To commemorate today’s release of the 22nd James Bond movie, Quantum of Solace, allow me to present a nifty video clip I snagged from Jaquandor. It’s a compilation of the “gun barrel” openings from all the previous Bond movies, from 1962’s Dr. No to Casino Royale in 2006. Oddly, it even includes the “unofficial” Bond movie Never Say Never Again, which couldn’t use the gun-barrel thing due to legal issues (the history of NSNA is one long legal nightmare) but attempted something similar.
Thoughts:
- Like Jaquandor, I was struck by how slowly paced the earliest versions seem to our modern, ADD-addled eyes. Seriously, people in 1962 must’ve consumed much less caffeine or something.
- I’m no expert on guns — in fact, I’ve only handled an actual pistol (as opposed to a pellet gun) once in my enitre life — but Connery’s half-crouch, arm-out-to-the-side stance (seen in the opening for Thunderball, You Only Live Twice, and Diamonds Are Forever; it was a stand-in for the first three films) looks awkward as hell. He’s off balance and you can see him swaying a little bit right after the shot; I can’t imagine you’d be able to shoot with much accuracy in that position. Lazenby’s drop to the knee is a little better, but still looks weird, and a little fey, too, which is a bad thing when you’re supposed to be the most-awesomest killer ever. Dalton and Brosnan remain standing, but their poses also appear a bit shaky to my admittedly inexpert eye. The Bond who looks the most (to me) like he’s really making a dead-on-target shot is, oddly enough, the Bond I like least, Roger Moore. He’s well balanced and holding his gun with both hands. That looks like the stance of a true marksman.
- So, as I said, my favorite Bond is Connery, but Moore wins out again when it comes to my favorite of these sequences, which is from For Your Eyes Only. The pacing is faster than in the older ones, but not yet to the point where it feels like the sequence is an afterthought or simply some bit of formula that needs to gotten out of the way. I also like the updating of the iconic music, which sounds like the era in which the movie was made — kind of rock-ish, kind of disco-ish — but still retains a certain timelessness. Compare the really awful techno-influenced sound of Goldeneye or whatever the hell is going on in Die Another Day…
- Speaking of Die Another Day, the bullet flying toward the audience is just silly. I can see where the producers were trying to come up with something fresh in a really well-used device, especially considering that DAD was being pushed as the big Bond anniversary film (the 20th movie, released in the 40th year of the franchise, 1962-2002), but still… it’s just silly.
- Although when you think about it, so is the entire gun-barrel concept. Think about it… we (the assassin) are looking down the barrel of the gun. This perspective makes no sense… unless we’re not even seeing through the eyes of the assassin, but those (if it had any) of the bullet. And where does the blood come from? It rolls down over the scene in a completely flat manner, as if over a sheet of glass. Wouldn’t it make more sense to gush outward from our “eye”? For that matter, wouldn’t it make the most sense if, instead of a gun barrel, we were looking down a rifle scope or something?
Okay, I’ll stop now… - One final note: as much as I like Daniel Craig as Bond — and I do, quite a bit — and the way the series was successfully rejuvenated with Casino Royale, the gun-barrel sequence left me cold. Yes, it was something different while still referencing the old stuff, and it was kind of cool how it integrated with the fight in the restroom and all, but… well, it just didn’t grab my socks.
And on that note, to everyone who’s going to see Quantum today, have a good time, and hold your bloody tongues because I don’t want to know a thing before I see it myself. Now then, where did I leave that cocktail shaker…
One of the things i never understood, and it might be just a lack a knowledge, but aren’t pistols smooth-bored?
I found this sequence on-line but it wouldn’t work for me. I had to find compilations of all of them separately, including Lazenby’s.
Not that it counts, but I thinks Brosnan’s was the smoothest.
Hm. Interesting thought on the boring… I honestly don’t know. And do we know this is supposed to be a pistol barrel? I’ve always assumed a sniper rifle, but I guess it’d have to be a pistol to be within range of Bond’s gun, wouldn’t it? The mystery deepens…
Brosnan’s motion is definitely the smoothest, and I like the reflective chrome effect on his “gun barrel.”
I liked Brosnan as Bond probably above all, but in the gun-barrel sequences he appears… portly. Not sure why, but seeing it all in a row just reinforces it.
IMHO, Dalton is the most graceful, although I agree that Moore’s two-handed grip appears the most professional. His first two tries, though, were quite ridiculous, with left hand going to steady the right on the upper arm.
Btw, I literally just returned from watching Quantum. The gun-barrel sequence is… oops, you’ll see for yourself 🙂
Already have… 🙂
Now that you mention it, I can see what you mean about Brosnan. I wonder if the “gun barrel” was filmed before or after the films themselves, when he wasn’t in as fine a trim? Or maybe the gun barrel sequence is optically smashed a little… interesting…
I think what’s happening with Brosnan is that he’s wearing a three-piece tux with a vest underneath the jacket, and his jacket is unbuttoned, as opposed to Dalton and Moore who had their tux jackets buttoned for their gunbarrels. So it’s not that Brosnan’s beefier than those gentleman, but just that his jacket is sticking out farther because it’s unbuttoned. Note how his jacket “billows” a bit when he makes the trademark “whip around to shoot” move.
I can’t believe I just watched Brosnan’s gunbarrels for five minutes trying to figure this out.