FormerBondFan
00 Agent
Posts: 5,455
Favourite James Bond Films: The Dark Knight Trilogy, Mission: Impossible and any upcoming action films starring Pierce Brosnan (no, it's not James Bond which is good because he'll need it to expand his reputation as an actor, especially in the action realm)
Favourite Films: Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Star Trek, The Dark Knight Trilogy, Harry Potter, Middle-Earth, The Matrix, Mission: Impossible
|
Post by FormerBondFan on Jul 21, 2008 18:57:56 GMT -5
Because of Babs, the franchise needs someone like J.J. Abrams.
|
|
|
Post by poirot on Aug 1, 2008 22:09:01 GMT -5
One of the easiest fixes would've been to title it "Icebreaker". I realize there were legal issues, but after all, it was the 40th anniversary. And most fans wanted to see a book title, even if it was just something like Icebreaker or Colonel Sun.
I actually think fans would be a little easier on it if this had happened. The "Die Another Day" title just doesn't fit the series very well, and paints an additional target on the film. (But even without the legal issue, perhaps EON thought it would be too similar to Moonraker?)
Anyway, I don't believe the film is in need of any major overhaul. The cgi is the main problem, and EON are the ones who allowed Tamahori to inject it into the film. The finale is also weak, with Graves' electric glove being fairly lame.
The only real change that should've been made at the script level was a clear decision as to the film's tone. If it hadn't been the series' 40th anniversary, I think the film would've been much tighter. Instead, they allowed the "Bond betrayed" storyline to become sidetracked with trying to hit too many familiar notes.
|
|
FormerBondFan
00 Agent
Posts: 5,455
Favourite James Bond Films: The Dark Knight Trilogy, Mission: Impossible and any upcoming action films starring Pierce Brosnan (no, it's not James Bond which is good because he'll need it to expand his reputation as an actor, especially in the action realm)
Favourite Films: Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Star Trek, The Dark Knight Trilogy, Harry Potter, Middle-Earth, The Matrix, Mission: Impossible
|
Post by FormerBondFan on Aug 1, 2009 12:04:23 GMT -5
Wouldn't be better if Martin Campbell did the directing?
|
|
|
Post by harrypalmer on Aug 6, 2009 11:41:12 GMT -5
Wouldn't be better if Martin Campbell did the directing? I didn't mind the directing. The Ice Palace should have featured in the ending of the film as it was a splendid location. Bond could have stormed it with some snow troops and that would have been better than the aeroplane fight.
|
|
|
Post by hergersheimer on Feb 7, 2010 0:17:03 GMT -5
How would you make DAD better? Not make it. It is afterall just a basic remake of Diamonds Are Forever, with elements of the novel Moonraker thrown in. The overall result, a mess that just cannot be unscrambled. It had at times some potential. Not the swansong that Pierce Brosnan should've had. Oh well.
|
|
|
Post by adam on Feb 7, 2010 16:00:32 GMT -5
To be honest DAD was good fun. If you take it for what it is, ie a 40th birthday celebration of all things Bond. Big action, big sets, 'Q', 'Moneypenny', explosions, girls, gadgets, an Ice Palace etc etc.
I'd quite happily watch it on T.V. Brosnan was at his most confident and looked good. The reviews at the time were ok and the box office was massive.
|
|
|
Post by 007 on Feb 8, 2010 11:10:27 GMT -5
How would you make DAD better? Not make it. You could say the same thing about QoS. Both are illustrations that EON are excellent at making mediocre films.
|
|
|
Post by The World Is Not Enough on Jun 12, 2010 7:48:03 GMT -5
The main thing I'd change would be the villain, and scrap the whole "Koreans altering their DNA to turn into white British guys" thing, it's just a bit too crazy. I think I'd give Frost a bigger role too. I think the film should have decided whether it wanted to be serious (ala the torture sequence) or outrageous (ala the invisible car), either would be fine but in the end it sort of felt like it couldn't make up its mind.
|
|
|
Post by Bond 77 on Jun 14, 2010 0:02:04 GMT -5
I always felt that Die Another Day was Brosnan's Moonraker. Both of the films were outlandish, over-the-top, epic proportional, Lewis Gilbert style Bond films. That's fine by me because I enjoy Bond in most forms whether it be more down-to-earth like From Russia With Love,or literally out of this world like the aforementioned Moonraker.
The big regret here is that Brosnan wasn't afforded the chance Roger Moore was given. Moore was given the chance to do a "grittier" fifth Bond film after an outlandish fourth outing, and I think For Your Eyes Only turned out to be one of Roger's best efforts.
I think if Brosnan was given the same chance to do a down-to-earth fifth film after Die Another Day that it would have been one of his best. It would also have been a good flow for the series overall. Bond might have been getting a little too outrageous, and a For Your Eyes Only type film would have put the series back on course.
Instead we had EON overreact to the assertions of some critics, whom felt that Bond had become too silly, by completely re-inventing the wheel with this Daniel Craig catastrophe.
