Jump to content

The Film Thread


Recommended Posts

Spectre has bigger problems than that I think.

Agree that Skyfall is a weird curiosity because of it though. I know why they did it, the 50th anniversary and all that, but it's a weird little film in part because of it. Especially as they'd only just done a 'soft reboot' of the series with Casino Royale 6 years and only a single movie before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was an uncensored extended version of The Godfather (parts 1+2) shown in America last night, clocks in at 7-8 hours. Hoping I can procure a copy to watch at work, it's received a lot of good feedback from what I've read about it so far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chindie said:

Spectre has bigger problems than that I think.

Agree that Skyfall is a weird curiosity because of it though. I know why they did it, the 50th anniversary and all that, but it's a weird little film in part because of it. Especially as they'd only just done a 'soft reboot' of the series with Casino Royale 6 years and only a single movie before.

personally i think all the new(since daniel took over) 007 films have lost what was good about them. they have just bent towards the hollywood expectation of an action flick. What I really loved and what got me hooked was the ridiculousness of the early movies, For it to be a bond movie in my eyes you need a villain whos taken over a volcano or the moon to build a base which they will use to take over the world after they have plagued it using dolphins with lazers instead of eyes, preferably there needs to be some naked girls too, booze and a watch that shoots rockets and/or a car that can fly to pluto and back.

beyond that i think daniel craig always looks miserable, bond always struck me as a fairly optimistic/happy guy,.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, villa4europe said:

Said before I really don't want him as bond, for continuity purposes for a start, for characteristics that his personality would bring to the character 2nd, his age 3rd, the fact that he's a good enough actor to deserve something written for him rather being shoe horned in to the role 4th...

Of course colour comes in to it, he's an existing character

Hair colour and eye colour haven't mattered before, why should skin colour be so massively different?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, V01 said:

There was an uncensored extended version of The Godfather (parts 1+2) shown in America last night, clocks in at 7-8 hours. Hoping I can procure a copy to watch at work, it's received a lot of good feedback from what I've read about it so far.

I did not care for The Godfather. 

Edited by hogso
It insists upon itself.
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

Hair colour and eye colour haven't mattered before, why should skin colour be so massively different?

of course its massively different!

at the moment they are looking to cast an actor to play a young han solo for the spin off film, should they cast a black actor? it wouldnt make any sense

the only way they could do it is if they scrapped continuity and went with the theory that 007 and "james bond" is a code name and has been several people, which i personally think would derail the franchise

and then lastly like i said, why are they trying to shoe horn a black actor in to the role? thats not the answer IMO, the answer is to have writers creating new franchises and new roles for black actors (who arent denzel...) the simplest answer would be to go back to alex cross and make films that are more kiss the girls and along came a spider than the god awful reboot 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

of course its massively different! [1]

at the moment they are looking to cast an actor to play a young han solo for the spin off film, should they cast a black actor? it wouldnt make any sense [2]

the only way they could do it is if they scrapped continuity and went with the theory that 007 and "james bond" is a code name and has been several people [3], which i personally think would derail the franchise

and then lastly like i said, why are they trying to shoe horn a black actor in to the role? [4] thats not the answer IMO, the answer is to have writers creating new franchises and new roles for black actors (who arent denzel...) the simplest answer would be to go back to alex cross and make films that are more kiss the girls and along came a spider than the god awful reboot 

1] That's not actually an explanation of why, that's just restating the original point

2] No, because the Star Wars franchise doesn't have a tradition of different actors playing the same roles in different episodes of the series (except for Anakin Skywalker, for obvious reasons). If I were looking for a franchise where the franchise creators consistently used different actors to play exactly the same role, the franchise would be . . .

3] Why would they need to 'scrap continuity' or change the story to some fanfic idea on the internet? They didn't do those things when James Bond recently changed from a 49 year-old Irishman with a slim build and black hair into a 37 year-old Englishman with blond hair and a muscular build. In  the past, they have been happy to leave ignored changes in the actors' nationality, accent, height, eye colour, hair colour and body build. I still don't see the big deal about skin. Why is it so categorically different from height and hair and eye colour, which are all just different features of the human body? It can't be because it's just unthinkable that a black man could be a spy, because of course there's no reason a black man couldn't work for MI6 in real life. 

