The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[katied]

IMO they're a little more open to opposing opinions at CB than at other Bond boards

[Mazer Rackham]

"The International" looks quite Bondish to me.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 00874.html

Clive Owen's 'International' Appeal

If "The International" were an article of clothing, it would be a steel-gray cashmere sweater. If it were a place, it would be the first-class lounge of a major metropolitan airport. If it were weather, it would be a wintry mix of drizzle with the occasional flurry.

And if this sleek, stylish thriller were a person, well, it would be Clive Owen, who happens to carry "The International" on his strong and handsome shoulders with the unflappable cool that still makes some of us rue the day he wasn't cast as James Bond. Owen plays Interpol agent Lou Salinger, a gruff, obsessed loner who for years has been on the trail of a corrupt bank (based on the real-life Bank of Credit and Commerce International). Now he's working with the Manhattan district attorney's office, specifically a comely assistant D.A. named Ella Whitman, played in an unobjectionable if undistinguished performance by Naomi Watts.

Directed by Tom Tykwer ("Run Lola Run") with sober forthrightness, "The International" is in many ways a throwback to the monochrome urban thrillers of the 1970s, with the added and topical twist of having a diabolical financial institution at its center. Garbled at times (I'm still confused by a scene at a flower stand in Milan), the movie still hums along with attractive, smooth efficiency. The compulsively watchable Owen makes for an ideal leading man of both action and angst. The film's eye-popping set piece, a shootout at the Guggenheim Museum, is an extravagantly choreographed valentine to philistines everywhere.


-- Ann Hornaday

http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_The_Inte ... 34955.html

“The International” – Starring...James Bond

People have started to regret the fact that Clive Owen never became James Bond. Considering his acting skills and looks, the role would have suited him perfectly. But…we do not always get want we want in life therefore, Owen received a part in “The International.” The problem is that he is much better of an actor than the character he was given.

Owen embodies an Interpol agent named Lou Salinger who has been on the trail of a corrupt bank for years. He works with the district attorney’s office in Manhattan and his partner in the movie is none other than Naomi Watts who plays the character of Ella Whitman, a district attorney from New York who joins forces with the obsessed loner agent in order to stop crime. The movie is about a European bank that is involved in international weapons trading and employs killers to ensure that business continues as desired. Most importantly, the idea of this film is actually based on a real story, that of Bank of Credit and Commerce International.

Directed by Tom Tykwer, “The International” turns out to be a talky, mostly slow-moving dull film except for towards the end when it gets revived by an exciting museum gunfight.

Tykwer, who also directed “Run Lola Run,” thought of it as one of those conspiracy movies about widespread corruption at high levels, quite similar to the dark political thrillers in which moral ambiguity and human complexity do not usually go with action movies. In fact, this is actually a message movie disguised as a suspense film. Or is it the other way around?

I enjoyed it. But it doesn't appear that people know what it is about or care about Owen
Maybe he isn't "too big for Bond"

[katied]

I kinda want to see The International, even if it didn't do that well at the box office.

[Capt. Sir Dominic Flandry]

Even the CommanderBond forum has started to turn on this film somewhat. Or this poster has at any rate.

"What exactly has this film (QoS) achieved? As far as I know, outside fandom, no one is talking about it. Haggis has distanced himself from the project (unlike after CR), the Bourne comparisons seem to have stuck, officially making Jason Bourne top dog in the public's eyes. Damon was the very unlikely winner of People Magazine Sexiest Man of the Year last year, strictly off the strength of his Bourne movies. Now that I find funny!

QoS has hardly raised Craig's profile higher than what it was before, and the almost lackadaisical reaction to Defiance hasn't helped his star power (despite it being a very good movie with a strong performance by Craig, only marred by the director going all Hollywood).

I find it laughable some go so far as saying QoS is better than Fleming inspired movies such as FRWL/TB/GF/OHMSS. Why? Well I think those movies were more memorable than QoS, which really didn't have the approach to character and depth that those movies carried. Also a hastily put together script really debunks any suggestion of 'intelligence' or 'depth' or 'Flemingian approach'. Just because Craig's walking around with a scowl on his face doesn't mean Bond's in 'pain' or 'coming to terms with Vesper'.

