James Bond In Skyfall - Part 6

[Blue Sugar]

Deakins was the star of the teaser. My f****** god.

Seriously. Even if the rest of the film sucks I will still buy it on BD and re-watch it multiple times, just because of it's most likely fantastic visuals.

 

[The Morningstar]

Yea, the silhouettes are just glorious.

 

[marvelrobbins]

A reboot means you are starting over.You can't call Skyfall Bond 23.That Is like calling The Amazing Spider-Man Spider-Man 4 or the Dark Knight Rises
Batman 7 or Man of Steel Superman 6.

Now while Teaser may be misleading It makes Skyfall seem like a Bourne or
24 style film.The Intergertion seems more like something out of 24.

 

[MadVillainy]

cool teaser

 

[The Morningstar]

Oh fer christ sake. It's a spy thriller, why can't it have a scene in an interrogation room? Why does that make it a rip off?

No, Bond is THE spy series, everyone else copies Bond, not the other way round.

 

[The_Raganork]

A reboot means you are starting over.You can't call Skyfall Bond 23.That Is like calling The Amazing Spider-Man Spider-Man 4 or the Dark Knight Rises
Batman 7 or Man of Steel Superman 6.

This is so beyond petty it's sad.

Bond 23 is no more of an official title than my naming it: "Bond Strikes Back"

it's the 23rd Bond film, if this is honestly what's keeping you up at night over these films you need something else to ***** over.

Now while Teaser may be misleading It makes Skyfall seem like a Bourne or
24 style film.The Intergertion seems more like something out of 24.

Are you serious?

Both Jack Bauer and Jason Bourne have HEAVILY stolen from James Bond. Both their initials are JB that's not accidental.

So to claim that Bond looking like something that was heavily influenced by Bond in the first place as a fault is the height of absurdity.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

Wow, I'm astonished by some of the behavior in here. We finally get the highly anticipated teaser for Skyfall (shaping up to be a truly fantastic movie) and it's gorgeous, but it can't be appreciated because it was 'too dark and gritty' or 'Nolan-like' for some posters.

I don't want to live on this planet anymore.

 

[The Guard]

Bond, in the last few films has been a lot closer to Fleming's novels than anything we've previously seen. Bond has always been a pretty emotional fellow, and almost everything is personal to him, though he likes to pretend otherwise, that its all business.

I like the teaser. Somewhat understated, but very well put together. I think the nature of the interrogation is more interesting than the fact that he's just being interrogated. One wonders what he did, or is believed to have done.

Craig is INTENSE here. Loving it. Can't wait.

 

[Blue Sugar]

Bang bang, you're dead.

 

[Raiden]

Wow, I'm astonished by some of the behavior in here. We finally get the highly anticipated teaser for Skyfall (shaping up to be a truly fantastic movie) and it's gorgeous, but it can't be appreciated because it was 'too dark and gritty' or 'Nolan-like' for some posters.

I don't want to live on this planet anymore.

Yeah, whatever problems Craig's 007 has, "dark and gritty" shouldn't be one of them, especially after they came in the heels of DAD.

 

[The Shape]

A reboot means you are starting over.You can't call Skyfall Bond 23.That Is like calling The Amazing Spider-Man Spider-Man 4 or the Dark Knight Rises
Batman 7 or Man of Steel Superman 6.

Uh, the Bond series has technically rebooted itself several times since several different actors have stepped into the role from films 1-20. None of the first 20 films are even linked and as far as I can remember, they don't even reference the preceding films.

CR is a full on reboot that started a new continuity, with a new actor, and a new connecting storyline. It is the 23rd Bond film...

 

[The_Raganork]

Bang bang, you're dead.

how come his gun explosion only goes off sometimes in this GIF?

 

[The_Raganork]

Uh, the Bond series has technically rebooted itself several times since several different actors have stepped into the role from films 1-20. None of the first 20 films are even linked and as far as I can remember, they don't even reference the preceding films.

CR is a full on reboot that started a new continuity, with a new actor, and a new connecting storyline. It is the 23rd Bond film...

Several of them are.

Roger moore's talks about being married and visits Teresa's grave.

Lazenby pulls out objects from each of the previous films.

Timothy Dalton also has a mention of once being married before

They're loosely related but they do reference each other sometimes.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Love this trailer. Very intense. Love the interrogation scene. Just Craig's demeanor about it all. And that stare before he says, "Done" gives me chills.

