Bullets 'n' Babes

I've just noticed that Sam Mendes is directing this, maybe this one will be good then?!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1074638/

That is interesting. It's a hard one to call. Lots of good directors have messed up Bond. Lee Tamahori (Die Another Day), Marc Forster (Quantum of Solace) come to mind.

True.
Is Sam Mendes experienced at action?

Nothing wrong with Quantum Of Solace.Cracking actioner.

grim_tales wrote: Is Sam Mendes experienced at action?

of course-American Beauty,Road To Perdition & Revolutionary Road were jammed with wal to wall big budget action sequences.He's this generations John Woo.

saltysam wrote:Nothing wrong with Quantum Of Solace.Cracking actioner.

I didn't see any action because it cut to the next take too rapidly.

saltysam wrote:Nothing wrong with Quantum Of Solace.Cracking actioner.

I thought I was alone.

saltysam wrote:Nothing wrong with the first 10 mins of Quantum Of Solace.

Markgway wrote:

saltysam wrote:Nothing wrong with Quantum Of Solace.Cracking actioner.

I thought I was alone.

I enjoyed Quantum of Solace too, solid film but it was sometimes hard to see what was going on when I saw it in the cinema.

Worse than this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avTejGH15FE

QoS was too short. I didn't expect it to be the ending already when they were walking in that desert.

It was an action-movie, not a Bond-flick, and the action was shite...

Like LD says, it was also way too short.

It should never have been released in current form. Someone at the studio should have said they needed to recut the action-scenes, and add some depth and characterbuilding in some parts...

Compared to your average Hollywood action flick, it's a decent movie. Compared to the excellent Casino Royale, it was utter utter shite.

grim_tales wrote:Is Sam Mendes experienced at action?

I don't think so. He's more an arty director. Marc Forster wasn't.

gasteropod wrote:I didn't see any action because it cut to the next take too rapidly.

Exactly. In a way Casino Royale didn't. I do need to see it a second time but right now I don't particularly rate it. It's certainly the lesser film next to Casino Royale.

Yi-Long wrote:Compared to your average Hollywood action flick, it's a decent movie. Compared to the excellent Casino Royale, it was utter utter shite.

Exactly.

Marc Forster is/was every bit as arthouse-y as Sam Mendes!

Shingster wrote:Marc Forster is/was every bit as arthouse-y as Sam Mendes!

I just hope they get some alongside him who DOES know about shooting and editing decent action.

Yi-Long wrote:

Shingster wrote:Marc Forster is/was every bit as arthouse-y as Sam Mendes!

I just hope they get some alongside him who DOES know about shooting and editing decent action.

Yeah, someone like Yuen Woo-ping would be absolutely right.

thelostdragon wrote:

Yi-Long wrote:

Shingster wrote:Marc Forster is/was every bit as arthouse-y as Sam Mendes!

I just hope they get some alongside him who DOES know about shooting and editing decent action.

Yeah, someone like Yuen Woo-ping would be absolutely right.

Crouching Bondgirl, Hidden Weapon. Awesome.


Well... no...

But someone other than the spastic monkey with a shakeycam that did the action in QoS would be nice. If you're gonna go through all the trouble of shooting big action setpieces and fightscenes, you should at least make sure it's watchable.

Someone like Yuen Woo Ping might not be the right guy for it, but Corey Yuen or Yuen Biao or any other director who knows how to shoot realistic action in a watchable fashion, would obviously be welcome...

Yi-Long wrote:Yuen Biao is a GOD

I agree

luckystars wrote:

Yi-Long wrote:Yuen Biao is a GOD

I masturbate to him on a daily basis!!!

Well... that would be a little exaggerated for me, but considering you misquoted me as well, I'll accept your perversity...

Shingster wrote:Marc Forster is/was every bit as arthouse-y as Sam Mendes!

I know. I was replying in response to Mendes. Monster's Ball is excellent.

bradavon wrote:I know. I was replying in response to Mendes. Monster's Ball is excellent.

My mistake brad.

I think the idea of getting a HK choreographer in is obviously good sense, but it feels to me like the problem there is that the studios don't like the idea of their "big name" hired director delegating the action sequences to another hand. There are a lot of decent choreographers working in hollywood today, but if the director has the shakey-cam syndrome then even if you're Lau Kar Leung your work will look shit. A good of example of this is Three Kingdoms, watch the film then watch the making of to remind you that it actually was Sammo choreographing the action after all.

Good action director or not, it doesn't really matter, because almost everywhere outside of Asia, the action director doesn't have a say in the editing process and only rarely in the camera angles when it comes to shooting the action he choreographed.
The shaky camera that is very close to the fighting actors and the quick editing were originally used to hide the fact that these actors are actually shitty on-screen fighters. This style of shooting action scenes is so enrooted in Hollywood now, that it is even used when they get actual great on-screen fighters like Jackie Chan or Jet Li.
So even if the action director has choreographed a fight scene for a Hollywood film, that would put Sammo Hung or Donnie Yen to shame, it most often comes out fucked up, because the fight is shot by cameramen who have no idea about how to shoot an action scene and because this material is then given to editors who have no idea about how to edit an action sequence well.

For the record I thought the action worked well in Casino Royale and it fitted in the Bourne films because they move at a frantic pace but it wasn't needed in QOS. Not every modern Hollywood action film needs this style.

Bourne gave me a headache - only the sequels though.
Same 2nd unit dir (Dan Bradley) did the Bourne sequels and QOS.
That has to be significant.
Bourne Identity was someone else (and it shows).
I doubt Marc Forster had much control over how the action in QOS was shot and let Bradley 'do his Bourne-ish thing'.

I think it's more likely that Marc Forster did have control and wanted the "Bourne-ish thing" and probably got Dan Bradley for that reason.