QoS is just an extended part of the script in CR that P&W wrote before Haggis suggested a 'third act', albeit, probably a worser version. The reboot idea has gone up in smoke because the theme of trust could really have been a center with which to develop the Bond character. Instead, its seems as if its been done to death. I expected a full arc spreading over 3-4 films encompassing all aspects of the character, not just Vesper. What I loved about Fleming's books is the La Vie en Rose references and how Vesper is always at the back of Bond's mind. All this closure stuff was unnecessary, because the arc and reboot is done now. Craig's busy talking about character development for Q & Moneypenny for Bond 23 now! How utterly pathetic. Erm...how about the producers use their gray cells and try to turn Craig's Bond into an icon with great stories that enhance James Bond's mythology and make us understand why this man is as big as he is. Surely that was what they should have been striving for. I fear that now these Bourne comparison's have stuck (outside fandom) Bond's legend and his mythology has been dulled.

B23 will be a better effort than B22 because Eon will have paid attention to the bad reviews and criticism. I find myself falling out of love with the current movies and that stems from the way the producers approached this reboot. No thought behind it whatsoever, e.g. why announce during the CR press conference you've already started working on the B22 script and then start production with a poor draft? You've had two years. Why film a movie with no underlying vision? Forster had no vision, Craig had no vision, and Haggis was in a rush to make a vision for Forster. If this reboot was thought over thoroughly from the beginning, we'd know exactly where Bond is headed because the stories won't need to hang on the hair of CR's balls (which is precisely what QoS does). Their hiring a non action director for a movie filled with action. And the list is endless. Since GE, this series has been a perfect example of missed opportunities. I'll always watch Bond, but I have zero faith in Eon because they appear to be quite amateurish in their approach."

That's an interesting post by that poster, John.

[katied]

Erm...how about the producers use their gray cells and try to turn Craig's Bond into an icon with great stories that enhance James Bond's mythology and make us understand why this man is as big as he is

With the Broccowilsons in charge, I doubt that will happen

[James]

Even the CommanderBond forum has started to turn on this film somewhat. Or this poster has at any rate.

"What exactly has this film (QoS) achieved? As far as I know, outside fandom, no one is talking about it. Haggis has distanced himself from the project (unlike after CR), the Bourne comparisons seem to have stuck, officially making Jason Bourne top dog in the public's eyes. Damon was the very unlikely winner of People Magazine Sexiest Man of the Year last year, strictly off the strength of his Bourne movies. Now that I find funny!

QoS has hardly raised Craig's profile higher than what it was before, and the almost lackadaisical reaction to Defiance hasn't helped his star power (despite it being a very good movie with a strong performance by Craig, only marred by the director going all Hollywood).

I find it laughable some go so far as saying QoS is better than Fleming inspired movies such as FRWL/TB/GF/OHMSS. Why? Well I think those movies were more memorable than QoS, which really didn't have the approach to character and depth that those movies carried. Also a hastily put together script really debunks any suggestion of 'intelligence' or 'depth' or 'Flemingian approach'. Just because Craig's walking around with a scowl on his face doesn't mean Bond's in 'pain' or 'coming to terms with Vesper'.

QoS is just an extended part of the script in CR that P&W wrote before Haggis suggested a 'third act', albeit, probably a worser version. The reboot idea has gone up in smoke because the theme of trust could really have been a center with which to develop the Bond character. Instead, its seems as if its been done to death. I expected a full arc spreading over 3-4 films encompassing all aspects of the character, not just Vesper. What I loved about Fleming's books is the La Vie en Rose references and how Vesper is always at the back of Bond's mind. All this closure stuff was unnecessary, because the arc and reboot is done now. Craig's busy talking about character development for Q & Moneypenny for Bond 23 now! How utterly pathetic. Erm...how about the producers use their gray cells and try to turn Craig's Bond into an icon with great stories that enhance James Bond's mythology and make us understand why this man is as big as he is. Surely that was what they should have been striving for. I fear that now these Bourne comparison's have stuck (outside fandom) Bond's legend and his mythology has been dulled.

