James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#676 Post by hearthesilence » Mon Apr 20, 2020 9:42 pm

I'm not sure how those were leaked, but that Wolverine movie was infamously leaked because an executive carelessly left behind a DVD screener at a restaurant.

Productions typically use one of a handful of companies that securely stream private content with traceable usage and a unique watermark ID displayed on-screen whenever it's accessed. If they knock out DVD screeners from the chain, it would make any pre-release leaks even less likely. In that case, a third-party vendor like a VFX company would have to leak it. Regardless, it's a felony to leak a film - witness what happened in the Wolverine case - so you'd need an especially bold contractor who would do something that's very traceable.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#677 Post by domino harvey » Mon Apr 20, 2020 9:50 pm

Couldn’t they be sued in civil court for damages (lost box office) as well? Seems like a good way to ruin your life

Nasir007
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 11:58 am

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#678 Post by Nasir007 » Mon Apr 20, 2020 10:33 pm

aox wrote:
Mon Apr 20, 2020 9:02 pm
Sorry for this sort of "IMDB Message Board"- level of questioning/supposition (read: bored during quarantine):

For some of you on here who work in the industry or have a much more in depth knowledge of the movie industry, are you surprised or not surprised that No Time to Die hasn't leaked online? I know security around film productions especially with the $$$ of this intellectual property can be as strong as a military operation, but we're also talking about dozens or hundreds of individual agents. Any insight into the level of security protecting this? How many copies exist? Who would have access to it?
A rather random query!

Seriously, why would this movie leak more than any other?

I actually think nowadays leaks are LESS likely right? If I understand, many of the DCP prints are digitally transmitted to the cinemas. So cinema would only get the movie the day of or whatever. Earlier there used to be the risk of VFX companies leaking it. Wasn't the wolverine leak from a VFX studio? But now the work is split up between dozens of companies.

I can't recall a really major film leaking BEFORE release for quite some time now.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#679 Post by swo17 » Mon Apr 20, 2020 10:41 pm

A Rainy Day in New York is a really major film but the world doesn't deserve it

User avatar
aox
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:02 pm
Location: nYc

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#680 Post by aox » Mon Apr 20, 2020 11:04 pm

Nasir007 wrote:
Mon Apr 20, 2020 10:33 pm

Seriously, why would this movie leak more than any other?
It wouldn't. I'm just using it as an example, and Bond 25 is the only major movie stuck in quarantine that I even remotely care about that I am aware of. So, I guess just personal reasons. Sorry, Wonder Woman. Yes, I know Woody Allen's new film could leak, but I was curious at the security that comes with a multi-billion dollar franchise.

User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#681 Post by hearthesilence » Mon Apr 20, 2020 11:14 pm

domino harvey wrote:
Mon Apr 20, 2020 9:50 pm
Couldn’t they be sued in civil court for damages (lost box office) as well? Seems like a good way to ruin your life
Absolutely. Re: being sued in civil court for monetary damages, I would think so too, but to my understanding, for practical reasons usually the most severe cases will face legal action, and since they're theoretically picking out the worst offenders, the infringement will be heinous enough that law enforcement will get involved, at which point the civil case would be dismissed so that a criminal case can begin. I could be wrong though - any lawyers want to chime in and correct me?

FWIW, in the U.S., the maximum penalty would be three years in a federal prison and a $250,000 fine or “twice the gross gain or loss attributable to the offense, whichever is greater." The offender in the Wolverine case pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a year.

Nasir007
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 11:58 am

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#682 Post by Nasir007 » Tue Apr 21, 2020 12:23 am

For the fine, they really can't have any hopes right? What if some schmuck leaked the movie and the loss attributable was like 200 million dollars - which can be the profit margin for some of these films. How on earth can they expect the poor guy to pay that? (Though my scenario assumes the extreme case of the leak being so widely disseminated that almost nobody goes to the theater.)

User avatar
The Curious Sofa
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:18 am

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#683 Post by The Curious Sofa » Tue Apr 21, 2020 5:47 am

Did someone just suggest that the US litigation and compensation culture doesn't make sense ?

