I just felt they were trying to make a nice looking, entertaining Bond film which has been swept up in so much hyper and media admiration, it's been cast into the awards pot.

 

I'm not complaining, but I see your point about it just being a Bond for entertainment and praise, not awards or accolaids.

[SecretAgentFan]

I do believe that getting Haggis to rewrite CR was only backed by the idea to get more prestige to Bond films.

 

But when CR was getting fantastic reviews, EON tried to go one step further, hiring an arthouse director. And then they got Mendes, thinking that this will really be their big push to get recognition beyond box office records.

 

If SKYFALL had won major awards I do believe that it would have hurt the franchise - because how can you go back from that doing "business as usual"?

 

Now, I think (and hope) EON will go for "just" doing a great Bond movie again.

 

Cue the "Bernardo Bertolucci directing Bond 24"-news...

[thecasinoroyale]

That's what I fear - because of this global acclaim, Bond 24 is going to be really magnified for anything that doesn't live up to 'Skyfall', and I just pray people overlook things like that and accept another brillianty made Bond adventure, which is as we really want!

 

If that means sacrifice the awards glory, so be it.

[tdalton]

I doubt that EON is going to settle for just doing a good Bond movie the next time around.  Now that they've gotten a taste of what it's like to even have the honor to be mentioned for Academy Awards beyond the ones that they tend to stumble into every couple of decades, I would imagine that EON's going to set their sights directly on the major prizes.  Considering that Skyfall made a ton of money while also delivering them accolades, they'd be foolish not to go in that route.

[thecasinoroyale]

I just can't help thinking what happened with 'Quantum Of Solace' after the might of 'Casino Royale'

 

Although, the Writers Strike didn't help the script and plot, but if every intention is there and they get the wrong director (Marc Forster), it could all go wrong in the eyes of the fans. Which I hope doesn't happen again, as 'QOS' didn't deserve the bad flack.

[tdalton]

I just can't help thinking what happened with 'Quantum Of Solace' after the might of 'Casino Royale'

 

Although, the Writers Strike didn't help the script and plot, but if every intention is there and they get the wrong director (Marc Forster), it could all go wrong in the eyes of the fans. Which I hope doesn't happen again, as 'QOS' didn't deserve the bad flack.

 

The exact same thing is going to happen again because of the media.  The media loves to build things and/or people up and then turn around and tear them down.  They've built Bond up over the past year and now, even though Bond 24 very well could turn out to be better than Skyfall, they're going to tear it back down again.  Probably something to do with selling out for Oscar glory and not staying true to the roots of the franchise that Connery built back in the 1960s.  

 

It doesn't matter how good or bad Bond 24 ends up being.  A part of the praise for Skyfall (and before people accuse me of "hating" on Skyfall, this is a very small part of the praise for the film, but I think it existed nonetheless) was that some critics wanted to reward it for simply not being Quantum of Solace.

Edited by tdalton, 13 March 2013 - 02:39 PM.

[SecretAgentFan]

I just can't help thinking what happened with 'Quantum Of Solace' after the might of 'Casino Royale'

 

Although, the Writers Strike didn't help the script and plot, but if every intention is there and they get the wrong director (Marc Forster), it could all go wrong in the eyes of the fans. Which I hope doesn't happen again, as 'QOS' didn't deserve the bad flack.

 

The exact same thing is going to happen again because of the media.  The media loves to build things and/or people up and then turn around and tear them down.  They've built Bond up over the past year and now, even though Bond 24 very well could turn out to be better than Skyfall, they're going to tear it back down again.  Probably something to do with selling out for Oscar glory and not staying true to the roots of the franchise that Connery built back in the 1960s.  

 

It doesn't matter how good or bad Bond 24 ends up being.  A part of the praise for Skyfall (and before people accuse me of "hating" on Skyfall, this is a very small part of the praise for the film, but I think it existed nonetheless) was that some critics wanted to reward it for simply not being Quantum of Solace.

 

Perfectly put.

 

And I think what we want from the franchise - to deliver a straight mission for BOND 24 - will be exactly what the critics will sneer at: "Unfortunately, it´s business as usual for Bond this time, and the new director X just cannot match the X that the great Sam Mendes could do for Bond."

