Hey, I'm a JB, too.
Nov. 14th, 2008 02:53 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dvampyrlestatRan across this article on Yahoo! today. Why Can't James Bond Catch Jason Bourne?
I am of the Pierce-Brosnan-as-Bond generation. Only caught a few Sean Connery-Roger Moore Bond films in between. Couldn't say I cared much. But I am aware of the culture that the franchise stood for. And what it called for. And what it cultivates. A suave spy (who isn't really a spy cause he flaunts who he is, right?) with the swanky tools, unruffle-able hair, no-crease suits, high-tech tools and scantily-clad women. 'Shaken, not stirred' is how he likes it, right?
To say I didn't enjoy the films, though, would be hypocritical of me. These kinds of films, you don't need a high IQ or even exert a lot of effort in thinking just to understand it. Just...go along with the ride. The fact that it objectify women does not even annoy me because COME ON. This is filmmaking, and if it rakes in the money, I can't blame the filmmakers. Hell, if I didn't like it, I'd turn away and not even watch a minute of it. I may not like some parts of it, or some implications of the film, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't enjoy it, right? (And I am one to talk against Bond films objectifying women; aren't I doing the same with my men? *chuckles*)
I saw Quantum of Solace last week and I've been seeing mixed reviews. Some wanted more sex. Some liked it for the minimal sex. Others enjoyed the action. Some thought it wasn't enough. What did I think?
I like that James Bond was made more human. The guy's clearly in pain, and he's out for blood. I like seeing him roughed up, bloody, bruised and battered. I mean, come on. He IS NOT LEGOLAS. Surely he gets hurt, too?
I liked that the lead Bond Girl this time was more spunk than skin. That she has a back story. That she is no damsel-in-distress (well, not entirely) or femme fatale. I like that she's given more substance.
I enjoyed the obligatory chase scenes, the inner workings of government as one covert agency works over and around another covert agency.
But I didn't like that while they gave Camille 'substance', they made the other Bond girl jump into Bond's bed at the first sign of invitation (to look for a stationery, no less). In my opinion, they could've just cut that scene off and the movie would've been loads better. I guess the writers added that in because, hey, this is 007. He's supposed to get on with the ladies, let's let him have some action.
I didn't like that the recurring theme for Bond villains is reused and overused. World domination? Sure, that's what most megalomaniacs aim for, but to give that angle to every single Bond villain renders each and every one of them flat, like a cardboard cutout. (Which is why I somehow am leaning heavily towards Sean Bean's Agent 006. Now HE had more balls.)
I didn't like that, while the action scenes were enjoyable, they're a deadringer of many other - better - action scenes I've seen before. Case in point: the chase through rooftops (and walls and verandas). That is sooooo Jason Bourne, only Jason did it better, without banging his head and such.
I still prefer Casino Royale over this one, though. But all in all, I enjoyed Quantum of Solace. And I have the feeling this won't be the last we'll see of Camille.
Now on to the other (and better) JB. ...No, not me. But Jason Bourne.
Jason Bourne is one of my favorite characters from a book. While I don't really think much of Robert Ludlum's writing or prose, I think he tells good stories, at least those that grip you. He does espionage better than anyone I've read so far.
I've read Ludlum's Bourne trilogy, and I thought everything should've stopped with The Bourne Ultimatum, the third one. But no, some guy Eric van Lustbader had to pick it up and wrote more Bournes (I've only read his Bourne Legacy. I'm still wondering if I should read his Bourne Sanction and Bourne Betrayal. *sigh* I don't mean to put Lustbader down so low, because I kinda enjoyed his Ninja series, but. I'm just saying Bourne is better left to Ludlum.
Jason Bourne isn't exactly a spy. Technically he was a soldier sent to Vietnam, trained as one of the best. Like Rambo, but without the crazy-jumpiness. The name Jason Bourne even belonged to some random lowly soldier, only taken on by David Webb when the job asked for it. Reading his exploits is exhilarating. And of course, as some of you who have seen the films might know, amnesia figured hugely in the story.
That part, at least, the movies were faithful to. Although I am still in disagreement with the decision of the filmmakers to retain the books' titles for use in the films, I still loved the films. The storyline in the films differed greatly from those in the books, although somehow in the same vein. I won't get into them, coz I don't want to spoil anyone who hasn't seen/read them yet, and also I don't want to repeat myself for those who have.
But. Jason has more depth than James. There's the 'identity crisis'. Jason's ingenuity and resourcefulness. While James is an aesthetic doer, Jason is the thinking machine. While James has the MI5 with him, Jason has the CIA against him.
Hmmm...I wonder how Jason would be like if he were British? LOL.
Dang...James Bond. Jason Bourne. Jack Bauer.