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#684 Post by therewillbeblus » Sat Oct 03, 2020 12:43 am

No Time to Die unsurprisingly delayed again a month shy of its Nov release, slated for Easter weekend 2021 (for now)

User avatar
aox
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:02 pm
Location: nYc

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#685 Post by aox » Sat Oct 03, 2020 12:06 pm

I suppose this is what happens when you're not fearful of your creditors breaking your legs.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#686 Post by tenia » Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:52 pm

I guess the perspective of doing the score of Tenet was a good enough reason for their creditors to give them a bit more time.

flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#687 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Sat Oct 03, 2020 4:18 pm

Zimmer didn't score Tenet. He dropped out of it for Dune.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#688 Post by therewillbeblus » Tue Jan 05, 2021 2:50 am

I'm a pretty fervent Bond fan, and can appreciate some aspect of even the weaker films of the series for the most part (notable exceptions: A View to a Kill and Tomorrow Never Dies, from distant memory at least), but why I keep returning to Quantum of Solace and expect anything less than a messy, vapid experience is the definition of insanity. It's not just that the action scene are among the most terribly shot I've ever seen (I'd also say the worst choreographed, but it's impossible to support that claim when the camera is constantly cutting away with awful blocking), but the actual narrative, dramatic rationales, and pathetic attempts at characterization are so thin while trying to be- even believing it is- as gritty as Casino Royale (which was a bit rough for Bond, but has been overblown in this hyperbolic department).

I think Skyfall is easily the best of the new films, humanizing the character in an honest way that acknowledges even our densest superficial winners aren't spared from history that carries conceals emotions within, nor can they escape from their current social relationships without finding meaning there as well. Everyone has an Achilles heel, even superman- though some people think Casino Royale initiated this with Vesper I never bought it on a human level like I do here. The way Bond and M react, showing their fallibilities and vulnerabilities as distinct non-synonymous traits, form a roundabout makeshift family system that communicates an eccentric quasi-version of love in 'compromised affection'.

The political subtext is dissected with a complexity that acknowledges the importance of democracy, but also argues for a conservative position that hails the necessity of secret branches of government- even when they fail and cause harm- and formulates that they may have inherent superiority that should be prioritized pragmatically if not ethically against due process. I also like how Bardem provides valid perspectives of anti-nationalism and exposes general facades of ideology, provoking Bond's own tunnel vision of rigid hivemindedness, before Bardem exposes himself as a nihilist and shows us the strength in simplified values in the process.

Bardem's own issues stem from honest trauma, emotion from an abandoned child transformed into anger, and it's all relatable even if he has ironically turned himself into a rigid ideologist of vengeance. M's rejection of his worth feeds that conservative no-nonsense forward-moving stance and also leaves room for empathy for the agent before, not the man now, to reconfigure Will's great grey-thinking line in Manhunter. The clash between individual love and detached emotion toward a dedication to country or utilitarian goals has been a theme only lazily postured at in Bond films before. However, this rhetorical question is emblematic of M's speech about individuals as terrorists being the real threat rather than vague nations. The conflict is also at the heart of Bond and M's actions and attitudes, which transcend a dichotomy of 'right' and 'wrong' and are just what 'is', imperfect and contradictory and troubling, but as irreconcilable as life itself is to follow one dimension of harmonious virtue, and thus must be done without regret or apology.

Skyfall is also a perfect blend of Bond staples and art-film choices. Of the former variety, the makers finally give us a throwback to the expansive narratives of the classics to supporting players coming back (or beginning) recontextualized for the new era. The avant-garde comes through in eclectic lighting choices like the sepia-soaked scenes that directly follow a dark, stealth sniper scene lit only with a cross between Refn's blown-out neon and Warhol-party wall visuals, only to culminate in a silhouette hand-to-hand combat behind a vivid jellyfish (and of course this is after a dreary teal first act). My favorite arthouse touch is a bit subtler in the sinister final act. The helicopter invasion at the end has a completely novel vibe for a Bond film.. it's actually chilling with the choice of jolly music eerily surreal, the guerrilla siege in darkness (all colors finally muted after doing the rounds throughout the film), and the final plea for a double suicide bordering on psych-thriller- even horror- territory; all of this revolving around a physical manifestation of Bond's sore tissue, which is also the place he had to travel to in order to get 'ahead' strategically. Nothing remains buried forever, and in a film of de-lavished spaces, from the ruins on the island to the titular tattered childhood home, we travel with Bond, Silva, and M to the dirty pits of their psychological cores, if only through surface-level tangible signifers. I guess it wouldn't be Bond if they went too deep, but this is even more admirable to push these boundaries within the language of the series.

