Discussion in 'TV & Media' started by JacksonArcher, Jan 11, 2011.
^ Could he be Q? Possibly.
How about Ken Jeong as Q?
Could be. Craig has said that for his third film he wishes to have some of the more traditional Bond elements, and with Moneypenny in the movie Q should be in it as well. Hopefully though, they'll go for more practical gadgets to fit Craig's Bond (Which CR sort of had with the tracking device and the remote heart thing) like the FRWL briefcase and not invisible rocket-launching cars. Especially since the budget is apparentally going to be a bit lower this time.
Hopefully Bardem and Fiennes are the villains. While I like Craig's Bond and his films, the villains and henchmen have been sorely lacking with the exception of mr.white (Who due to Jesper Christensen's comments on the films might not be invited back).
I hope we have more solid casting/publicity for the film soon.
^Disagree. Mads Mikkelsen was phenomenal as Le Chiffre.
I wonder if Trek fans would get a kick out of John de Lancie playing Q.
^ I would love that. Even without the joke, I think I could see him being a really good Bond Q.
You know, he could actually work. If he can do an English accent, that is. "I never joke about my work" wouldn't really feel right in American tongue.
Meh, he could have been, the guy's been awesome in other things I've seen him do, but aside from the torture scene LeChiffre is never shown as much of a threat. First time we see him he's puffing on his inhaler and talking about banking deals which doesn't exactly scream "scary!" Then he's ambushed in his own hotel room and threatened by some two bit Rebel leader (who Bond convinienly kills...yes that's right Bond kills the man LeChiffre owed the money to and this isn't the end of the film?!)
I prefer Green, because at least his character is consistant, he's a weasely henchman nothing more, meanwhile LeChiffre is all over the place.
I really hope Bardem and Finnes are in the next one, Bond hasn't had a decent villain since Graves (say what you like about DAD, Tony Stephens was excellent)
I often find the villain is who makes the Bond movie for me. At some point, we just expect Bond to be Bond and do what he does best. The villain is who has to be new and impressive. All the better Bond films have the best bad guys, and the crappy films have the weakest. I can't abide Toby Stephens in Die Another Day!
I don't even remember who the heck the bad guy was in Quantum, the dude with the environmental issues, right? Wow. 006, Dr. No, Goldfinger. Even in the split decision films, the villain is more memorable, Man with the Golden Gun and Live and Let Die, for example. Although, with my theory, I'm torn as to where Christopher Walken lies. He makes A View to a Kill, but that doesn't upgrade it from Guilty Pleasure to Good Movie.
So, having a traditional baddie along with Q and MP are just as important in getting the next film back to form.
I wouldn't mind a Blofeld-style recurring nemesis (Not Mr. White though). Or even a recurring henchmen ala Jaws (but not as campy).
Reportedly this is Dench's final Bond movie as well, I wonder if they'll kill off her M (It's important to remember that this is rebooted continuity, so this won't effect her Brosnan appearences) and replace her.
Casino Royale is really more a character study of Bond than about Le Chiffre, but I agree that the Craig movies so far haven't had very impressive foes.
The Brosnan films I think had some of the best villains, actually, in terms of seriousness; 006 and Elektra King are two of the most interesting characters due to their relationships with Bond, and Elliot Carver, while a more traditional megalomaniac, was a fun concept (and, given media trends since 1996, more than a little prescient).
^ If only Carver had had a flame-haired female assistant ...
Agreed on both accounts.
My one real complaint with CR was its treatment of Le Chiffre. He was just way too neutered form his printed. counterpart. But as you say, the movie was about Bond, whereas the novel was really about Vesper.
And the Brosnan baddies were all really good. Like you said about Carver. I think part of the problem was he was (as you suggested) a bit ahead of his time. People claimed he was silly and unrealistic. I thought he was spot-on. Though I admittedly have always been a huge defender of the film. But Pryce was excellent and purposefully over-the-top.
Unfortunately, he was used to his fullest potential--neither were King or Graves. Both latter cases could have been amazing had the Chopping Broccolis decided to take some risks, but they chose to play it safe.
I'm a big fan of Tomorrow Never Dies. Interesting villain, and one of the best (if not the best) Bond girls. I always found it annoying how the promotion of Die Another Day made such a big deal about Halle Berry being (at last) the Bond girl who's a match for Bond when they already did that, far more convincingly and with no fuss, with Michelle Yeoh.
Agreed. Berry ruined DAD if you ask me.
I mean, the film was brilliant up until she appears on screen. Don't think that's coincidence.
I thought Berry was okay, but not great, and definitely overhyped.
For a Bond girl who really drags down the proceedings, Denise Richards. Criticism of her and her character really clouds people's views of The World Is Not Enough, in my opinion - she's lame, but pretty much everything else about that movie is good to great. The villains are great, Bond gets some character stuff (including his ice-cold shooting of King, a moment darker than anything in the Craig movies), they do a good job of involving M in the plot as a real character, etc.
Not so much overhyped as overdone. They just tried way too hard with her. As you said, with Yeoh, they showed us she was a badass. With Berry, they kept tell us as such, but it never really amounted to anything. To point: Storm was badass--Jinx not so much.
As such, she just bloated up the movie and was seemingly superfluous. If they would have just kept the focus on Bond vs Graves, I think it would have been much better.
But, to go back to my original point, that was the same problem with Electra. Or rather, it was Renard who bloated that film. On his own, Renard would have made a pretty good villain, and Carlyle is one of my favorite actors, but was ultimately irrelevant to the story. He could have been completely omitted and lost very little, but gained so much. Because, by having him the subject of the final confrontation, Electra was immediately thrust into the henchmen role which was a total waste of her character.
Actually I thought Berry was better than she had any right to be in DAD, and I say that as someone who's not a fan (don't find her especially attractive, don't think she can act that well) For all the talk of her being Bond's equal though he had to save her arse multiple times, and frankly at the end I was rooting for Miranda Frost...
One problem the Brosnan films had was an increasing desire to cast name Americans as Bond girls, and it just didn't work. Hatcher was poor, but at least she wasn't a major part of the film, Denise Richards as a nuclear scientist. Whoever decided that should have been sacked...Halle Berry was unfortunately the logical conclusion of this. And they haven't learned. They did want Jolie for Casino Royale, and she'd have been a terrible Vesper (although at least her English accent would have been better than Eva Greens...)
As a rule some of the best Bond girls have been actresses you've never heard of (give me Natalia, Xenia or Wai Lin over Jinx any day) although there are exceptions (Diana Rigg being the main one)
Time to be honest here. I hate TWINE, it's my least favourite Brosnan, and probably in my bottom five of the franchise over all. Elektra is one of the few redeeming features however, it's just a shame they didn't conceal the fact she was the villain before the film came out. It's also a shame she went increasingly phycho and that Carlyle didn't do a better job as Renaud who, let's face it, is just a henchman at the end of the day.
Going back to Bond girls however, I have to say the worst is still probably Tanya Roberts, that was just wrong casting all round.
Of course a terrible actress can work, I mean Eckland's surprisingly good value as MAry Goodnight!
And apparently they're wrong:
Everytime I see Michael Shannon, I think of Jaws.
Separate names with a comma.