New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Jason Bourne gonna sue somebody

Kim Hollis: Do you feel that emulating the Bourne franchise's grittier, more realistic style of espionage is a good step for Bond or does it make it too derivative?

Tim Briody: After how popular and successful the Bourne films were, this decision was a masterstroke that took the franchise out of the '60s and '70s.

Pete Kilmer: I think taking the "Bourne" formula of action and putting it in these reboot films of the Bond films was very smart. It doesn't take anything away from Bond, but only adds to him I think. Craig has shown that he can be just as suave and ladykiller-like the other men who've played Bond. I think having Craig do the action and fighting sequences that they've had him do has been a smart, smart move.

Scott Lumley: I recently had a discussion with my friend and he mentioned his favorite part of Casino Royale was the aborted car chase at the end of the film. I hadn't earmarked that part of the film as a favorite, but it is the point when the producers killed cartoon Bond dead and replaced him with gritty real life Bond. Watching Craig sweat and bleed and cry in that basement made me completely forget all the campy cartoonish antics that we were subjected to in the previous Bond films and I loved it. This is a brilliant reboot of a venerable Hollywood character and it was done perfectly. The only film that compares in scale to what happened in this series is Batman Begins, and I think we've already seen the parallel here with this massive opening weekend.

Brandon Scott: There is no question it is derivative (everyone who has seen it says so) and this has had some critics up in arms...see Roger Ebert who proclaims, "Bond is not an action star!". Now that being said, there is no question it has helped from a box office standpoint. Bourne has been and will likely always be, more popular with American audiences, but the box office results are proof positive that people are happy with the upping of the action quotient. Kudos from a marketing standpoint.

Sean Collier: It's more about modernization. The Bourne franchise were modern thrillers, the Bond movies were not. When 007 went 21st century, it was bound to be similar to other films doing the same things. I wouldn't necessarily label it derivative - at least not consciously so.





Kim Hollis: Sean, I actually agree that the new Bond films aren't consciously derivative. I believe this was simply a direction they needed to move. It was getting hard to take 007 seriously, and they've corrected that problem by taking it a darker direction. Real spies don't lead the lives that Bond led when he was being portrayed by Roger Moore, Sean Connery and the like. In a post-9/11 world, people are more aware that espionage involves little glamour. It was important to recognize that fact and move into the 21st century.

Jamie Ruccio: I don't think the Bond Franchise had any choice but to emulate the Bourne series. There was no chance that the Bond franchise could compete and survive against the comparison that happens with Bourne. But several things are good news for Bond when the franchises are compared. First, Bond has elements that Bourne does not. Bourne is unremittingly stark and bleak. There is almost no other story telling element that is not directly tied to the main character. Bond has additional elements beyond the espionage, love interests (although my understanding is that Quantum of Solace mutes this more than any other Bond film previously), additional characters and other story elements. Bond has a measure of sophistication and glamor whereas Bourne is simply the story of a lost foot soldier. In this regard the advantage goes to the Bond franchise. It is also ironic that Quantum of Solace, from my understanding, is more of a return to the original Bond of the novels and really less of a stylistic theft from Bourne. If anything Bourne is more like the original Bond.

Max Braden: I wouldn't say derivative and I would say they were smart to go this route, but it does run the risk of seeking short term gains at the expense of the brand. Does anyone feel that Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace really fit in with the style of the rest of the films? What's memorable about them? You can sell grit, but if it starts looking like other grit, audiences may jump ship more frequently to the flavor of the moment.

Jason Lee: I do not feel at all like Bond is emulating Bourne. What impresses me so much about this new Bond is that a majority of the action has emanated from a very specific emotional place for the character - this wounded animal that is almost blindly seeking vengeance. Knowing eventually where Bond will end up (the womanizing, one-liner delivering super spy), this early story has all the more "weight" and "impact" for me.

Continued:       1       2       3       4       5       6