User avatar
soundchaser
Leave Her to Beaver
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 12:32 am

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#689 Post by soundchaser » Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:37 am

It’s probably an exaggeration to say that Quantum of Solace in one of the worst-edited films I’ve ever watched, but I have a visceral memory of being made seasick by the first chase sequence. I really can’t remember any other movie having that effect on me.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#690 Post by therewillbeblus » Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:01 am

Yeah even though I've now seen it at least three, maybe four times, that's the only scene I retain every watch. Mathieu Amalric is an unexpectedly inspired casting choice for a Bond villain, and he deserved better

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#691 Post by tenia » Tue Jan 05, 2021 5:06 am

Quantum of Solace was an early sign of how incompetent Forster (and, I guess, his editor Matt Cheese) is at directing action scenes, so another definition of insanity probably was to have them returning for another action movie with World War Z, which suffers from pretty much the exact same visual issues.

However, visuals are indeed only some of QoS's issues, which also includes a very poorly sketched villain, limited chemistry between Craig and Kurylenko (and Aterton, to a lesser extent) but also mostly a quite inconsistent pace that makes this very short entry in the franchise feeling much longer than it actually is (not that the longer recent movies don't feel their durations, but QoS is 40 minutes shorter than the other 3 Craig movies and supposedly going to be 55 minutes shorter than No Time to Die, which is quite a difference).

With Tomorrow Never Dies, it probably is the only James Bond movie I'm almost never coming back (I think I only saw it once since I first saw it in theater) (last time I watched TND, I had to stop after 40 minutes for non-related reasons and actually never resumed the movie).

User avatar
How rude!
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:36 am

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#692 Post by How rude! » Tue Jan 05, 2021 12:45 pm

"I really can’t remember any other movie having that effect on me"

Rollerball 2002 remake had the same affect on me. It was an incomprehensible mess.

User avatar
Brian C
I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#693 Post by Brian C » Tue Jan 05, 2021 12:59 pm

TOMORROW NEVER DIES wasn’t great when it came out and hasn’t aged terribly well, but I still feel like it’s merely the third-worst of the Brosnans. For better or for worse, it felt like an old Roger Moore-era script dusted off and given a ‘90s update in the form of Michelle Yeoh. Not really enjoyable but not far off the average for the series, either.

The remarkable thing to me about the Brosnans is that each one is worse than the previous one, and by almost the exact same margins. You could use them to measure the half-life of diminishing returns. You can see this progression in the villains: Sean Bean playing an equal to Brosnan’s Bond, followed by Pryce at maximum ham setting playing a standard-issue Bond villain, followed by an awkward and miscast Robert Carlyle who was clearly out of his depth, followed by some guy that I don’t know who he is and barely remember.

Plus, by the time that THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH rolled around, it was obvious that the producers had already run out of ideas for how to use Judi Dench’s M, and so shoehorned her into a damsel in distress role. Unfortunately they’d repeat this in the Craig era, with the equally unfortunate idea of making her Bond’s surrogate mother figure. But it was especially discouraging after only two previous movies, in which their only use for her to date had been “IDK, maybe have Bond be vaguely skeptical of a woman boss.”

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#694 Post by tenia » Tue Jan 05, 2021 1:33 pm

TND doesn't work but in a very boring and mediocre way, while Die Another Day is awful in a trainwreck fashion that could be fun and unwillingly hilarious.
I however think The World is Not Enough fares better than those, despite the various miscasts (Denise Richards as a nuclear physicist might even be worse than Carlyle's psycho).

User avatar
Brian C
I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#695 Post by Brian C » Tue Jan 05, 2021 2:03 pm

I’d probably enjoy DIE ANOTHER DAY more if I saw more that was amusing in its awfulness, but all I see is the awfulness. It doesn’t even fail in interesting ways - it’s just an overstuffed and undercooked Bond movie.

I do like the opening credits sequence though - Bond’s torture works surprisingly well with the Madonna song, and it’s weirder and more effective than the more self-consciously “dark” tone of the Craig films.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#696 Post by therewillbeblus » Tue Jan 05, 2021 2:40 pm

Die Another Day usually tops the worst Bond lists, and I haven't revisited it since maybe a year after its release. I remember finding it bad but watchable, with some inspired set design in the igloo castle, a decent opening action scene, and Halle Berry walking out of the ocean, and that's about it. The World is Not Enough I kinda like though, not that it's "good" but I enjoyed some of the setpieces, felt the forward momentum worked better than the other Brosnans sans sans Goldeneye, and Desmond Llewelyn's sendoff as Q was quite emotional at the time. I also think it's the far-superior N64 game to Goldeneye, which as far as I know is a completely isolated opinion, so maybe I'm not exactly matching the needle on this Bond!

