No Time To Die (now contains spoilers!) Ha

malachi said:
Delayed until November due to the virus outbreak.

https://twitter.com/007/status/1235248760260874241

Pointless and long delay when other big films are still coming out during that time.
Click to expand...

Not really pointless.

China is a huge market for them (the premier was supposed to be there) and 2/3rds of their global box office comes from outside America.

It makes business sense.
 
The Chinese market s huge alright. I also wonder if the plot could involve a man-made virus of some kind. Films have been postponed for similar reasons before, i.e. mirroring real-life events going on at the original time of release.
 
If more films are pulled for that length of time, then there will be no cinemas left for them to show it at...
 
This is really going to let the cat out of the bag how reliant US studios are on the China box office.
 
Feels ages since the first trailer came out and was on before every film at cinema, this trailer gives a little more away but still excited to see it.
 
Lots of big flashy action pieces there but I just can't get excited for it. I don't know if it's franchise weariness or that I didn't like the last few Bond movies but I'm just all "Meh'd" out by the lack of good story with well written characters instead of "Here's a big shiny action piece, ignore all the other stuff, OK" of the more recent films.

For me it's time for a new Bond, a new direction (a max of 3 movies over 10 years per Bond actor - aged 25-35 at most - and then get a new one etc) and a new set of writers, because I'm gettiong broed of the same "By the fourth Movie the actor is old so we get the same cliché of Bond coming out of retirement" guff.
 
ianh said:
Lots of big flashy action pieces there but I just can't get excited for it. I don't know if it's franchise weariness or that I didn't like the last few Bond movies but I'm just all "Meh'd" out by the lack of good story with well written characters instead of "Here's a big shiny action piece, ignore all the other stuff, OK" of the more recent films.

For me it's time for a new Bond, a new direction (a max of 3 movies over 10 years per Bond actor - aged 25-35 at most - and then get a new one etc) and a new set of writers, because I'm gettiong broed of the same "By the fourth Movie the actor is old so we get the same cliché of Bond coming out of retirement" guff.
Click to expand...
Same here. I think Daniel Craig and his Casino Royale is one of the best Bond films and he the best Bond actor in it. But it's tired and he's older now. I'll probably still go to watch but I'm not terribly excited anymore.
 
ianh said:
Lots of big flashy action pieces there but I just can't get excited for it. I don't know if it's franchise weariness or that I didn't like the last few Bond movies but I'm just all "Meh'd" out by the lack of good story with well written characters instead of "Here's a big shiny action piece, ignore all the other stuff, OK" of the more recent films.

For me it's time for a new Bond, a new direction (a max of 3 movies over 10 years per Bond actor - aged 25-35 at most - and then get a new one etc) and a new set of writers, because I'm gettiong broed of the same "By the fourth Movie the actor is old so we get the same cliché of Bond coming out of retirement" guff.
Click to expand...

Hades said:
Same here. I think Daniel Craig and his Casino Royale is one of the best Bond films and he the best Bond actor in it. But it's tired and he's older now. I'll probably still go to watch but I'm not terribly excited anymore.
Click to expand...

Casino Royale almost had that feel to the Roger Moore films with the modern touch. No endless excess of explosions and constant chases or fighting. Good build up of story, dialogue that eventually lead up to some normal action but nothing over the top. As well as showing off the beauty locations.

The recent Daniel Craig films feels like it was a Gi Joe Movie. Or something along that line.
 
I feel like the older films tended to have just a few huge action scenes, say one at the start, middle and end (although not always) with maybe 1-2 smaller ones thrown in, and none of those scenes seemed to drag on in what I felt was an overly long time i.e. they used to spy films with a little action thrown in.

The recent films however seem, to me at least, to have devolved into constant action scenes (5-6 huge scenes per film with 2-3 smaller ones) which take forever and therefore the only use for the dialogue scenes looks to be just as a means to move from one action scene to the next so the script is pretty Meh instead of being the focus i.e they're action films with a little spying thrown in.

Of the recent era, I think Goldeneye and Casino Royale felt like they got the action vs dialogue mix better, even if I felt CR dragged on a little towards the end.
 
Skyfall was terrible for that. While I did enjoy that film, there were too many action scenes that dragged on and on. Like the train scenes. The only thing is the modern day 007 doesn't really feel like a spy movie. It just feels like a generic action blockbuster with some flash cars that feels like a fancy ad promotion.

Even Brosnan's films had that spy feel to it with gadgets with the modern take.


Though, Quantum of Solace had a great entrance.
 
Bond as a character was (from memory) 35 - 45, Timothy Dalton turned down On Her Majesty's Secret Service for being too young at the time to play Bond. Lazenby did an admiral job for the time, only binned the opportunity.

Brosnan got vain and later stories were ludicrous with the exception of Golden Eye/Tomorrow Never Dies. When Robert Carlisle was going to be the bad guy for World is not Enough, the story about receiving a bullet in the head from an 00 agent, sounded proper Bond. Only the film turned out carp. Sadly exercise repeated when Toby Stephens was going to be another nemesis - both decent actors and each film was dreadful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom