Let's talk about that plane stunt.

Where Bond rides a motorbike off the cliff and catches up to the plane. I feel like I've read online that it could be possible if highly improbable, but I can't be sure as it was a while back. Do you buy it? Aside from that jaw dropping shot of the bike and Bond plummeting after the plane, the rest of the execution allows me to buy into the sequence. Practical/special effects done right, in my opinion. 

After speaking to some non-Bond fans, I feel that that moment turns them away because they find it hard to believe, and in turn labels the whole of GE far fetched. But wasn't this part of the sequence that secured the idea that James Bond has returned, back in '95?

It announces 'Bond is back' spectacularly ... the sequence opens with what was the world-record longest bungee jump at the time, and closes with the above which is classic 'outrageous, but maybe JUST possible' Bond.

Agreed. It's up there with Bond 'fishing' a plane in LTK and maybe skiing on a cello case. If we go by previous films. It's one of Goldeneye's better moments.

The stunt is great until it focuses on Brozza freefalling behind the plane...the CGI was awful even by mid 90s standards.

I think back to 1983, that was really someone hanging on a plane and I can look at that one without wincing.

I remember being a kiddo and watching Goldeneye on the television (a sort-of Netflix machine that chooses the show for you - for our younger readers) with my family. Suffice to say, they thought it was hilarious in its comic book implausibility.

I think if it had ended with Bond divng into the fuselarge as the pair fall off the precipice it would sit much better with me, the free-fall catch up, get to the cockpit and avert a crash is such a lengthy and overblown sequence I feel it loses a lot of it's urgency and danger...It doesn't ruin the pts but it does set it back a few notches for me - and sadly from here on out I feel the films are increasingly guilty of taking one or more potentially great set-pieces and over-egging them to the point they actually undermine audience involvement and tension.

bitchcraft wrote:

The stunt is great until it focuses on Brozza freefalling behind the plane...the CGI was awful even by mid 90s standards.

I think back to 1983, that was really someone hanging on a plane and I can look at that one without wincing.

Heh, I can buy into the scene because the effects are good. Definitely better than some of the dodgy back projection of the earlier Bonds. 

lachesis wrote:

I think if it had ended with Bond divng into the fuselarge as the pair fall off the precipice it would sit much better with me, the free-fall catch up, get to the cockpit and avert a crash is such a lengthy and overblown sequence I feel it loses a lot of it's urgency and danger...It doesn't ruin the pts but it does set it back a few notches for me - and sadly from here on out I feel the films are increasingly guilty of taking one or more potentially great set-pieces and over-egging them to the point they actually undermine audience involvement and tension.

Interesting. Could it be the ridiculousness of such a stunt that pulls you out, as opposed to the length of it? It's a celebration in my opinion, when I hear the plane roar up again, the mission completed, and the start of Turner's Goldeneye and Kleinman's titles. 

Hilly wrote:

Agreed. It's up there with Bond 'fishing' a plane in LTK and maybe skiing on a cello case. If we go by previous films. It's one of Goldeneye's better moments.

The cello sequence, maybe, but Bond 'fishing'? I wouldn't consider that to be part of James Bond's better absurd moments... 

FieldsMan wrote:

Interesting. Could it be the ridiculousness of such a stunt that pulls you out, as opposed to the length of it? It's a celebration in my opinion, when I hear the plane roar up again, the mission completed, and the start of Turner's Goldeneye and Kleinman's titles. 

The segue into the titles it great and would still have been a good cue with Bond negotiating the plane interior as it falls rather than the whole catch it up, yes perhaps it is that it exceeds my suspension of disbelief or the length or a combination thereof.

The length is often a case of either a sequence becoming repetitive or else escalating to the point of becoming ridiculous...over-long sequences sort of fuel those twin terrors. Every subsequent film has one or more sequences (in CR's case all but one) that just outstay their welcome and end up less than the efforts of those involved should really deserve. Ironically the smallest offender in this group is QOS which is pretty efficient and balanced in the delivery of it's action albeit at the expense of coherence!

I have nothing against the fishing scene in LTK, Fields, just thought it in the same realm of absurd as Goldeneye's bike leap.

lachesis wrote:

FieldsMan wrote:

Interesting. Could it be the ridiculousness of such a stunt that pulls you out, as opposed to the length of it? It's a celebration in my opinion, when I hear the plane roar up again, the mission completed, and the start of Turner's Goldeneye and Kleinman's titles. 

The segue into the titles it great and would still have been a good cue with Bond negotiating the plane interior as it falls rather than the whole catch it up, yes perhaps it is that it exceeds my suspension of disbelief or the length or a combination thereof.

The length is often a case of either a sequence becoming repetitive or else escalating to the point of becoming ridiculous...over-long sequences sort of fuel those twin terrors. Every subsequent film has one or more sequences (in CR's case all but one) that just outstay their welcome and end up less than the efforts of those involved should really deserve. Ironically the smallest offender in this group is QOS which is pretty efficient and balanced in the delivery of it's action albeit at the expense of coherence!

Perhaps your right in that gaining control of the plane as it plummets as opposed to chasing it then gaining control of it would be more palatable for some, but then we'd be rid of that excellent shot of Bond riding the bike off the cliff. Hmmm...

I'm curious to know, of the subsequent Bond films, which sequences overstay their welcome. I imagine it would be the bike chase for TND despite it being perhaps my favourite chase sequence in the series. But the others?

Tempted to say the submarine scenes in TWINE or Madagascar in Casino Royale. Though it's hard to say. TND doesn't help itself by, once on the seacat, descending into a shoot 'em up. Though Carter's payoff is good.

As lachesis says, I'd wager that the sequences in Madagascar, Miami and Venice all overstay their welcome.