[quantumofsolace]

Skyfall Takes Empire Awards http://www.empireonl...y.asp?NID=36914

 

[Guy Haines]

Oh dear. Bad news. More awards!

 

Seriously, I don't see why Bond 24 can't be a "typical Bond film" - a "Goldfinger" or "Thunderball" style adventure in terms of plot structure - and yet not be in the running for awards again. I don't see the two as mutually exclusive. For one thing, there's no longer the snobbery directed at the idea of appearing in, writing for, or directing a Bond film. That doesn't necessarily mean hiring an art house director or some great novelist for the screenplay. All it means is producing a great film which also happens to be a Bond film as well - which is what happened, imho, with Skyfall.

[thecasinoroyale]

A nice win for 'Skyfall', though it's directed more towards Sam Mendes' acheivements.

 

Good stuff!

[SecretAgentFan]

Oh dear. Bad news. More awards!

 

Seriously, I don't see why Bond 24 can't be a "typical Bond film" - a "Goldfinger" or "Thunderball" style adventure in terms of plot structure - and yet not be in the running for awards again. I don't see the two as mutually exclusive. For one thing, there's no longer the snobbery directed at the idea of appearing in, writing for, or directing a Bond film. That doesn't necessarily mean hiring an art house director or some great novelist for the screenplay. All it means is producing a great film which also happens to be a Bond film as well - which is what happened, imho, with Skyfall.

 

True. But... from experience critics just love to build something up just to tear it down again. And I just cannot imagine that BOND 24 - even if it delivers exactly what we want - will be met with the same enthusiasm as SKYFALL.

[Hockey Mask]

There will definitely be a balance between something new and copying the Skyfall formula too closely.  This has been true for all Bonds but Skyfall's success will ratchet up the scrutiny.

[Marketto007]

 

 

xxx

[tdalton]

Oh dear. Bad news. More awards!

 

Seriously, I don't see why Bond 24 can't be a "typical Bond film" - a "Goldfinger" or "Thunderball" style adventure in terms of plot structure - and yet not be in the running for awards again. I don't see the two as mutually exclusive. For one thing, there's no longer the snobbery directed at the idea of appearing in, writing for, or directing a Bond film. That doesn't necessarily mean hiring an art house director or some great novelist for the screenplay. All it means is producing a great film which also happens to be a Bond film as well - which is what happened, imho, with Skyfall.

 

True. But... from experience critics just love to build something up just to tear it down again. And I just cannot imagine that BOND 24 - even if it delivers exactly what we want - will be met with the same enthusiasm as SKYFALL.

 

I think that if EON delivers the exact kind of movie that most on this forum seem to want, which is as far as I can tell a more straight-forward Bond film with no personal angle whatsoever and all of the other trappings that make a Bond film a "Bond film", then there's zero chance that the critics will love it.  They've shown time and time again that they look down on those types of Bond films, and Bond 24 won't be an exception if they decide to go the traditional route.  

[graric]

 

Oh dear. Bad news. More awards!

 

Seriously, I don't see why Bond 24 can't be a "typical Bond film" - a "Goldfinger" or "Thunderball" style adventure in terms of plot structure - and yet not be in the running for awards again. I don't see the two as mutually exclusive. For one thing, there's no longer the snobbery directed at the idea of appearing in, writing for, or directing a Bond film. That doesn't necessarily mean hiring an art house director or some great novelist for the screenplay. All it means is producing a great film which also happens to be a Bond film as well - which is what happened, imho, with Skyfall.

 

True. But... from experience critics just love to build something up just to tear it down again. And I just cannot imagine that BOND 24 - even if it delivers exactly what we want - will be met with the same enthusiasm as SKYFALL.

 

I think that if EON delivers the exact kind of movie that most on this forum seem to want, which is as far as I can tell a more straight-forward Bond film with no personal angle whatsoever and all of the other trappings that make a Bond film a "Bond film", then there's zero chance that the critics will love it.  They've shown time and time again that they look down on those types of Bond films, and Bond 24 won't be an exception if they decide to go the traditional route.  