The footage is mighty impressive. I really think this has potential to be one of the best Bond films.

And the digital and Deakins work beautifully. It doesn't even look digital.

 

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

I had to rewind the trailer after I figured out they were doing a word association test. That's a great idea. I guess why I like Craig and never got into the other Bonds is that we see more of who Craig's Bond is as a person.

 

[Doctor Jones]

What?

It's a reboot. Why is that hard to grasp? It has started over. Just because they didn't reboot before doesn't mean they should have never done it ever.

In Goldeneye Bond suggest Dench M just arrived. In Casino Royale he's just becoming a 00 agent and Dench M has been there a while.

They obviously are NOT related. How is it hard to imagine a new continuum in the Bond series.

These things aren't made to cater to what we want, if it were we'd have Goldfinger 34 times.

The charge of a team making up these films is to give us something enjoyable whilst also pushing the limits and giving us something new.

It's time to open our eyes and realize we don't always know what's best for our favorite things. Part of the joy is seeing where it goes, if it fails like DAD then we frown, if it works like CR we smile.

But allow them the chance to try to be different without *****ing about it. We're not owed Bond films, we're not entitled to them.

they are creative works that thrive on being creative, different and ever changing.

Hey, somebody here gets it.

But the fun of this thread is killed when it should have been more fun after this great teaser. It's too serious here now.

 

[Blue Sugar]

how come his gun explosion only goes off sometimes in this GIF?

Whoa, didn't notice that! How weird.

The only thing stopping this teaser from being totally great is the lack of the Bond-theme. Though I do like the electronic-tinged music we do hear.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Bang bang, you're dead.

Actually I think he just realized the gun wasn't powerful enough and thus simply gave up until he found an effective weapon.

 

[The_Raganork]

It is...

I loved the trailer. This is extremely exciting for me as a long time Bond fan. Plus hearing some rumors about the plot...

WHEW, it's going to be a great November

 

[StevieNicks1988]

Several of them are.

Roger moore's talks about being married and visits Teresa's grave.

Lazenby pulls out objects from each of the previous films.

Timothy Dalton also has a mention of once being married before

They're loosely related but they do reference each other sometimes.

There's more. Die Another Day, although a horrible movie, has the Q scene with all the gadgets in the back of the room, the sort of gadget vault - including the jetpack from Thunderball.

Also, there's that Russian General who made various appearances in the 80s through the different movies (mainly The Spy Who Loved Me & For Your Eyes Only that I can remember off the top of my head).

And then of course there's Blofeld appearing with different Bond actors (Connery, Lazenby & Moore).

 

[Asteroid-Man]

That was a pretty decent trailer. Would've liked to have heard the Bond theme a little more, but it's all good.

 

[The_Raganork]

There's more. Die Another Day, although a horrible movie, has the Q scene with all the gadgets in the back of the room, the sort of gadget vault - including the jetpack from Thunderball.

Also, there's that Russian General who made various appearances in the 80s through the different movies (mainly The Spy Who Loved Me & For Your Eyes Only that I can remember off the top of my head).

And then of course there's Blofeld appearing with different Bond actors (Connery, Lazenby & Moore).

Indeed!



There's even more than that. Felix is played by the same actor in LaLD and LTK. It would be a long post to put them all together but yes, they do reference each other.

Even the World is not Enough, is a reference to OHMSS, when Bond learns his family Crest translates to: "The World is Not Enough"

 

[DarthSkywalker]

The movie definitely looks different. Sort of like a combination of the 60s Bonds and a Chris Nolan movie. It looks very, very nice. Very exciting.

 

[ChickenScratch]

You hold a gross misunderstanding of Fleming's novels, and if you cite Casino Royale as good because it was "Bond doing his job again" than that speaks to you not really getting it.

Casino Royale, next to On Her Majesty's Secret Service, is perhaps the MOST personal Bond story Fleming wrote. Bond literally falls in love, and the "spy plot" resolves itself 3/4 of a way through the novel, letting the rest meditate on the destruction of a relationship due to the toxic nature of espionage.

I'm a purist. No actor portraying Bond - including the great vaunted Connery -- is greater or more important than Fleming. Craig, whether fans like it or not, represents the closest representation to Bond since OHMMSS. Fleming's Bond was largely humorous, and when he was it was in a cutting way. He was largely bitter most of the time, and took an almost personal insult in every single case he took. He delighted in taking on the Bond villain for the pure principle of "my malehood versus his malehood."