FieldsMan wrote:

As lachesis says, I'd wager that the sequences in Madagascar, Miami and Venice all overstay their welcome.

Very much so, Casino Royale has that odd consequence that whenever the action hits high gear the film all but seem to grind to a halt, and in many ways these sequences are made so 'hard hitting' they end up far more ridiculous than Bond's Gondola becoming a hovercraft!

But yes at least one scene in every subsequent movie falls foul of this problem for me. TND starts right at the outset - the PTS sequences right up to the point Bond takes off with the 'Newclear weapon' could well have gone down as one of the best ever...but then there is a tacked on bit with a back seat attack oh and another plane and it all just feels too much. As you say the Helicopter scene begins well but ends up tiresome and wholly without threat or excitement thanks to the most moronic pilot in the history of aviation.

TWINE I'd also accuse the pts of being to long but it isn't the worse offender, the sequence in the rocket silo and the interminable pipsline defusing always send me to sleep.

DaD is more a case of just cut that entire bit out please, the pts is excellent here and finishes just at the right moment I also like the escape from the clinic barring the final cgi dive by Jinx...but the ice palace stuff never really convinces and the film here is much better when there is no action going on.

QOS is blessed with brevity but the foot-chase with Mitchell still manages to become more tiresome than exciting...indeed one of the consequences of going for grit seems to be rather non visual and overtly repetitive often concluding more by accident than design.....yay for realism!

The issue manifests itself in slightly different form for SF and SP, Mendes seems savvy to the idea that a long sequence needs variety but in aiming to achieve that he peppers sequences with elements that seem overly contrived and preposterously planned  - Silva's escape from MI6 case in point and then pretty much every sequence in SP just lacks any sense of threat or bite.

Maybe its me getting old but as I look back and enjoy the older films, increasingly it's the quieter moments that really work to make them the joy they are to watch, the action is given some context and offers welcome contrast to the broader flow of the film when it is less frequent. The more modern approach is simply to hit you with a precession of action sequences tied with minimal story but heavily overladen with emotive pretension and self importance to buy our investment.

lachesis wrote:

FieldsMan wrote:

As lachesis says, I'd wager that the sequences in Madagascar, Miami and Venice all overstay their welcome.

Very much so, Casino Royale has that odd consequence that whenever the action hits high gear the film all but seem to grind to a halt, and in many ways these sequences are made so 'hard hitting' they end up far more ridiculous than Bond's Gondola becoming a hovercraft!

But yes at least one scene in every subsequent movie falls foul of this problem for me. TND starts right at the outset - the PTS sequences right up to the point Bond takes off with the 'Newclear weapon' could well have gone down as one of the best ever...but then there is a tacked on bit with a back seat attack oh and another plane and it all just feels too much. As you say the Helicopter scene begins well but ends up tiresome and wholly without threat or excitement thanks to the most moronic pilot in the history of aviation.

TWINE I'd also accuse the pts of being to long but it isn't the worse offender, the sequence in the rocket silo and the interminable pipsline defusing always send me to sleep.

DaD is more a case of just cut that entire bit out please, the pts is excellent here and finishes just at the right moment I also like the escape from the clinic barring the final cgi dive by Jinx...but the ice palace stuff never really convinces and the film here is much better when there is no action going on.

QOS is blessed with brevity but the foot-chase with Mitchell still manages to become more tiresome than exciting...indeed one of the consequences of going for grit seems to be rather non visual and overtly repetitive often concluding more by accident than design.....yay for realism!

The issue manifests itself in slightly different form for SF and SP, Mendes seems savvy to the idea that a long sequence needs variety but in aiming to achieve that he peppers sequences with elements that seem overly contrived and preposterously planned  - Silva's escape from MI6 case in point and then pretty much every sequence in SP just lacks any sense of threat or bite.

Maybe its me getting old but as I look back and enjoy the older films, increasingly it's the quieter moments that really work to make them the joy they are to watch, the action is given some context and offers welcome contrast to the broader flow of the film when it is less frequent. The more modern approach is simply to hit you with a precession of action sequences tied with minimal story but heavily overladen with emotive pretension and self importance to buy our investment.

Agreed regarding CR. 

Interesting about TND's PTS. Personally, I think we could have cut to the chase a little quicker and had Bond take off in the plane sooner, ridding of perhaps one too many explosions. I find the mid air action to be much more exciting, plus we get one of Brosnan's best one-liners (which ironically foreshadows the car chase, later). Regarding the chopper, again, the manoeuvre is possible though at a quicker speed. It really isn't the most outrageous moment to feature in a Bond film, especially considering the physical obstacles that prevent it from going full pace. And death by chopper blades? The threat is palpable to me. 

Perhaps if TWINE's PTS ended with the banker scene, the boat chase may not seem as long? I've always felt that pipeline scene breezed by. And I really enjoy the bunker sequence. 

I agree about the clinic shootout. Had it ended with a proper stunt, it may have cemented Jinx as a true Bond equal. Alas, it's not convincing enough. Similarly, I quite like the escape and shootout at the biodome, but I've always wondered by Bond could not have entered his car instead and cue car chase with Zao. So I'd agree that it's not a case of trimming the ends, but cutting a scene out all together. Likewise, that really, really subtle reference to Goldfinger, that is the laser scene. 

QOS may take pace into consideration, but the sequences don't feel particularly clever or Bondian. I wish we had smoother photography in Italy. The car chase and rooftop chase were wasted opportunities (despite the excellent opening minute). 

I'm not sure I follow re: Silva's escape, but I can see a case for the SF PTS. Admittedly it has grown on me as a sort of OTT Bondian opening but on the first watch it was a little jarring to see Craig in such a sequence. 

And SPECTRE: See QOS.

Suddenly the GE plane stunt doesn't seem all that unreasonable. Impressive stunt work and rather gratifying photography of it also.