User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#697 Post by cdnchris » Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:32 pm

Brian C wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 12:59 pm
TOMORROW NEVER DIES wasn’t great when it came out and hasn’t aged terribly well, but I still feel like it’s merely the third-worst of the Brosnans. For better or for worse, it felt like an old Roger Moore-era script dusted off and given a ‘90s update in the form of Michelle Yeoh. Not really enjoyable but not far off the average for the series, either.

The remarkable thing to me about the Brosnans is that each one is worse than the previous one, and by almost the exact same margins. You could use them to measure the half-life of diminishing returns. You can see this progression in the villains: Sean Bean playing an equal to Brosnan’s Bond, followed by Pryce at maximum ham setting playing a standard-issue Bond villain, followed by an awkward and miscast Robert Carlyle who was clearly out of his depth, followed by some guy that I don’t know who he is and barely remember.

Plus, by the time that THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH rolled around, it was obvious that the producers had already run out of ideas for how to use Judi Dench’s M, and so shoehorned her into a damsel in distress role. Unfortunately they’d repeat this in the Craig era, with the equally unfortunate idea of making her Bond’s surrogate mother figure. But it was especially discouraging after only two previous movies, in which their only use for her to date had been “IDK, maybe have Bond be vaguely skeptical of a woman boss.”
I find myself liking the Brosnan ones less and less as time goes by, but Tomorrow Never Dies may actually be my "favourite" of his because it is, like you said, a throwback to the Moore ones and I think it works in the spirit of those Bond films. My eyes roll uncontrollably when I catch it on TV, but I don't hate it. World is Not Enough is unnecessarily convoluted and forgettable. I wasn't even terribly fond of Goldeneye when it first came out, though it's the only one that actually grew on me over the years. Still not one I'd list highly, though.

Die Another Day is garbage and has no redeemable qualities and is by far the worst of the series. Quantum of Solace a close second, but more because it's just a bad movie overall, from the already mentioned shitty editing to the shitty villain and really shitty plot. I also think Spectre is a turd: I liked how it tried to pay tribute to the early Connery ones and that, but I'll never understand why they felt the need they had to link up all of the Craig movies, despite the Bond movies never really going for continuity, and then doing it in such a bad way. They also turned Blofeld into a whiny man-baby with daddy issues. Bautista as the henchman was wasted too.

User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#698 Post by Big Ben » Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:44 pm

I realize looking for realism in a Bond film is not a wise thing to do but even I couldn't help but go "Really?" in the theater as Bond shot down a helicopter with a handgun in Spectre. Craig's Bond films are either hit or miss for me and I still to this day wonder how the man who directed the more grounded Skyfall also managed to direct the ludicrous Spectre. Spectre that not only wasted a set up formed in previous Craig films but they managed, incredibly to waste the wonderful Christoph Waltz. And that's saying something.

User avatar
Brian C
I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL

James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#699 Post by Brian C » Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:00 pm

GOLDENEYE mostly holds up for me. Its basic plot - former MI6 colleague turns traitor over an old historical grievance - is a little stronger than most Bond films and actually feels like an old Dalton-era plot, and I think the movie makes the most of it by setting it against the fracturing of the old Soviet bloc. And Campbell does a pretty good job of balancing that (relatively) gritty story with some classic Bond elements, foremost Famke Janssen’s character, who’s gotta be the best “evil” Bond girl in the series. Plus the stunt work is the best of the Brosnan films (probably the last one with good stunt work before CGI augmentation became so common), and I like Eric Serra’s uncharacteristic score.

I guess the movie doesn’t have much in common with the Connery films, so I can see why someone who heavily favors that era wouldn’t like it. But as a hybrid between the Moore and Dalton movies, I think it’s better than any of the ones from either era. And all in all, I think it’s better than Campbell’s CASINO ROYALE franchise reboot, which inexplicably went all-in on watching people play cards.

User avatar
The Fanciful Norwegian
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:24 pm
Location: Teegeeack

Re: James Bond Franchise (1962-∞)

#700 Post by The Fanciful Norwegian » Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:27 pm

Brian C wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:00 pm
And all in all, I think it’s better than Campbell’s CASINO ROYALE franchise reboot, which inexplicably went all-in on watching people play cards.
I don't think it was inexplicable at the time—the movie came out at the tail end of the poker craze (it's not a coincidence that the movie changed the game from baccarat to Texas hold 'em), when a lot of people who should've known better were convinced that we would all be watching poker tournaments on TV into the foreseeable future.

Post Reply