Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9692703" data-attributes="member: 18">I mean, there's no question early Connery Bond established a lot of super-spy movie tropes, but I feel like after that, as soon as other people started making super-spy movies as a real genre (clearly distinct from the "serious" spy movies you reference), and indeed parodying super-spy movies, then you immediately started getting a sort of interchange between Bond and other movies of the eras - where Bond informs them but is also often itself informed by them - I think that's true from the late Connery era onwards (honestly I wouldn't even have opinions on a lot of this stuff if it wasn't for Kill James Bond making me re-watch and re-consider a lot of the older Bond movies). Indeed action/spectacle movies in general often inform Bond a bit more broadly - Moonraker wouldn't exist without Star Wars, for example (or would be very different and later in sequence), and there are specific elements in a lot of Moore/Dalton/Brosnan movies which clearly exist because of movies around that time. Like, I love Dalton, but his second movie is clearly a response to gritty/violent drug crime movies of that era (still rocks).Re: Bourne, I mean, I think the major influence there was just how action is directed and that parkour exists. Brosnan-era Bond had been sort of locked into a rather behind-the-times take on action, and Bourne absolutely spin-kicked it in the face (not even very intentionally, just by doing its thing). And yeah, Craig Bond was like okay yeah we don't want to feel outdated, so let's incorporate these new elements, but I think it's still a very different take, romantic and flashy, compared to the quasi-realism and more icy, intimate, deeply paranoid style of Bourne. I mean, the closest to Bourne is probably Casino Royale, and that is, imho, easily the best Craig-era Bond (the only one, for my money, which felt like the movie overall was on-par the quality of the lead actor), but even then it has its own things going on and is not exactly close (like, even the "gritty" CBT scene is too overwrought for a Bourne movie, where more conventional and convenient torture would be used).I'm not sure it'll happen but it'd be nice if Villeneuve could like, evolve the style further and maybe become more of a trend-setter. Action hasn't actually moved on all that far since the Bourne era, so there is room for innovation. I suspect he'll just be very competent though and not really evolve things. Still better him than say, Nolan (who might well innovate more, but probably in a really stupid cul-de-sac direction).</blockquote>

Verification