B23 will be a better effort than B22 because Eon will have paid attention to the bad reviews and criticism. I find myself falling out of love with the current movies and that stems from the way the producers approached this reboot. No thought behind it whatsoever, e.g. why announce during the CR press conference you've already started working on the B22 script and then start production with a poor draft? You've had two years. Why film a movie with no underlying vision? Forster had no vision, Craig had no vision, and Haggis was in a rush to make a vision for Forster. If this reboot was thought over thoroughly from the beginning, we'd know exactly where Bond is headed because the stories won't need to hang on the hair of CR's balls (which is precisely what QoS does). Their hiring a non action director for a movie filled with action. And the list is endless. Since GE, this series has been a perfect example of missed opportunities. I'll always watch Bond, but I have zero faith in Eon because they appear to be quite amateurish in their approach."

Good points, especially about Bourne and the mythology of the character.

[English Agent]

In regards to that 'post'..............its unfortunate, but a lot of things written are correct.

i.e. i also havn't heard many people talk about QOS outside the Bond fan world!.....the most commented thing i heard, was how the film gave people headaches due to its fast editing!

I still dont know what EON were doing with the script for QOS after CR, as they mentioned just after CR they had been working on the script, and were ready to release the next film in May 2008. Errr.......yet, in November 2008, EON were panicking to get the script finished before the writers strike.

In regards to B23 i too think it will be better (hopefully) than QOS, as that film was a very lame effort.............but we should get an inkling sometime this year on the direction of the next film from EON, by the people they hire for the project.

EON should do the following:-

Get some new writers, to bring a fresh input to Bond.
Get back an experienced action/drama director
Get rid of Bourne infuences in the film
Bring back the 2nd unit action direction team, prior to QOS
Leave out the super fast editing and shaky cam
Allow more time in post production

and most importantly HAVE A DECENT SCRIPT for the film!

......................but will the producers listen?

EA

[katied]

In regards to the producers:I'm hopeful,but they *are* the Broccowilsons after all

[James]

EON should do the following:-

Get some new writers, to bring a fresh input to Bond.
Get back an experienced action/drama director
Get rid of Bourne infuences in the film
Bring back the 2nd unit action direction team, prior to QOS
Leave out the super fast editing and shaky cam
Allow more time in post production

and most importantly HAVE A DECENT SCRIPT for the film!

......................but will the producers listen?

EA

Agree with most of those and it goes without saying I'd prefer a new James Bond but we'd disagree on that. QoS is going to date so quickly with its R&B theme song, Craig's tight jeans and casual clothes, the rubbish FX in the parachute drop, the Bourne era editing etc.

[stockslivevan]

AWTD is R&B? I doubt it's that, but then I don't know what the hell it is anyway.

[katied]

I would call AWTD a hybrid of R&B and Alternative music.

[James]

AWTD is R&B? I doubt it's that, but then I don't know what the hell it is anyway.

Let's just call it generic shite then.

[Roger Devereau]

In regards to that 'post'..............its unfortunate, but a lot of things written are correct.

i.e. i also havn't heard many people talk about QOS outside the Bond fan world!.....the most commented thing i heard, was how the film gave people headaches due to its fast editing!

I still dont know what EON were doing with the script for QOS after CR, as they mentioned just after CR they had been working on the script, and were ready to release the next film in May 2008. Errr.......yet, in November 2008, EON were panicking to get the script finished before the writers strike.

In regards to B23 i too think it will be better (hopefully) than QOS, as that film was a very lame effort.............but we should get an inkling sometime this year on the direction of the next film from EON, by the people they hire for the project.

EON should do the following:-

Get some new writers, to bring a fresh input to Bond.
Get back an experienced action/drama director
Get rid of Bourne infuences in the film
Bring back the 2nd unit action direction team, prior to QOS
Leave out the super fast editing and shaky cam
Allow more time in post production

and most importantly HAVE A DECENT SCRIPT for the film!