4] I don't know exactly why the producers are so keen on the idea of a black actor for the role, but it's probably an attempt to create interest and drum up attention, to keep the franchise in the public eye. As I understand it though, they're trying to persuade Daniel Craig to continue first. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

Why would they need to 'scrap continuity' or change the story to some fanfic idea on the internet? They didn't do those things when James Bond recently changed from a 49 year-old Irishman with a slim build and black hair into a 37 year-old Englishman with blond hair and a muscular build. In  the past, they have been happy to leave ignored changes in the actors' nationality, accent, height, eye colour, hair colour and body build. I still don't see the big deal about skin.

 

is it so categorically different from height and hair and eye colour, which are all just different features of the human body? It can't be because it's just unthinkable that a black man could be a spy, because of course there's no reason a black man couldn't work for MI6 in real life.

 

there is a back story to James Bond even if the actor has changed hair colour or accent over the years  (son of a Scottish father, a swiss  mother .. he went to Eton circa 1932 /1933  ,then Fettes College ...  he joined the navy and rose to be a Commander  , none of which really fit a Black person in that time frame  ( though of course it could be argued that Bond has been moved forward to a modern era where it is emore conceivable for a black person to match those requirements)  ......

As Chindie said , if you worked on the premise that 007 James Bond was a code name then it wouldn't be a problem , but that isn't the case ... if you make him Black then he isn't really James Bond anymore ..

Edited by tonyh29
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

 

 

there is a back story to James Bond even if the actor has changed hair colour or accent over the years  (son of a Scottish father, a swiss  mother .. he went to Eton circa 1932 /1933  ,then Fettes College ...  he joined the navy and rose to be a Commander  , none of which really fit a Black person in that time frame  ( though of course it could be argued that Bond has been moved forward to a modern era where it is emore conceivable for a black person to match those requirements) [1] ......

As Chindie said , if you worked on the premise that 007 James Bond was a code name then it wouldn't be a problem , but that isn't the case ... if you make him Black then he isn't really James Bond anymore [2] ...

 

 

1] It could indeed be argued, and I'm going to make that exact argument! If Bond went to Eton in 1932, then he'd be in his late 40's (a rough average age of James Bond actors) in the late 1960s, but I haven't noticed many bakelite telephones or Russian communists in the films recently. I have noticed computers and the internet and mobile phones and cars released in the last ten years and . . . 

You're right, there is a backstory, but that backstory certainly includes physical descriptions of James Bond. His appearance is compared on more than one occasion to Hoagy Carmichael:

220px-Hoagy_Carmichael_-_1947.jpg

. . . who certainly looks nothing whatsoever like Daniel Craig, for one. In any case, what percentage of the cinema audience is aware of the Bond backstory these days? Maybe 5%? 

2] This is your concluding sentence, but it doesn't seem to logically follow on from anything else you wrote. I'm still looking for a logical reason why a black actor can't be James Bond, in a movie in which everybody calls him James Bond and he does James Bond things to the James Bond theme music, but Daniel Craig can. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, is it a code name, or isn't it a code name?

I presumed it was, and on that basis, as a casual fan, I'd have no issue with a black portrayal of the character. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, hogso said:

So, is it a code name, or isn't it a code name?

I presumed it was, and on that basis, as a casual fan, I'd have no issue with a black portrayal of the character. 

what about if they changed it to Jane Bond and made her a woman ?

(it isn't a code name I think was the consensus )

Link to post
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, hogso said:

So, is it a code name, or isn't it a code name?

I presumed it was, and on that basis, as a casual fan, I'd have no issue with a black portrayal of the character. 

but then they do stuff like the DB5 in skyfall, (it has the same license plate as GF) they mention his dead wife in several films and i think across all of the actors (they show her tombstone in a moore film) M and Q can obviously be fit but moneypenny? Felix Leiter? (interestingly 2 characters they have diversified) we are also lead to believe that blofeld i the same bloke despite being played by 4 (?) different actors (iirc in diamonds are forever bond instantly recognises him despite him being played by a different actor) they all drink the same drink

dont get me wrong continuity in the series is a mess but i can cope with a bloke with dark hair changing to a bloke with blond hair and slightly shorter, changing him to a black bloke and then claiming him to be the same character for me personally simply doesnt make sense, id struggle to see it as anything other than tokenism 

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â