The 'point the camera and shoot' criticism of Spottiswoode doesn't ring true to me. I just think of the scene where Bond is waiting for Paris in his hotel room, silencing his Walther and pouring himself a shot. An evocative, sleek shot that is up there with the best moments of Bond in the series.
+1!!! One of the sleekest, most stylish visual moments of the whole series.
The 'point the camera and shoot' criticism of Spottiswoode doesn't ring true to me. I just think of the scene where Bond is waiting for Paris in his hotel room, silencing his Walther and pouring himself a shot. An evocative, sleek shot that is up there with the best moments of Bond in the series.
That scene reminds me of Dr No, when Bond makes himself a vodka, in his hotel room and sits down to enjoy it. It was a nice touch from Spottiswoode.
Have you ever heard of the Emancipation Proclamation?"
1. Hamilton: Goldfinger is a pitch perfect blend of fantasy and suspense, with enough grandeur to compete with the best films of a terrific decade for movies. His later efforts suffer, in part, from the limitations of the changing creative tastes of the time, becoming more dour, cheeky and bizarre.
2. Young: Visually more mature than Hamilton and almost as smooth narratively. His films sometimes have pacing issues, in part because he relies on more methodical storytelling, closer to the pace of the novels, but they are the most faithful in reproducing what comes through on the pages of Fleming's novels.
3. Hunt: His cutting edge debut On Her Majesty's Secret Service predicts the spare, crisp visual stylings of film a decade later, sometimes starkly majestic and sometimes almost campy. Still, he chooses to film Lazenby wrong, with too many oblique moments and not enough "beauty shots" to establish him firmly as Bond.
4. Gilbert: Tasked with giving Bond films true epic status, he does not fail, though his later efforts are essentially retreads of the superior You Only Live Twice. While Hamilton is credited with ushering in the "Bond formula," it's Gilbert who establishes most of the tropes that non-fans have come to expect of the films.
5. Campbell: While Goldeneye looks and feels like a made-for-cable-TV movie from the 1990s, Casino Royale is a tour de force, re-establishing Bond for a modern audience. He may lack the stronger visual vocabulary of earlier directors, relying too much on close ups and generally claustrophobic compositions, but these are essentially and unfortunately the tools of the contemporary filmmaker.
6. Mendes: His skill set, while less colorful, is on par with Campbell's, though he seems to rely more on narrative formula in his storytelling. A common element, for example, is when the protagonist must take a long journey (down a road, up a river, over a desert) across a solitary landscape; another is an action climax that is smaller in scale than earlier skirmishes and almost anticlimactic in execution. Unlike Campbell, he seems less comfortable with action sequences involving more than a few characters.
7. Spottiswoode:Tomorrow Never Dies is the most even and visually satisfying of Brosnan's Bonds, though as with each of the four films, it suffers from a lack of coherence in establishing Bond as dark, serious character or a smooth, funny one. He is also saddled with a competent but less-than-grand performance by Pryce as the villain.
8. Glen: While he is easily the most workman-like of the directors, he manages to produce two good Bonds, For Your Eyes Only and The Living Daylights, the former a spare film in the vein of On Her Majesty's Secret Service and the latter a near-miss that tries to be Fleming-esque while evoking the visual stylings of the Indiana Jones films.
9. Forster: More comfortable with smaller arthouse films, his frenetic visuals and compulsion to make a short film help turn what could have been a solid follow-up to Casino Royale instead into an experience not unlike flipping through a glossy catalog of fashion and furnishings. He would have been better taking the publicity stills for the movie.
10. Apted: As visually competent as Spottiswoode, his film suffers from some the narrative creakiness Young's Thunderball, only without the benefit of Connery, the locales, and the score. The result is a film with a shallow exploration of its own premise (a black widow villainess teamed with a psychotic puppet who cannot feel pain), whose teaser sequence is better than the rest of the movie.
11. Tamahori: As visually competent as Spottiswoode and Apted, his Bond suffers from a need to reimagine Bond as a cartoon, an odd choice considering his earlier effort, The Edge, works on many levels as a thriller with thoughtful insight.
The 'point the camera and shoot' criticism of Spottiswoode doesn't ring true to me. I just think of the scene where Bond is waiting for Paris in his hotel room, silencing his Walther and pouring himself a shot. An evocative, sleek shot that is up there with the best moments of Bond in the series.
I know I will be in the minority here but I don't really care for the Paris scenes and Bond being all emotional about her. The scene feels forced and it isn't helped by Pierce's overacting - which to me is isolated to TND.
These are among the weakest moments in the film for me, especially the completely campy Dr. Kaufman. I'm fine with Brosnan in the chair, though.
The 'point the camera and shoot' criticism of Spottiswoode doesn't ring true to me. I just think of the scene where Bond is waiting for Paris in his hotel room, silencing his Walther and pouring himself a shot. An evocative, sleek shot that is up there with the best moments of Bond in the series.
That scene reminds me of Dr No, when Bond makes himself a vodka, in his hotel room and sits down to enjoy it. It was a nice touch from Spottiswoode.
A wonderful and rare moment that shows Bond's downtime, even if you don't like TND's as a whole you love that little scene.
The 'point the camera and shoot' criticism of Spottiswoode doesn't ring true to me. I just think of the scene where Bond is waiting for Paris in his hotel room, silencing his Walther and pouring himself a shot. An evocative, sleek shot that is up there with the best moments of Bond in the series.