......................but will the producers listen?

EA

Eon should cast a new James Bond, hire some new scriptwriters, and come back with a new film in 2011/2012.

[katied]

Don't agree about recasting Bond...but definitely better scriptwriters..shame we can't do anything about the producers

[007]

"What exactly has this film (QoS) achieved?

Well, at the very least we got a few laughs out of the shoe-lifts revelation.

[katied]

Well, at the very least we got a few laughs out of the shoe-lifts revelation.

This is true

[Terry]

Even the CommanderBond forum has started to turn on this film somewhat. Or this poster has at any rate.

"What exactly has this film (QoS) achieved? As far as I know, outside fandom, no one is talking about it. Haggis has distanced himself from the project (unlike after CR), the Bourne comparisons seem to have stuck, officially making Jason Bourne top dog in the public's eyes. Damon was the very unlikely winner of People Magazine Sexiest Man of the Year last year, strictly off the strength of his Bourne movies. Now that I find funny!

QoS has hardly raised Craig's profile higher than what it was before, and the almost lackadaisical reaction to Defiance hasn't helped his star power (despite it being a very good movie with a strong performance by Craig, only marred by the director going all Hollywood).

I find it laughable some go so far as saying QoS is better than Fleming inspired movies such as FRWL/TB/GF/OHMSS. Why? Well I think those movies were more memorable than QoS, which really didn't have the approach to character and depth that those movies carried. Also a hastily put together script really debunks any suggestion of 'intelligence' or 'depth' or 'Flemingian approach'. Just because Craig's walking around with a scowl on his face doesn't mean Bond's in 'pain' or 'coming to terms with Vesper'.

QoS is just an extended part of the script in CR that P&W wrote before Haggis suggested a 'third act', albeit, probably a worser version. The reboot idea has gone up in smoke because the theme of trust could really have been a center with which to develop the Bond character. Instead, its seems as if its been done to death. I expected a full arc spreading over 3-4 films encompassing all aspects of the character, not just Vesper. What I loved about Fleming's books is the La Vie en Rose references and how Vesper is always at the back of Bond's mind. All this closure stuff was unnecessary, because the arc and reboot is done now. Craig's busy talking about character development for Q & Moneypenny for Bond 23 now! How utterly pathetic. Erm...how about the producers use their gray cells and try to turn Craig's Bond into an icon with great stories that enhance James Bond's mythology and make us understand why this man is as big as he is. Surely that was what they should have been striving for. I fear that now these Bourne comparison's have stuck (outside fandom) Bond's legend and his mythology has been dulled.

B23 will be a better effort than B22 because Eon will have paid attention to the bad reviews and criticism. I find myself falling out of love with the current movies and that stems from the way the producers approached this reboot. No thought behind it whatsoever, e.g. why announce during the CR press conference you've already started working on the B22 script and then start production with a poor draft? You've had two years. Why film a movie with no underlying vision? Forster had no vision, Craig had no vision, and Haggis was in a rush to make a vision for Forster. If this reboot was thought over thoroughly from the beginning, we'd know exactly where Bond is headed because the stories won't need to hang on the hair of CR's balls (which is precisely what QoS does). Their hiring a non action director for a movie filled with action. And the list is endless. Since GE, this series has been a perfect example of missed opportunities. I'll always watch Bond, but I have zero faith in Eon because they appear to be quite amateurish in their approach."

The voice of sanity.

[katied]

The voice of sanity.

The voice of sanity *and* the voice of reason!

[Captain Nash]

Of course there will be people who are pro-Craig that didn't like one film over another.
Does that make them a turn coat? No
It's called having an opinion.
I prefer Casino Royale over Quantum Of Solace, but not because of Craig, but the lousy editing and direction.
I have every confidence that Bond 23 will be yet another successful Bond film.
Having a few opinions on a film doesn't mean I hated QOS. Let's not read to much into posts. I think that's a problem on all forums.

[katied]

Not allowing anyone to have an opposing opinion about Bond, or the producers,is most definitely the *opposite* of having an opinion