After reading The Bru's last posting and reading the article from the link, I have to ask: What the F*CK is wrong with Matt Damon. Seriously, Matt, I still want to be your bro and all. But bro's need to know when to slap around another bro, and bro, you need to be slapped! (okay, I'm done with the bros).
Not only does he call Bond "repulsive" and fail to see the merit in the story quality of his over-exaggeration, he lets the rag who quoted him get away with calling Miami his home town. Miami? HIS HOME TOWN? A sad, sad day for Bostonians.
Anyway, I agree with The Bru - New Bond = Good Bond, but this is one of those apples-oranges situation - they're both fruit, and they're both good (and good for you).
And yes, I think I just called James Bond and Jason Bourne fruity.
Showing posts with label Bourne; Bond. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bourne; Bond. Show all posts
Friday, January 30, 2009
Bourne Vs. Bond: Let Battle Begin
Matt Damon doesn't like James Bond films. He recently reiterated his contempt for them. I think he is right on the money with branding Bond as a misogynistic, imperialist, Martini-chugging murderer. However, I think it is a cheap shot and futile one at that. First of all, Bourne movies - in my ever-so-humble opinion - will take the Bond movies to circus and leave them as appetizers for the lions (bad metaphor, but it's still too early). As for the futility of the jab, I don't think Bourne movies will ever replace the Bond movies in film history, now will they ever threaten their legacy. Yes, they are both spy films, but can they be any more different?
It is true that the last two Bond movies took a lot of inspiration from the Bourne franchise, broke many a box-office record, and received critical applauds across the board, but they are not quintessential Bond movies. I don't hide the fact that I am not a Bond fan and I actually prefer the last two films - in purely cinematic sense - to the earlier ones by a mile (with the exception of the brilliant Goldfinger). Yet, they feel so alien in terms of what the Bond franchise stands for. They are no longer escapist fantasies (yes, politically incorrect, but what is really politically correct about Hollywood cinema?), but gritty, I-will-punch-you-in-the-nose-till-you-bleed-to-death-while-I-don't-sleep-with-this-incredible-Ukrainian-beauty action-fests.
I prefer Bourne films, but I think comparing them is not necessary and, like I said before, futile. It is like comparing The Godfather and GoodFellas - two gangster movies that are completely different in their appproach to the genre. And no - I am not comparing Thunderball with The Godfather.
The Bru
It is true that the last two Bond movies took a lot of inspiration from the Bourne franchise, broke many a box-office record, and received critical applauds across the board, but they are not quintessential Bond movies. I don't hide the fact that I am not a Bond fan and I actually prefer the last two films - in purely cinematic sense - to the earlier ones by a mile (with the exception of the brilliant Goldfinger). Yet, they feel so alien in terms of what the Bond franchise stands for. They are no longer escapist fantasies (yes, politically incorrect, but what is really politically correct about Hollywood cinema?), but gritty, I-will-punch-you-in-the-nose-till-you-bleed-to-death-while-I-don't-sleep-with-this-incredible-Ukrainian-beauty action-fests.
I prefer Bourne films, but I think comparing them is not necessary and, like I said before, futile. It is like comparing The Godfather and GoodFellas - two gangster movies that are completely different in their appproach to the genre. And no - I am not comparing Thunderball with The Godfather.
The Bru
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)