Too bad Brosnan didn't get a fifth opportunity. It will always leave me wondering about "what could have been".
|
|
|
Post by poirot on Jun 14, 2010 1:48:28 GMT -5
Instead we had EON overreact by completely re-inventing the wheel One thing that always bothered me was the way everyone- from Wilson and Broccoli to Purvis and Wade- admitted that they didn't know how to continue with Brosnan in the role. Or how to adapt CR for an older Bond. I mean, seriously? DAD's relationship between M and Bond alone provided enough material to build a sequel around. It boggles the mind to think of how creatively bankrupt EON is at this point. This is one reason why most of us were able to accurately predict the fact that QOS would be a disappointment. The producers can always get a nice boost from recasting the role, but they're otherwise running on empty.
|
|
|
Post by Cpt. Sir Dominic Flandry on Jun 14, 2010 16:45:48 GMT -5
Miranda Frost had a reasonably big role - bigger than Fields who was in QOS for aboit 5 mins.
Mike Wilson did say they had run out of ideas. Why not sell it? Wilson has lost interest slightly and Barbara is not the most talented producer in the world, so perhaps Bond needs some new owners.
Barbara combined her Craig obsession with the popularity of Bourne and Wilson's young Bond idea that Cubby rejected to create Casino Royale which - remarkably - became a big hit. It came of the rails with QOS and the series needs to go back to its roots.
|
|
alvin
Commander
Posts: 430
|
Post by alvin on Jun 14, 2010 19:31:21 GMT -5
Die Another Day can be improved if they did more psychological study with the Gustav Graves character. I mean, they should show him torn between his two identities, and then they should show Bond being sympathetic toward him. Eon should also put Cuba in a better light; I kind of got the feeling that they were putting Cuba down because it's a communist country. Maybe there should be some scenes of Cuban citizens showing Bond around town. Then for the MI6 scenes, there should be more minority characters, even gays, to show diversity in the headquarters.
|
|
|
Post by Gambit on Jun 15, 2010 13:19:53 GMT -5
Instead we had EON overreact by completely re-inventing the wheel One thing that always bothered me was the way everyone- from Wilson and Broccoli to Purvis and Wade- admitted that they didn't know how to continue with Brosnan in the role. Or how to adapt CR for an older Bond. I mean, seriously? DAD's relationship between M and Bond alone provided enough material to build a sequel around. It boggles the mind to think of how creatively bankrupt EON is at this point. This is one reason why most of us were able to accurately predict the fact that QOS would be a disappointment. The producers can always get a nice boost from recasting the role, but they're otherwise running on empty. They should consider having a new Bond in each new film. ;D
|
|
FormerBondFan
00 Agent
Posts: 5,455
Favourite James Bond Films: The Dark Knight Trilogy, Mission: Impossible and any upcoming action films starring Pierce Brosnan (no, it's not James Bond which is good because he'll need it to expand his reputation as an actor, especially in the action realm)
Favourite Films: Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Star Trek, The Dark Knight Trilogy, Harry Potter, Middle-Earth, The Matrix, Mission: Impossible
|
Post by FormerBondFan on Jun 15, 2010 14:20:43 GMT -5
One thing that always bothered me was the way everyone- from Wilson and Broccoli to Purvis and Wade- admitted that they didn't know how to continue with Brosnan in the role. Or how to adapt CR for an older Bond. I mean, seriously? DAD's relationship between M and Bond alone provided enough material to build a sequel around. It boggles the mind to think of how creatively bankrupt EON is at this point. This is one reason why most of us were able to accurately predict the fact that QOS would be a disappointment. The producers can always get a nice boost from recasting the role, but they're otherwise running on empty. They should consider having a new Bond in each new film. ;D And should include this man:
|
|
|
Post by caribbeanjack on Jun 16, 2010 15:19:30 GMT -5
Die Another Day can be improved if they did more psychological study with the Gustav Graves character. I mean, they should show him torn between his two identities, and then they should show Bond being sympathetic toward him. Oh, so basically have Bond feel sorry for the villain? Then there wouldn't be any conflict. Hence, no story. In light of all the other things you've been saying, including inserting some of your political views in this forum, what you're really saying here is that there shouldn't be any villains. The villains shouldn't be demonized--I believe that was your expression in another post. Yeah, there's an exciting spy thriller for you: have Bond sit down with the villain and have tea. That's true. There's nothing like good solid entertainment when we see Cubans showing Bond all the atrocities in Castro's Cuba. Alvin, you and your fellow young college progressives are hilarious in a pitiful way. You talk about unrealistic ideologies. I've been to Cuba. My wife's relatives in Cuba are subjugated to a brutal regime. There's a reason why Cubans are risking there lives to flee the country. Try visiting the place and see for yourself what reality is like before you go mouthing off your leftist propaganda. Regarding minorities at MI6: well, Colin Salmon has a top role in MI6. I was just watching DAD the other night, and I remember other characters in those HQ scenes, and it looks like there's some diversity. As for gays, well, it could be that any one of those characters walking around the MI6 HQ is gay. The filmmakers only have so much time to tell their story. And to bring up the sexual orientation of one of those characters would be pointless in terms of the overall movement of the story. Do we really need to see Bond walk up to one of those characters and get into idle conversation and somehow, it's worked into the script that they talk about that other person's sexual orientation? What does that have to do with the villain's caper? Again, it's all ideology on your part with no basis in practicality.
|
|