I know I will be in the minority here but I don't really care for the Paris scenes and Bond being all emotional about her. The scene feels forced and it isn't helped by Pierce's overacting - which to me is isolated to TND.
These are among the weakest moments in the film for me, especially the completely campy Dr. Kaufman. I'm fine with Brosnan in the chair, though.
1. John Glen
2. Peter Hunt
3. Lewis Gilbert
4. Terrance Young
5. Guy Hamilton
6. Martin Campbell
7. Sam Mendes
8. Michael Apted
9. Marc Forster
10. Roger Spottiswood
11. Lee Tamahori
Am i the only one here that absolutely hates Mendes's Directing style ? Campbell and young are able to make a film that flows whereas Mendes seems like he has a check list of all the things expected from a bond film then films them all individually and then coddles them together, It feels harsh and rushed (feels like watching a fast and furious film) and we end up with about 3 minutes of a DB10 and the introduction of a really good character (imo) Severine who's dead in 3 scenes.
Comments
+1!!! One of the sleekest, most stylish visual moments of the whole series.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/wish-i-was-at-disneyland/id1202780413?mt=2
Multiples:
1. Terence Young
2. Sam Mendes
3. Martin Campbell
4. John Glen
5. Guy Hamilton
6. Lewis Gilbert
Singles:
1. Peter Hunt
2. Michael Apted
3. Roger Spottiswoode
4. Marc Forster
5. Lee Tamahori
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/wish-i-was-at-disneyland/id1202780413?mt=2
That scene reminds me of Dr No, when Bond makes himself a vodka, in his hotel room and sits down to enjoy it. It was a nice touch from Spottiswoode.
" I don't listen to hip hop!"
2. Young: Visually more mature than Hamilton and almost as smooth narratively. His films sometimes have pacing issues, in part because he relies on more methodical storytelling, closer to the pace of the novels, but they are the most faithful in reproducing what comes through on the pages of Fleming's novels.
3. Hunt: His cutting edge debut On Her Majesty's Secret Service predicts the spare, crisp visual stylings of film a decade later, sometimes starkly majestic and sometimes almost campy. Still, he chooses to film Lazenby wrong, with too many oblique moments and not enough "beauty shots" to establish him firmly as Bond.
4. Gilbert: Tasked with giving Bond films true epic status, he does not fail, though his later efforts are essentially retreads of the superior You Only Live Twice. While Hamilton is credited with ushering in the "Bond formula," it's Gilbert who establishes most of the tropes that non-fans have come to expect of the films.
5. Campbell: While Goldeneye looks and feels like a made-for-cable-TV movie from the 1990s, Casino Royale is a tour de force, re-establishing Bond for a modern audience. He may lack the stronger visual vocabulary of earlier directors, relying too much on close ups and generally claustrophobic compositions, but these are essentially and unfortunately the tools of the contemporary filmmaker.
6. Mendes: His skill set, while less colorful, is on par with Campbell's, though he seems to rely more on narrative formula in his storytelling. A common element, for example, is when the protagonist must take a long journey (down a road, up a river, over a desert) across a solitary landscape; another is an action climax that is smaller in scale than earlier skirmishes and almost anticlimactic in execution. Unlike Campbell, he seems less comfortable with action sequences involving more than a few characters.
7. Spottiswoode: Tomorrow Never Dies is the most even and visually satisfying of Brosnan's Bonds, though as with each of the four films, it suffers from a lack of coherence in establishing Bond as dark, serious character or a smooth, funny one. He is also saddled with a competent but less-than-grand performance by Pryce as the villain.
8. Glen: While he is easily the most workman-like of the directors, he manages to produce two good Bonds, For Your Eyes Only and The Living Daylights, the former a spare film in the vein of On Her Majesty's Secret Service and the latter a near-miss that tries to be Fleming-esque while evoking the visual stylings of the Indiana Jones films.
9. Forster: More comfortable with smaller arthouse films, his frenetic visuals and compulsion to make a short film help turn what could have been a solid follow-up to Casino Royale instead into an experience not unlike flipping through a glossy catalog of fashion and furnishings. He would have been better taking the publicity stills for the movie.
10. Apted: As visually competent as Spottiswoode, his film suffers from some the narrative creakiness Young's Thunderball, only without the benefit of Connery, the locales, and the score. The result is a film with a shallow exploration of its own premise (a black widow villainess teamed with a psychotic puppet who cannot feel pain), whose teaser sequence is better than the rest of the movie.
11. Tamahori: As visually competent as Spottiswoode and Apted, his Bond suffers from a need to reimagine Bond as a cartoon, an odd choice considering his earlier effort, The Edge, works on many levels as a thriller with thoughtful insight.
Thank you! {[]
"Better make that two."
2. Peter Hunt
3. Lewis Gilbert
4. Terrance Young
5. Guy Hamilton
6. Martin Campbell
7. Sam Mendes
8. Michael Apted
9. Marc Forster
10. Roger Spottiswood
11. Lee Tamahori
1. Dalton 2. Moore 3. Connery 4. Craig 5. Lazenby 6. Brosnan
Am i the only one here that absolutely hates Mendes's Directing style ? Campbell and young are able to make a film that flows whereas Mendes seems like he has a check list of all the things expected from a bond film then films them all individually and then coddles them together, It feels harsh and rushed (feels like watching a fast and furious film) and we end up with about 3 minutes of a DB10 and the introduction of a really good character (imo) Severine who's dead in 3 scenes.