I think what will effect the critics more than type of film made, it will be the director Eon brings in that shapes the critic opinions. If Django Unchained hadn't been directed by Quentin Tarantino, for example, it would have been less likely for a film that over the top to have been so highly praised (and received as many award nominations.)

If a director on the same critical level as Sam Mendes (or even more critically loved than him) makes Bond 24 it won't matter too much what direction he goes in, if it is a strong action film with more humour they will praise it, if it is more psychological than Skyfall they will praise it. If the same film is made by a director like Martin Campell I'd they would be more likely to make unfair comparisons to Skyfall (of course if any director makes a so-so Bond film they will tear it to pieces.)

[Marketto007]

The three Empire Awards acceptance speech from last night.

 

http://bcove.me/dfvncm8u

 

http://bcove.me/czsuxjfl

 

http://bcove.me/cywfki4m

 

xxx

[SecretAgentFan]

 

 

Oh dear. Bad news. More awards!

 

Seriously, I don't see why Bond 24 can't be a "typical Bond film" - a "Goldfinger" or "Thunderball" style adventure in terms of plot structure - and yet not be in the running for awards again. I don't see the two as mutually exclusive. For one thing, there's no longer the snobbery directed at the idea of appearing in, writing for, or directing a Bond film. That doesn't necessarily mean hiring an art house director or some great novelist for the screenplay. All it means is producing a great film which also happens to be a Bond film as well - which is what happened, imho, with Skyfall.

 

True. But... from experience critics just love to build something up just to tear it down again. And I just cannot imagine that BOND 24 - even if it delivers exactly what we want - will be met with the same enthusiasm as SKYFALL.

 

I think that if EON delivers the exact kind of movie that most on this forum seem to want, which is as far as I can tell a more straight-forward Bond film with no personal angle whatsoever and all of the other trappings that make a Bond film a "Bond film", then there's zero chance that the critics will love it.  They've shown time and time again that they look down on those types of Bond films, and Bond 24 won't be an exception if they decide to go the traditional route.  

I think what will effect the critics more than type of film made, it will be the director Eon brings in that shapes the critic opinions. If Django Unchained hadn't been directed by Quentin Tarantino, for example, it would have been less likely for a film that over the top to have been so highly praised (and received as many award nominations.)

If a director on the same critical level as Sam Mendes (or even more critically loved than him) makes Bond 24 it won't matter too much what direction he goes in, if it is a strong action film with more humour they will praise it, if it is more psychological than Skyfall they will praise it. If the same film is made by a director like Martin Campell I'd they would be more likely to make unfair comparisons to Skyfall (of course if any director makes a so-so Bond film they will tear it to pieces.)

 

The thing with Mendes is: he carries so much "auteur" goodwill with him, critics were absolutely keen on giving him a benevolent review for SKYFALL. 

 

With Mendes gone, they will either have to up the ante (bring in Spielberg) or go with a not so famous director. Every director will hesitate, however, to follow SKYFALL - just because of its massive box office which can hardly be topped (or can it?) 

 

Maybe the wisest thing to do now is to get a young, unproven director without any baggage.

[SecretAgentFan]

Ooops, Babs said she "loved PULP FICTION" during the Empire Awards Interview.  Wouldn´t have thought she would openly give a nod to Tarantino right now. (No, I don´t mean this is a sign that she wants him for BOND 24).

 

Interesting that she and MGW both not only cuddle with P & W but say that they will be back in the future.

[tdalton]

Interesting that she and MGW both not only cuddle with P & W but say that they will be back in the future.

 

One can only hope that she was kidding on that front.  They had five films and basically recycled the same two plots all five times.

 

I guess they will be back, though, should Bond 24 disappoint at the box office, so they can write yet another story of Bond being betrayed or MI6 being directly attacked.  

[SecretAgentFan]

I agree - although I think that these narrative elements were not always suggested by them.

 

As I understand P & W are well loved by EON because they are team players - but they became frustrated for the obvious reasons (directors letting others re-write their material, misinterpreting it and so on).

 

We will see how long John Logan will stay on (or who will rewrite him...) and what narrative clichés he will bring to the table.