Bond has a sense of duty, but it's actuated by an intense habit to make EVERYTHING personal. Look at his feud with Hugo Drax in Moonraker, if you've read the novel. He goes down their first, yes, to take on Drax but it their battle of wits becomes insanely personal. Hell, even as they play cards at Blades Bond is already personally invested in teaching this man a lesson. In Diamonds are Forever, he at first takes on the job and then largely becomes more and more invested in punishing -- not killing -- Jack Spang and the others for the mere sake of how they disgust him. In Live and Let Die, his emotions and anger from Vesper's betrayal carries over into him taking on SMERSH. When Felix is mauled, it becomes insanely personal. In fact, M picks him SPECIFICALLY because Bond has a personal history with SMERSH. In Dr. No, Strangeways and Quarrel's deaths both motivate Bond to take the job more seriously and more personal. Thunderball, we have much the same disgust at criminality that motivates Bond. Goldfinger is perhaps Fleming's least personal Bond story, but Bond's male rivalry with Goldfinger himself is very clearly personal and goes beyond Queen and Country.

In From Russia With Love, Bond does not care about the Lector. But it's not out of duty, it's because the Lektor is a clear ploy and set up by the Russians. Why would he care? In the novel, Bond goes out of a sort of boredom, excited by the prospect of a job after having months of boredom. He then finds himself feeling sorry for Tatiana and things become personal when he falls for her and Karim is murdered. In the film, it sets it up much the same sans the boredom Bond was feeling prior to the job. He heads to Istanbul out of a perverse intellectual curiosity.

If you look at most of Fleming's novels, the constant theme is that the duty of Bond doing his job never stays that way, and that each mission has a much more, unforeseen personal toll on Bond each and everytime. But whatever the personal toll, Bond must always reign in his personal feelings by the climax in order to get the job done, which inevitably costs him more and more personal angst than had he been able to exercise his personal feelings. This is reinforced twice in QoS when Bond lets Green live so he can get the information for M (which is the boon of the story) as well as when he spares the life of the man who conned Vesper (also allowing them more info). This takes place in the novels too, where Bond is either denied his revenge or personal emotive satisfaction, or puts it aside to get the job done. Just look at the first few Bond novels, where Bond himself never actually gets to directly kill the Bond villain. SMERSH kils Le Chifree, Mr. Big dies faraway in an explosion that while caused by Bond is very impersonal, Hugo Drax dies by his own hand with Bond just focusing on surviving, Jack Spang dies in a train crash that is a errant consequence of his and Bond's fight. In all these cases, Bond is denied personal satisfaction yet gets the job done. By the time Bond arrives at On Her Majesty's Secret Service, he's tired and eager for real love -- thus why he finds Tracey. And in You Only Live Twice, we get a sense of what's left over after Bond's last attempt to escape the poison of the spy business fails -- he is a suicidal wreck of a man hellbent on revenge.

I'm not saying Bond movies are prefect. I think some people treat the films with more reverie then the source material, which created one of the greatest film icons of all-time. ANd I don't knock the Brocollis too much, because they have helmed a character who has existed for so long and so permeates our culture. I do find the Dalton, Brosnan, and Craig movies more engaging because they begin to challenge Bond's emotional responses to his job, much the same way Fleming did with Bond.

But to sit here and say that because Roger Moore wore a suit and ordered around soldiers for Queen and Country, somehow made him a better Bond and more Bond -- that's just entirely false. Even Fleming, in his novels, has a constant theme of insubordination on the part of Bond. It was never for Queen and Country so much as it was for M -- and the principal Bond always returns to, and is always loyal to, is getting the job done.

Craig perhaps embodies that perfectly in that he is a bulldozer spy that does not stop until he's crushed you and finished you. He is an agent that M wields specifically because he is a blunt instrument that gets the job done, and finds a personal investment in each and every case.

Great post man. I agree.

As for this Ian's Bond is Not Film's Bond. They can argue it till they are blue in the face, it's the same character. Just different.

I also don't hold to any movie continuity. There's is one timeline and it is Ian's (which includes Higson, Amis, Faulks, Gardner and Beson, everything else it's in there (and it does fit).

 

[Doctor Jones]

"Some men are coming to kill us. And we're going to kill them first."

Love Craig's delivery. There's a twinkle in his eye there. Craig has always managed to balance the humor with the serious.

And I presume that's Bardem in the last shot before the title? Because it's badass.