I'm not gonna talk about Jack, though. This post would really be long if I did. XDD
*seriously kicks MU*
I am of the Pierce-Brosnan-as-Bond generation. Only caught a few Sean Connery-Roger Moore Bond films in between. Couldn't say I cared much. But I am aware of the culture that the franchise stood for. And what it called for. And what it cultivates. A suave spy (who isn't really a spy cause he flaunts who he is, right?) with the swanky tools, unruffle-able hair, no-crease suits, high-tech tools and scantily-clad women. 'Shaken, not stirred' is how he likes it, right?
To say I didn't enjoy the films, though, would be hypocritical of me. These kinds of films, you don't need a high IQ or even exert a lot of effort in thinking just to understand it. Just...go along with the ride. The fact that it objectify women does not even annoy me because COME ON. This is filmmaking, and if it rakes in the money, I can't blame the filmmakers. Hell, if I didn't like it, I'd turn away and not even watch a minute of it. I may not like some parts of it, or some implications of the film, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't enjoy it, right? (And I am one to talk against Bond films objectifying women; aren't I doing the same with my men? *chuckles*)
I saw Quantum of Solace last week and I've been seeing mixed reviews. Some wanted more sex. Some liked it for the minimal sex. Others enjoyed the action. Some thought it wasn't enough. What did I think?
I like that James Bond was made more human. The guy's clearly in pain, and he's out for blood. I like seeing him roughed up, bloody, bruised and battered. I mean, come on. He IS NOT LEGOLAS. Surely he gets hurt, too?
I liked that the lead Bond Girl this time was more spunk than skin. That she has a back story. That she is no damsel-in-distress (well, not entirely) or femme fatale. I like that she's given more substance.
I enjoyed the obligatory chase scenes, the inner workings of government as one covert agency works over and around another covert agency.
But I didn't like that while they gave Camille 'substance', they made the other Bond girl jump into Bond's bed at the first sign of invitation (to look for a stationery, no less). In my opinion, they could've just cut that scene off and the movie would've been loads better. I guess the writers added that in because, hey, this is 007. He's supposed to get on with the ladies, let's let him have some action.
I didn't like that the recurring theme for Bond villains is reused and overused. World domination? Sure, that's what most megalomaniacs aim for, but to give that angle to every single Bond villain renders each and every one of them flat, like a cardboard cutout. (Which is why I somehow am leaning heavily towards Sean Bean's Agent 006. Now HE had more balls.)
I didn't like that, while the action scenes were enjoyable, they're a deadringer of many other - better - action scenes I've seen before. Case in point: the chase through rooftops (and walls and verandas). That is sooooo Jason Bourne, only Jason did it better, without banging his head and such.
I still prefer Casino Royale over this one, though. But all in all, I enjoyed Quantum of Solace. And I have the feeling this won't be the last we'll see of Camille.
Now on to the other (and better) JB. ...No, not me. But Jason Bourne.
Jason Bourne is one of my favorite characters from a book. While I don't really think much of Robert Ludlum's writing or prose, I think he tells good stories, at least those that grip you. He does espionage better than anyone I've read so far.
I've read Ludlum's Bourne trilogy, and I thought everything should've stopped with The Bourne Ultimatum, the third one. But no, some guy Eric van Lustbader had to pick it up and wrote more Bournes (I've only read his Bourne Legacy. I'm still wondering if I should read his Bourne Sanction and Bourne Betrayal. *sigh* I don't mean to put Lustbader down so low, because I kinda enjoyed his Ninja series, but. I'm just saying Bourne is better left to Ludlum.
Jason Bourne isn't exactly a spy. Technically he was a soldier sent to Vietnam, trained as one of the best. Like Rambo, but without the crazy-jumpiness. The name Jason Bourne even belonged to some random lowly soldier, only taken on by David Webb when the job asked for it. Reading his exploits is exhilarating. And of course, as some of you who have seen the films might know, amnesia figured hugely in the story.
That part, at least, the movies were faithful to. Although I am still in disagreement with the decision of the filmmakers to retain the books' titles for use in the films, I still loved the films. The storyline in the films differed greatly from those in the books, although somehow in the same vein. I won't get into them, coz I don't want to spoil anyone who hasn't seen/read them yet, and also I don't want to repeat myself for those who have.
But. Jason has more depth than James. There's the 'identity crisis'. Jason's ingenuity and resourcefulness. While James is an aesthetic doer, Jason is the thinking machine. While James has the MI5 with him, Jason has the CIA against him.
Hmmm...I wonder how Jason would be like if he were British? LOL.
Dang...James Bond. Jason Bourne. Jack Bauer.
I'm not gonna talk about Jack, though. This post would really be long if I did. XDD
*seriously kicks MU*
